Facebook considered dangerous?

Note to Facebook readers from my “Notes” section. If there are updates to this post, you won’t ever see them on Facebook. Instead, go to my blog directly, as updates will appear as they are made. I'm at http://mudderings.blogspot.com/.

How many of you have been following the recent debate (firestorm) over Facebook and its new Terms of Service (TOS) – recently rolled back but soon to reappear? I’ve been concerned about Facebook for a while, and this latest news gives me even more to worry about.

Not many of us, including me, read over those TOS when they pop up (often as just a link) when we sign up for something. But maybe we should be taking them more seriously.

You see, in the Facebook TOS it says, even now:

By posting User Content to any part of the Site, you automatically grant, and you represent and warrant that you have the right to grant, to the Company an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide licence (with the right to sublicence) to use, copy, publicly perform, publicly display, reformat, translate, excerpt (in whole or in part) and distribute such User Content for any purpose, commercial, advertising, or otherwise, on or in connection with the Site or the promotion thereof, to prepare derivative works of, or incorporate into other works, such User Content, and to grant and authorise sublicences of the foregoing. You may remove your User Content from the Site at any time. If you choose to remove your User Content, the licence granted above will automatically expire, however you acknowledge that the Company may retain archived copies of your User Content.

In essence, Facebook says if you post content here, we can use it however we want, and you’ve already agreed that that is “A- OK”.

Is it?

Is it “A-OK” with you that your images might appear in an advertisement, or a flyer, or anywhere else without your previous knowledge or permission?

According to Facebook, you’ve already agreed that it is, and you’ve also agreed that you will receive no compensation for the use of those images.

Now, the good thing (if there is a good thing) with this is that last sentence in the TOS. It says if you take stuff down from your Facebook site, the license that allows Facebook to use that stuff expires.

But… a couple of weeks ago, that last bit vanished. Gone. Now, by becoming a Facebook user, you’d granted permanent license to Facebook. Forever.

Didn’t they need to tell you that? Nope. You’ve also agreed that they don’t. It’s your responsibility, under the TOS, to keep checking the TOS in case they’ve changed anything.

Under considerable pressure from the Facebook community, Facebook has reverted to the former TOS. But even its CEO states that this is temporary.

Did I just hear you say, “Oh, crap! That’s bullsh!t?"

I think I did. Or perhaps that was me saying it again. I’ve been saying it a lot.

So, fellow artists. What to do?

Many of us, particularly artists, just might want to reconsider how we’re using Facebook. And there are a couple of excellent options that I’m going to outline below.

If you now store images in your Facebook account and want to continue to do so, start by taking all your images down while Facebook is still operating under the old (current) TOS. As soon as you do that, the Facebook license expires on those images.

Now, for any image you wish to put back on Facebook, do this:

Resize your image to no more than 500 pixels wide. This makes the image unusable for anything but the web. At 300 dpi (printing standard) it makes a print about 1 21/32 inches wide. Remarkably useless. Now, put a watermark or text on the image. Put a copyright, and a date, and your name. If you have a website, put that on it too.

You see, Facebook will accept images up to 5 megabytes (5 MB). When you load up an image at that size, or close to it, that’s what you give them to use – a big image with lots of detail – just fine for printing in any number of ways.

However, if you reduce the size before you upload, you give them much, much less. Indeed, an image properly reduced, and saved as a jpg file, should be about 100 kilobytes (100 KB) or 1/10th of a megabyte. It’ll also upload much, much faster.

Now your reduced, watermarked image can be uploaded to your Facebook account. It is suitable for viewing by your friends, family and followers but has been rendered pretty useless to Facebook overseers. Or anyone else for that matter.

You don’t want your images ripped off Facebook and used for anything other that what you allow… do you?

Almost any contemporary computer will have some software on it that will allow you to do what I’ve described. You do not need Photoshop to do this. If you don’t know how to do this, ask a friend or colleague. Unfortunately, lessons in how to do the photo editing are beyond the scope of this blog.

What are your other options if you don’t want to put anything back onto Facebook?

Why don’t you consider using on online photo/image sharing organizations like Flickr or Picasa? Facebook does let you “link” to other sites (making your links outside the scope of its TOS) and you can create galleries there, and link to them from your Facebook account.

What do these organizations have to say in their TOS?

Flickr, which is owned by Yahoo!, states (and this is actually in the Yahoo! TOS):

With respect to photos, graphics, audio or video you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Yahoo! Services other than Yahoo! Groups, the license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publicly perform and publicly display such Content on the Yahoo! Services solely for the purpose for which such Content was submitted or made available. This license exists only for as long as you elect to continue to include such Content on the Yahoo! Services and will terminate at the time you remove or Yahoo! removes such Content from the Yahoo! Services.

Is there a difference? There is. You’ll notice no mention of commercial use, instead, it says “…solely for the purpose for which such Content was submitted or made available.”

Now, I’m not a lawyer, but I’m reasonably sure this means that they can do all of the above in the context of this being a photo sharing service. They can share your photos, since you’ve uploaded them to share. If you delete them, it’s over. And no permanent archive.

Picasa Web Albums TOS (Google) is a little less friendly. It says:

11. Content licence from you

11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive licence to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. This licence is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services.

11.2 You agree that this licence includes a right for Google to make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to use such Content in connection with the provision of those services.

11.3 You understand that Google, in performing the required technical steps to provide the Services to our users, may (a) transmit or distribute your Content over various public networks and in various media; and (b) make such changes to your Content as are necessary to conform and adapt that Content to the technical requirements of connecting networks, devices, services or media. You agree that this licence shall permit Google to take these actions.

11.4 You confirm and warrant to Google that you have all the rights, power and authority necessary to grant the above licence.

Granted, 11.1 sounds a lot like Flickr… but 11.2 is a little disconcerting. Furtherdown you’ll see that you have to terminate the terms in writing and:

13.5 When these Terms come to an end, all of the legal rights, obligations and liabilities that you and Google have benefited from, been subject to (or which have accrued over time whilst the Terms have been in force) or which are expressed to continue indefinitely, shall be unaffected by this cessation, and the provisions of paragraph 20.7 shall continue to apply to such rights, obligations and liabilities indefinitely.

– which seems to say the legal rights never end anyway.

So Flickr seems the safest bet (with its current TOS). I was going to mentionPhotobucket but a quick look at its TOS reveals such things as:

“including without limitation, via the Site or third party websites or applications (for example, services allowing Users to order prints of Content or t-shirts and similar items containing Content).”

which is pretty bad. There may be other photo sharing networks with even better TOS (for you). Please feel free to send them and I’ll update this blog post with the new information.

If you go the Flickr (or other) route, make sure you “link” your Facebook account to your images, or galleries of images (probably your best bet) on a regular basis and include your public Flickr (or other) address in your Facebook profile.

You might even want to create an image to stick in your Facebook Photos section that simply has the text “My images are now all at [your account address].” That way, someone looking for your photos will get a clue as to where to find them.

The very best option would be to have your own website and host your images there. You can post your own copyright messages and retain all rights yourself.

Then, you can “link” as above, these images or galleries into your Facebook profile. Do it regularly, as in when you add new images, and your Facebook followers will get a steady diet of your art and images.

Is Facebook is dangerous, especially if you are an artist? I believe this to be so unless you take the proper precautions.

Should you go through all the trouble of doing something about it? You probably should. After all, you’re not in the business of giving your art away for free.

Harper/Nope Poster

(quick note for Facebook readers: Facebook removes images and video - read this post in it's orginal format at my blog http://mudderings.blogspot.com/

Following the Canadian Election then the American Election I was, well, dissapointed in what we, North of the Border, were able to generate in terms of excitement and vision and blogged about it in the post "Voting for Vision: How I wish I could have."

That wasn't quite enough for me, it seems, and I started work on a poster that encapsulated my feelings. I based it on the work of Shepard Fairey who had done the HOPE Poster. I had intended to include it in a recent show here in Charlottetown but, quite honestly, sort of forgot when I was hanging the show and then it was too late to include.

So now, inspired by yesterdays inauguration of Barack Obama, I've decided to post it for all to see and anyone to download and share.

So, you can grab it off my website here: http://darrinwhite.ca/en/harper/ in PDF format.

Please feel free to post your feedback. And please feel free to become involved in the political process and make the change you want to see.

Voting for Vision: How I wish I could have

Barak Obama’s victory, less than two weeks ago, and indeed the election itself, was a stunning defeat for Politics… in Canada.

Over the past few months (years), I, a Canadian, with no impact on the US Federal Election, was completely engaged in the US election process. So, it seems from Facebook status updates and blog posts, were most of my friends and peers.

While the same was true for the Canadian Election the previous month, with posts and blogs, newsletters, calls to action and more, we were all voting against Stephen Harper far more than we were voting for Stephane Dion, for Elizabeth May, or for Jack Layton. Had any of these others won, I don’t think I would have been, as I was the night of November 4th, dumb-struck and in awe, eyes welling with tears, as the networks announced President Elect Barack Obama. No, I would have sighed, declared it a victory for nobody and gone to bed. Just like it did do on our (Canadian) Election night.

I HATE voting against something. It makes me sick. It leaves a bad taste in my mouth and churns my stomach. When I cast a vote that is against, I do so knowing I must, knowing that to not vote against a party, platform, or person who stands for so many things with which I disagree is akin to voting for that person. I vote against knowing that to not vote is not just akin but fundamentally the same as voting FOR this person or people with whom I disagree (not voting is actually quite abhorrent to me – too bad that about 40% of Canadians think not voting is just fine, thank you). And so I vote, as I must, against that person. But not FOR someone else. Not really. My votes become strategic, like so many others. Strategic to keep someone else out of power. Strategic to keep a lid on ideas fundamentally different from mine. Strategic to cripple in some small way one party’s ability to rule without check or balance. But, not, sadly, not for a different vision, and not really, for the person or party beside whose name I place my “x”. Certainly not, as so many US voters were lucky to have, for a vision of a new, rejuvenated, Canada.

All through the day, November 4th, so many people stood in long lines to vote FOR Barack Obama or vote FOR John McCain. True, some voted for McCain perhaps out of racially based fear, or other fears promoted by the McCain team and perhaps also some people voted for Obama out of anger stemming from the economic meltdown, or the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan or otherwise. But so, so many people voted for a vision, and they were offered visions from which to choose. They were offered options and choices. And they were able to walk into their polling stations, exercise their civic duty, and vote for one of those two visions. And they did.

How I wish I could have voted for a vision of Canada on October 14th that I believed in. How I wish I could have shared with my friends and peers that feel of comraderie, of collective hope for the future. Instead, we were all “faceless for the arts” and promoting letter campaigns, and supporting a vision of Canada that was “Anything But Harper”.

That is so fundamentally sad that I am ashamed now to admit it and put in it writing. Oh, it worked alright. But it was Stephen Harper, mostly of his own doing and not a much more than a pinch of ours, who kept himself from the majority he so desperately wanted. Had he not blown his chances in Quebec with his stupid cuts and comments on arts and culture, he stood a good chance of winning the few extra seats he needed for that majority. Instead, his appeal to a perceived western base that centred on knocking the arts lead to a resurgence in support for the Bloc leading to the saving of the nation from a conservative majority by the one party whose constitution seeks the separation of a big chuck of that same country. How, my fellow Canadians, did we manage that?

So here’s my call to action. If you are not a member of a political party, please consider joining one. I don’t care which one, but all the party platforms are available online. Read them, understand them, and pick one that is reasonable close to what you believe.

Then, take part in that party’s programs and consultations. Make your voice heard, and share your thoughts and opinions. Make yourself part of any leadership races or reviews. Help pick someone in whom you believe and for whom you will volunteer to spread a message or vision you honestly support. Do your civic duty, and on the day when you are called to that duty and get off your sofa go vote. Maybe if we all do that, we’ll be able to walk into our polling stations at the next Canadian election and make our mark beside a name and party in which we believe, and not feel sick or disgusted, but smile as we leave the ballot box because we know we’ve voted for something.

Like they did.