The interesting fact here is that a lot of people go to the web to show off, a lot of people go to facebook to meet with friends but sometimes also to express themselves more freely without anyone at close distance.
The web grants this, you can become a public figure without being very close to your public.
What will happen to pictures, poems, notes, 25 random things it's not really the question, the real issue is that now facebook like GM will probably have to pay for the disk space, energy and other resources they are using and they are trying to find a way to pay for all that cost.
Íf we want to have a free place to post our photos, ideas, chat, keep in touch maybe this is a relatively inexpensive price for that.
If we are not professional photographers, but we have taken some nice pictures, which we will never sell why they can't be published around the globe?
Specially if they come with a notice that this picture comes from facebook/userid or name, why not?
If we want exposure there is no better way to get us cover page, exposure, etc...
People have to remember that there is no free lunch so maybe the price tag for free space would be sharing the content with the world.
Now regarding the change in the term, I really would like to know if on the millions of facebook members there aren't at least a few hundreds Ivy league top lawyers to check this contract change.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
The thing here is about the way they did it. I totally agree with you about exposure will...anyway, changing rules without warning or an opt out choice is lame.
Post a Comment