Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dropbox TOS Includes Broad Copyright License

hardware.slashdot.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 72 posts

Re: Dropbox TOS Includes Broad Copyright License

#11

Post by Jach »

skarayan wrote: post #6
Indyan wrote: post #2

I am no lawyer, and most legalese is absolute greek to me, but that clause genuinely freaks me out. However, commonsense also tells me that Dropbox will never do something like sharing/profiting out of other's files. That will drive them to the ground. I am not really sure what to make out of this. Is this some clause that Dropbox had to put in to save their butt, or is there a sinister motive behind this?

Even if there is nothing sinister now, this is how power is abused. This worries me.

Can you provide me with some historical details of a case where some people thought sinister action could take place because of one small little detail, and it didn't for a long time, then suddenly things got really bad really fast specifically because of that little thing? Genuinely curious.

Re: Dropbox TOS Includes Broad Copyright License

#13

Post by nikcub »

Indyan wrote: post #2

I am no lawyer, and most legalese is absolute greek to me, but that clause genuinely freaks me out. However, commonsense also tells me that Dropbox will never do something like sharing/profiting out of other's files. That will drive them to the ground. I am not really sure what to make out of this. Is this some clause that Dropbox had to put in to save their butt, or is there a sinister motive behind this?

I thought the same until twitpic started selling user photos to agencies. Never assume what is commonsense for you is commonsense for anybody else, particularly a company

Re: Dropbox TOS Includes Broad Copyright License

#14

Post by vesto »

sek wrote: post #3

Account deleted, problem solved. Can't believe i recommended this service to my friends.

This certainly isn't a reason to suddenly delete your Dropbox account. Based on the previous actions of Dropbox regarding their TOS, I'm sure they will come out and clearly explain to users exactly why this change was instated and what it means for users, and I honestly doubt it's anything too serious for us to worry about.

Re: Dropbox TOS Includes Broad Copyright License

#15

Post by sek »

iamichi wrote: post #9
sek wrote: post #3

Account deleted, problem solved. Can't believe i recommended this service to my friends.

yeah, they've become really bad. i loved the service but moved to spideroak last week when i read that anyone could access my files with any password, while they fixed a bug. that along with the privacy/encryption stuff convinced me to move. wuala seems to be the most secure service i've seen though.

Absolutely, client side encryption is the only way to go in my opinion.

Re: Dropbox TOS Includes Broad Copyright License

#16

Post by rkalla »

When the new TOS were announced I think a lot of balked at reading those statements. The examples given in the TOS (e.g. "to convert your files") all seem reasonable, but as Indyan pointed out, it sure leaves the door open to some fuzzy interpretations.

Quick question, if AT&T suddenly bought Dropbox, would you all feel as passive about the new TOS or be quick to get your files out of there?

What about Facebook? Microsoft? or Silver Lake Partners?

I understand it's easier for Dropbox to be vague in their TOS so they don't have to spell out the service or future features that might require expanded agreements.... but given the nature of the service and the previous fiascos Dropbox has had already this year, it sure seems like they are cutting themselves some undeserved slack with regards to specificity.

I appreciate that they rewrote the terms to be more human readable, but why not spell out "You agree to let us duplicate, read and write your files in the case where you share, copy, publish or convert your files via the web or client software interface" -- or something following that.

I don't have a company with 200 million users though, so maybe the logistics of being that specific are an impossibility. I'd also be a lot more forgiving of this broad language if Dropbox has never had any hickups, so my personal nervousness is mixed in there.

Re: Dropbox TOS Includes Broad Copyright License

#17

Post by cma »

code_duck wrote: post #8

This is exactly like the broadly misunderstood TOS for Facebook, Etsy and other services. They need a license to your work in order to distribute it, and display it to others or perhaps even you. These clauses have been in TOSs for years and years, and only now people have taken notice. The average person doesn't know much about IP though, and probably couldn't tell you the difference between a copyright and a patent…

Just because it is standard doesn't mean it is acceptable.

Re: Dropbox TOS Includes Broad Copyright License

#18

Post by ams6110 »

nikcub wrote: post #13
Indyan wrote: post #2

I am no lawyer, and most legalese is absolute greek to me, but that clause genuinely freaks me out. However, commonsense also tells me that Dropbox will never do something like sharing/profiting out of other's files. That will drive them to the ground. I am not really sure what to make out of this. Is this some clause that Dropbox had to put in to save their butt, or is there a sinister motive behind this?

I thought the same until twitpic started selling user photos to agencies. Never assume what is commonsense for you is commonsense for anybody else, particularly a company

If there is money to be made, and if it's not illegal, someone will do it. Actually only the first condition is important for some folks.

Re: Dropbox TOS Includes Broad Copyright License

#20

Post by sek »

vesto wrote: post #14
sek wrote: post #3

Account deleted, problem solved. Can't believe i recommended this service to my friends.

This certainly isn't a reason to suddenly delete your Dropbox account. Based on the previous actions of Dropbox regarding their TOS, I'm sure they will come out and clearly explain to users exactly why this change was instated and what it means for users, and I honestly doubt it's anything too serious for us to worry about.

They accumulated enough, this was just the one that got me to do it. For these purposes i did use Dropbox i need a service i can trust.
Post reply on HN