Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Twitter Says Your Tweets Belong To You

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 5 years ago | from the learning-from-other's-mistakes dept.

The Internet 102

CWmike writes "Twitter has modified its terms of service to state unequivocally that messages posted belong to their authors and not to the company. 'Twitter is allowed to "use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute" your tweets because that's what we do. However, they are your tweets and they belong to you,' wrote Twitter co-founder Biz Stone in a blog post Thursday announcing the modifications. Twitter is still hammering out a set of guidelines for developers on the proper use of the company's API. What do Twitterers think of the TOS changes? Barbara Krasnoff writes, ' Twitter announces new ToS. Tweeters shrug,' noting that some appreciated the company's transparency in contacting its users and pointing out the changes that were being made."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

All your tweets are belong to you! (5, Insightful)

chrisj_0 (825246) | more than 5 years ago | (#29393851)

couldn't help myself!

Re:All your tweets are belong to you! (1)

masmullin (1479239) | more than 5 years ago | (#29393859)

damnit you beat me!

Re:All your tweets are belong to you! (1)

martas (1439879) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394007)

wow, you even beat me to saying he beat me!

Re:All your tweets are belong to you! (1)

AlexDV (759799) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394767)

Wow, that's exactly what I tweeted when I first heard the news!

Re:All your tweets are belong to you! (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 5 years ago | (#29397735)

In Soviet Russia tweets own ... Nah. Fuck it.

In Korea only old people ... Nah. Fuck it.

I for one welcome our tweet-owning ... Nah. Fuck it.

I'll probably get modded down for this but ... Nah, Fuck it.

Re:All your tweets are belong to you! (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | more than 5 years ago | (#29395841)

Mis-tweeted? Sounds like a bit of CYT (Cover Your Twat)

Re:All your tweets are belong to you! (0, Redundant)

martas (1439879) | more than 5 years ago | (#29393999)

dammit, you beat me to it...

Good game sir! (1)

Myrcutio (1006333) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394975)

If a tweet if writ by Pete
for a terrorism feat,
and the cops are on the beat
to drag him through the street.
He'll point fingers at his peep
and claim "Twitter is a *bleep*"
But the ToS are neat
And Pete will be fucked.

I've got nowhere else to post this... (0, Offtopic)

Drinking Bleach (975757) | more than 5 years ago | (#29393853)

Has anyone else using the classic index lost the ability to add tags? I'm running Firefox 3.5.2 here and can't do it.

Re:I've got nowhere else to post this... (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29393893)

Why are you using the classic index while wanting to also use tagging? Either move with the times or get left behind.

Re:I've got nowhere else to post this... (1, Offtopic)

Drinking Bleach (975757) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394033)

Because the newer index takes 15 seconds to render and spikes my CPU up by 10 degrees just to load the page.

Re:I've got nowhere else to post this... (0, Troll)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 5 years ago | (#29396353)

Thats Firefox for you. Get Opera 10.

Re:I've got nowhere else to post this... (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 5 years ago | (#29396857)

On the plus side, there's a secret built-in benchmark. If you can get the newer index to load in under 5 seconds, then your computer can run Crysis!

Re:I've got nowhere else to post this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29394129)

Ya man, turn off the classic index. You can turn off classic index but still use the old classic format for comments. I personally hate the dynamic comment layout but the dynamic main page index doesn't bother me because when you could add tags it will using the newer index anyway; "classic" wasn't available.

VLAD FARTED (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29393857)

and then he tweeted about reza and marticock

CYA move (4, Insightful)

jmanforever (603829) | more than 5 years ago | (#29393869)

Sounds like Twitter is trying to cover their butts.

"No officer lawman sir, That is not our terrorist message, and we don't have anything to do with it. All the messages belong to the person who wrote them."

Re:CYA move (2, Insightful)

MBCook (132727) | more than 5 years ago | (#29393945)

That way my immediate thought. It's a nice thing to do (compared to the "we own everything you type" option), but I figured this way simply because they are getting too many contacts from people's lawyers and want to put themselves in a position of lower risk.

Not that it stops screwballs from suing you. Google has been sued over stuff that has nothing to do with them because their search engine points to pages that say whatever.

Re:CYA move (2, Informative)

NoYob (1630681) | more than 5 years ago | (#29393989)

I was thinking more along the lines of - teenager gets harassed by others, commits suicide, parents sue deep pockets (twitter)

Re:CYA move (1)

Arthur Grumbine (1086397) | more than 5 years ago | (#29395843)

parents sue deep pockets (twitter)

That phrase, I don't think it means what you think it means.

Re:CYA move (4, Informative)

NoobixCube (1133473) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394117)

They claim all usual rights of ownership, but foist responsibilities back on the user.

Re:CYA move (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29395175)

Twitter isn't claiming all the usual rights of ownership; they don't have the right to license out your work, nor are the rights they do claim exclusive. You still maintain ownership. And of course the user should bear the responsibility for their tweets: they wrote them!

Twitter does not, and should not have the responsibility for censoring what people choose to say, nor should authors be able to wash their hands and say "hey, I just suggested that Twitter publish a comment that the President be shot as an example to all the other negroes; I didn't actually publish it myself."

Who else would be responsible? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29395183)

> They claim all usual rights of ownership, but foist responsibilities back on the user.

Well, shouldn't the person who wrote the tweet be the one responsible?

I have a hard time seeing why Twitter should be responsible for what its users say. Why would they accept liability on someone else's behalf?

Re:CYA move (1)

centuren (106470) | more than 5 years ago | (#29395691)

They claim all usual rights of ownership, but foist responsibilities back on the user.

Twitter has to be able to "use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute" the text in a tweet in order for the service to do anything. You may click "Tweet", but it's Twitter that has to "use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute" for it to actually show up anywhere.

Re:CYA move (1)

owlnation (858981) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394157)

Sounds like Twitter is trying to cover their butts.

Yes... especially since this announcement comes a day after Twitter planning to start monetizing the site.

There was never any point suing Twitter until such day as the site actually made any money (if it ever does).

Re:CYA move (2, Insightful)

Jurily (900488) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394387)

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 SourceForge, Inc.

Re:CYA move (1)

nEoN nOoDlE (27594) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394443)

Thanks for finding the cloud in-between the silver lining. I'm sure you also had a negative response stored away if Twitter did the exact opposite and claimed ownership of every tweet their users make.

Re:CYA move (1)

evan_arrrr! (1406417) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394545)

Ah, so the glass is half full AND half empty? Preposterous.

Re:CYA move (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394963)

The glass is half full of sand.

RIAA + Bin Laden = (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29394593)

Yep. Because as we all know from Slashdot Law 101, liability for things said on the internet attaches to the holder of the copyright. If only Bin Laden had a decent deal with the RIAA!

For His Noodly Sake, the idea that the parent post is worth 5 precious insightful points is an insult to the thinking community.

Re:CYA move (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29394707)

5 insightful? pshawww...

Re:CYA move (3, Insightful)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394729)

Sounds like Twitter is trying to cover their butts.

"No officer lawman sir, That is not our terrorist message, and we don't have anything to do with it. All the messages belong to the person who wrote them."

They don't need that kind of CYA. None of the places that do claim to own everything you write are held accountable for that kind of thing. They throw in a few disclaimers, and at the end of the day they might be asked to take something down but they aren't going to be prosecuted for having hosted a terrorist message whether their TOS automagically claims ownership or not.

I think that they just realized that they can basically ask for every relevant right they need in their TOS anyway, so they can earn some cheap good PR with their users just by giving up on their plans to publish "The Poetry of Twitter" without having to pay any of the twit authors.

Re:CYA move (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394775)

Yes and no. It's how it was and is in the first place. Only through some total mindless retards that have never seen or understood the Internet, is it, that many sites now fear of being sued for the shit that *their users* do (as opposed to them). Which is about as stupid as to sue the company that maintains a road, for the people that get harmed by other people while being on that street.

But of course, when for once someone gets it, and does it right, someone like you comes along and has to poop out his mindless rant.

Thank you for keeping the Internet fucked up, mr. jmanforever. Yeah, man... forever fucked up. THX. 5.1. Digital Surround. :P

Re:CYA move (1)

timeOday (582209) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394813)

"No officer lawman sir, That is not our terrorist message, and we don't have anything to do with it. All the messages belong to the person who wrote them."

Which is exactly how it should be. Wouldn't you agree?

And so... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29393871)

Nothing of value was not lost.

Re:And so... (2, Informative)

Jaden42 (466735) | more than 5 years ago | (#29393959)

Or gained...

Your tweets belong to you but... (2)

genner (694963) | more than 5 years ago | (#29393875)

we can do whatever we want with them....

Re:Your tweets belong to you but... (5, Insightful)

truthsearch (249536) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394053)

Same as on /. Look down...

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 SourceForge, Inc.

Re:Your tweets belong to you but... (4, Funny)

Itninja (937614) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394695)

What they don't tell you is "the Poster" is a code name of a multinational terrorist organization called "Sphere Tot". And said organization is stockpiling all your posts to be used in the inevitable Irony War of 2012.

Re:Your tweets belong to you but... (1)

TheVelvetFlamebait (986083) | more than 5 years ago | (#29395819)

In which case, I will never use irony again.

From now.

No... wait... now!

Re:Your tweets belong to you but... (1)

dkf (304284) | more than 5 years ago | (#29396715)

And said organization is stockpiling all your posts to be used in the inevitable Irony War of 2012.

So, we're all safe here then?

Re:Your tweets belong to you but... (4, Insightful)

itsdapead (734413) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394081)

we can do whatever we want with them....

What alternative do you suggest?

Option A: don't claim the right to "use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute" tweets. Problem: publishing material on a website involves using, copying, transmitting, displaying, adapting, modifying and distributing it, so they would be infringing copyright and, sooner or later, get sued by some troll (in other news: Twitter operates in countries outside the US which don't have the same "fair use" clauses in their copyright laws).

Option B: claim ownership of everything. They could do this if they wanted to - nobody forces you to post your 120 character masterwork on Twitter.

Option C: lock out the public and pay professional twitterers to produce pithy and erudite tweets on a "work for hire" basis. Tempting, but I don't see the business model.

Your call.

Re:Your tweets belong to you but... (5, Insightful)

genner (694963) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394105)

we can do whatever we want with them....

What alternative do you suggest?

Option A: don't claim the right to "use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute" tweets. Problem: publishing material on a website involves using, copying, transmitting, displaying, adapting, modifying and distributing it, so they would be infringing copyright and, sooner or later, get sued by some troll (in other news: Twitter operates in countries outside the US which don't have the same "fair use" clauses in their copyright laws).

Option B: claim ownership of everything. They could do this if they wanted to - nobody forces you to post your 120 character masterwork on Twitter.

Option C: lock out the public and pay professional twitterers to produce pithy and erudite tweets on a "work for hire" basis. Tempting, but I don't see the business model.

Your call.

D: Move the server offshore and pirate other people's work.

Re:Your tweets belong to you but... (1)

bennomatic (691188) | more than 5 years ago | (#29396079)

we can do whatever we want with them....

What alternative do you suggest?

Option A: don't claim the right to "use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute" tweets. Problem: publishing material on a website involves using, copying, transmitting, displaying, adapting, modifying and distributing it, so they would be infringing copyright and, sooner or later, get sued by some troll (in other news: Twitter operates in countries outside the US which don't have the same "fair use" clauses in their copyright laws).

Option B: claim ownership of everything. They could do this if they wanted to - nobody forces you to post your 120 character masterwork on Twitter.

Option C: lock out the public and pay professional twitterers to produce pithy and erudite tweets on a "work for hire" basis. Tempting, but I don't see the business model.

Your call.

D: Move the server offshore and pirate other people's work.

E. Profit!

Re:Your tweets belong to you but... (1)

rantingkitten (938138) | more than 5 years ago | (#29396175)

Option E. Close Twitter and forget it ever happened. The world will no more change from this than it would if you were to kick over an anthill in your back yard.

Really, is this important? Does anyone think that the asinine "hashtagged" @nonsense crapola on twitter is somehow valuable and is worried that someone might infringe upon it? Or is this just drama for the sake of drama?

Re:Your tweets belong to you but... (3, Funny)

itsdapead (734413) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394151)

Sorry, missing option D:

Option D: insist that all Tweets were submitted under a copyleft license. Trouble is, every single tweet would then read:

This tweet is released under the reallyfree copyleft modified attrribute-alike noncommercial license variant 7b which pe

Again, maybe an improvement.

Re:Your tweets belong to you but... (0, Offtopic)

cyberstealth1024 (860459) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394549)

Again, definitely an improvement.

There. Fixed it for you.

Re:Your tweets belong to you but... (1)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 5 years ago | (#29395265)

this was my first thought we well - they don't need to own them, they already have everything they want. in fact all you really own is the liability....

Responsibilities (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29393881)

In most of the countries the transfer of ownership also transfers most of the responsibilities. These changes are preparing to the earlier announced attempts to become profitable soon. The point is to mitigate the risks of legal issues. When money is involved, it is in business sense a lot safer to be an intermediate service provider than owner and producer of the content in question.

Cake and eat it! (3, Insightful)

Cryogenic Specter (702059) | more than 5 years ago | (#29393917)

Sounds like they get to have their cake and get to eat it too. They get all the benefits of using user generated content any way they want but have none of the liability. Good for them.

Re:Cake and eat it! (1)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394507)

This has nothing whatsoever to do with liability.

Re:Cake and eat it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29394515)

Sounds like they get to have their cake and get to eat it too. They get all the benefits of using user generated content any way they want but have none of the liability. Good for them.

It sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Should they be liable for what people post?

Re:Cake and eat it! (1)

Eil (82413) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394673)

Well, why not? The Twitter service, and anything you do with it, belongs to the people that own the service. They get to call the shots. Anyone who doesn't like it shouldn't use Twitter (or any other service owned by someone else), end of story.

(And before anyone draws the comparison, this argument wouldn't hold for an ISP because there's only one Internet and it is--or should be--a wholly public resource and remain strictly neutral in regards to the content passed around on any section of it.)

If They Truly Belong To Me... (2, Insightful)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 5 years ago | (#29393921)

If my Tweets do belong to me, then this can be proven in exactly one way. If my Tweets belong to me than I should have the ability at any time to take them all down and they will not be seen again on Twitter unless I retype them all back in -- 140 characters at a time.

When that happens then I'll say that they've told the truth.

Until that happens, they don't really belong to me.

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (1)

Cryogenic Specter (702059) | more than 5 years ago | (#29393951)

That's true. There are other sites that use data from tweets too, so maybe they need your permission to do so, or will need to remove content if you claim copyright infringement. Maybe you could get a recommendation for a lawyer from the RIAA...

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (2, Insightful)

amRadioHed (463061) | more than 5 years ago | (#29393971)

Are you implying that you can't do that right now? What's stopping you?

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (4, Interesting)

emurphy42 (631808) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394095)

Specifically, there's a "delete this tweet" option attached to each tweet, and a "delete my account" option under Settings. I haven't tried either one, but surely you can create a second account and do so?

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29394553)

The difference is deleting the tweet from your page removes it from your page & the RSS feed..but not from the search API.

Try it, we just started using this twitter API to pull tweets onto our page - apparently 'Realtime' means 'several days of delay'

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (3, Informative)

Lazaryn (955844) | more than 5 years ago | (#29395347)

If only I had some mod points. It's true that the "delete" button doesn't actually delete anything, it just hides it from SOME parts of the site. I've been caught up on that once before due to an accidentally offensive tweet (With only 140 characters be careful on what words to condense/remove) that I immediately deleted and rewrote. A few months later I got an angry message as someone found that "deleted" tweet.

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29397187)

Why is this score:0? It's accurate and completely relevant.

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29394097)

you can't edit or remove tweets which have been posted.

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29394375)

You can delete your own posts from Twitter. However, this does not take them off of all the clients or phones of anyone following you.
Twitter broadcasts information to other people, and quickly (usually).

The key here is don't put something up that you would not want to be available to everyone in the world.

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29394039)

It's a square deal as is. You get to keep the copyright for your "work", but you cede the rights necessary for Twitter to disseminate your thoughts. You don't cede them to anyone else, and Twitter can't sue you for reusing your deep thoughts somewhere else.

The ability to revoke your stuff would indeed be nice. But to say that without it the deal is meaningless is just lame.

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (2, Insightful)

shentino (1139071) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394179)

Why whine? You can't retract your slashdot posts either.

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394911)

Why whine? You can't retract your slashdot posts either.

Quiet! I'm trying to sell torches and pitchforks, here. Stay out of the iPhone threads, too.

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29394111)

you can do that, if you delete your page, everything poofs except for reasonable internal backups (twitter does have backups, they're allowed).

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (2, Informative)

bananaquackmoo (1204116) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394159)

Allow me to introduce you to the delete post button. Or the delete account button. Clearly you do not use Twitter. Why do I bother feeding the trolls...

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (2, Insightful)

bertoelcon (1557907) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394191)

Except, once something reaches the internet proper the odds of removing all instances of it drop to near 0.

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (2, Insightful)

thenextstevejobs (1586847) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394243)

Except, once something reaches the internet proper the odds of removing all instances of it drop to near 0.

While this is true, this has nothing to do with Twitter! You could have set your account up as private, in which case it could not be scraped by people without your permission, thus generally fade from the caches of the Interwebs. Turns out its hard to get rid of anything. Shredded paper could be reconstructed. If someone really put their mind to getting your information, they probably could.

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (2, Insightful)

bennomatic (691188) | more than 5 years ago | (#29396091)

thus generally fade from the caches of the Interwebs

All due respect to Vegas, what goes on the Internet stays on the Internet...

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (1)

GiovanniZero (1006365) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394263)

Which means what? Nobody owns any content they post online?

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (3, Funny)

Korbeau (913903) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394247)

I have all your tweets copied in notepad. I will print them on paper and send them back to you by mail, but first let's play a little game, mister du Keyboard. Mouahahhhahhhahahha *click*.

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (1)

thenextstevejobs (1586847) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394251)

If my Tweets do belong to me, then this can be proven in exactly one way. If my Tweets belong to me than I should have the ability at any time to take them all down and they will not be seen again on Twitter unless I retype them all back in -- 140 characters at a time. When that happens then I'll say that they've told the truth. Until that happens, they don't really belong to me.

Um.. you do have that ability.

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (1)

blueg3 (192743) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394289)

While as others have pointed out, you can do this, your argument is flawed. Twitter claims that you maintain ownership of your comments, but upon sending them to Twitter grant Twitter very broad rights with respect to using those comments. Unless this agreement restricts those rights by allowing you to demand of Twitter that your comments be removed, then they don't have to. If you don't like that arrangement, you shouldn't send your text to Twitter.

One of the main consequences of you owning your tweets is that you can reproduce them elsewhere without Twitter's permission (since you control the copyright).

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (2, Insightful)

mrsquid0 (1335303) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394315)

When you write a book the content belongs to you, but you do not have the ability to recall and erase every copy of that book in print. Why should it be any different for electronic publishing, such as Twitter?

Re:If They Truly Belong To Me... (1)

shentino (1139071) | more than 5 years ago | (#29395011)

You own your tweets

It's just that by posting them with twitter you grant twitter a license.

Show me an American who can keep his mouth shut (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29393955)

And I'll eat him.

Re:Show me an American who can keep his mouth shut (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29394149)

Shouldn't you eat the noisy ones and leave the nice quiet ones in the gene pool?

But... (1)

ilkensai (1615567) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394275)

All your base, are belong to us.

Hmmmm.. (3, Funny)

rickb928 (945187) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394299)

If you love

your tweets,

set them

free.

I'll kill

any

that get

to

me.

Burma Shave.

Where is the money? (1)

majesticmerc (1353125) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394343)

Forgive my ignorance. They don't host ads, they don't charge subscription fees, they don't sell your information, you don't buy anything from them. Where is the business model with this? All I see is a website giving a free service and not seemingly covering their own costs.

Re:Where is the money? (3, Insightful)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394541)

They don't host ads... not for long! [mercurynews.com] This is a typical dot bomb strategy - first you get lots of users, then you change the rules to start generating revenue, then you cash out quickly before everybody quits due to the rule change.

I'm impressed (1)

Devistater (593822) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394361)

Actually I'm impressed. From my experiance most other sites go the route of MS when they did they Hotmail EULA change that said anything you sent through their servers belongs to MS, and if its proprietary then it now belongs to them with all rights going to MS. Theoretically if you sent patent PDFs through hotmail during that time, they would then own the patent.

Anyway, seeing twitter go the other way and up front say that the tweets belong to the authors is impressive to me.

thanks? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29394411)

how nice of them...maybe we all should try this.

Dear RIAA,

That song I just downloaded? I hereby hold the right to "use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute" that song. But it's not stealing, 'cause it's still yours. Congrats.

Ah, Slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29394413)

If the article said that twitter claimed complete ownership and all rights to the tweets, every post here would cry foul and how sad it is in this day and age that companies still are so draconian.

But instead we get people bitching that they are just covering their own asses. Like we havn't seen posts suggesting that doing so is right thing to do time and time again.

Or complain that the company still retains some rights to the tweets, oh no, the company still maintains the same rights they did yesterday. How horrible it is that only some changes happen!

But hey, maybe I'm new to slashdot...

Seems pretty standard for user-generated content (1)

snowwrestler (896305) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394425)

Look at the terms of service for YouTube, Flickr, or Slashdot for instance. Copyright remains with the poster but a license is granted to the service so that it can do its publishing thing.

Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29394491)

Because they're so fucking banal that the only people who could possibly be interested in tweets are the narcissistic douchebags who wrote them

Depressing (1)

Digital Vomit (891734) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394529)

I'm just sad that so many people seem to think public proclamations, however banal, could possibly be "owned"

"I took a poop today." (c)2009 Digital Vomit

'Twitterers' (1)

xyph0r (1153429) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394631)

Twitterers? That doesn't sound right. Surely the correct term is twats/twits?

Of course. (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394795)

They decided to keep only the good and profitable stuff.

In other news (4, Funny)

Junior J. Junior III (192702) | more than 5 years ago | (#29394893)

The city sewage treatment plant has announced that everybody owns their own flushings.

Re:In other news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29396813)

in some countries garbage is considered private property, that way, it's protected by privacy laws.
The advantage of privacy of garbage is that people can't rummage through it and snap up personal info.

Twitter wants to be a dumb pipe (1)

schnablebg (678930) | more than 5 years ago | (#29395023)

Why does Twitter want to be a dumb pipe? All they do is shuffle 120 characters of text around. All value is added via third parties--the various clients using the API, TwitPic, URL shorteners. They won't add metadata, apparently hacked solutions like free form text that take up the already limited character space are OK. Now they give up ownership to all the content on the platform. Their board is really asleep at the wheel if you ask me. They are TOO open.

Twitter would make a lot of sense as a free, open platform, like IRC. It makes no sense a business with hundreds of millions of dollars invested in it.

But I disown my own tweets (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#29395671)

and this isn't me either.

Legalese Question (1)

mdmkolbe (944892) | more than 5 years ago | (#29395741)

use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute

Given that the US copyright code only limits reproduction, derivative works, distribution, performance, display and transmission (17 USC 106), is there a good reason why "use", "copy", "process", "adapt", "modify" and "publish" are in that list?

(IIRC, the BSD license has the same list of terms so this question's been bugging me for a while.)

Twitter giving you what you already had (1)

Jessta (666101) | more than 5 years ago | (#29396075)

...ummm so twitter has said that you have the rights that you always had.
Content you produce always belongs to you, but the terms of service do say that they have a world-wide license to do with your produced content as they will. So the only thing they can't do is stop you from distributing it again yourself.

But they can still publish a book of your tweets and not pay you a cent.

Re:Twitter giving you what you already had (0, Flamebait)

petrus4 (213815) | more than 5 years ago | (#29396177)

...ummm so twitter has said that you have the rights that you always had.

Can we maybe lose the extreme Marxist douchebag vibe that seems so prevalent around here, Slashdot? It's really getting old.

Companies can't do anything right. If they genuinely do the wrong thing, as with DRM etc, then it is understandable to condemn their actions; but you're condemning Twitter here because they are affirming their users' rights?

I for one commend Twitter for this. It's radically different from the way a lot of companies behave; i.e., "Use our service and we own your SOUL." Here, they're saying that they're not even trying to be avaricious about users' material.

I hope this serves as a positive example to other such providers.

Re:Twitter giving you what you already had (1)

Jessta (666101) | more than 5 years ago | (#29398405)

They are saying it, but not in their terms of service. Thus they are actually misleading users as to their rights.
Their terms of service are similar in this respect to myspace, and a number of other web 2.0 services they are actually not different at all.

An ethical provider would limit the license you release your content to them under to only allow them to use the content in ways required to provide you with the service they are offering you. eg.
"By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through the Services, you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute such Content in any and all media or distribution methods (now known or later developed)."...as required to provide the twitter service to you.

Awsome (1)

MarioXXX (1636089) | more than 5 years ago | (#29396435)

Finally

Fair use? (1)

Dahamma (304068) | more than 5 years ago | (#29396573)

I can't wait for the courts to have to decide what the legal definition of "fair use" is for an inane 140 character post usually consisting of so many stupid tags/abbreviations it's unreadable to 99% of the population.

Or maybe Haiku has finally found its niche!

Quoted Twitter post
RT @bob On the crapper!
Lawsuit may ensue.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?