Mastodon MigrationApr 27, 2023

When you post on Twitter(1) or Bluesky(2) you grant them a broad perpetual license to use, modify, and sublicense your content. You effectively make them co-owners of your content. They can mine it and monetize it. They can even sell it. When you post on Mastodon(3) most instances take no license at all. That's right, they tell you what they are doing with your content—storing posts and delivering them—but no license.

1/2
#twittermigration #TermsOfService #PrivacyPolicy #ContentLicense

Show threadMastodon MigrationApr 27, 2023

Twitter and Bluesky (and almost all corporate social media providers) say they need a broad license to do what they do. But the truth is that they don’t need a license to publish your content—or they could take a much more limited publishing only license—but they don’t because the way they make money is processing your content, profiling you, and selling information about you to ad tech companies. For this they need to co-own your content.

2/3
#twittermigration #ContentLicense #Bluesky

Show threadmonbrielle
@mastodonmigration if fact you are twisting the TOS. In order for them to operate, they need to be able to promote the app. That means, they will take screenshots of Bluesky, which will include users’ content. That said, they have explicitly told us community that if we are using our content in a way we disapprove of, please we can email them
Apr 28, 2023 at 12:34amWeb
Show threadTakel Apr 28, 2023

@monbrielle @mastodonmigration exactly; this is the same moral panic that happens every time people look at the same boilerplate text in every terms of service for every social media platform ever and decide to flip their shit about something they don't understand

it's been going on since two thousand and fucking fifteen, and it's still going on today https://www.techdirt.com/2015/11/02/stop-freaking-out-about-snapchats-terms-service-you-read-it-wrong/

Stop Freaking Out About Snapchat's Terms Of Service; You Read It Wrong

This seems to happen every year or so with tech companies that involve hosting photos: people totally misreading terms of service completely freak out that the company is claiming copyright on thei…

Techdirt
Show threadMastodon MigrationApr 28, 2023

@takelgryph @monbrielle Not all Terms of Service are the same. Mike Masnick is right about the Snapchat terms in the article, and the important reason is the limitation [emphasis mine]:

"We will use this license for the LIMITED PURPOSE of operating, developing, providing, promoting, and improving the Services..."

Twitter and Bluesky do not so limit their licenses effectively giving them a co-ownership of the content.

#twittermigration #ContentLicense

Show threadMastodon MigrationApr 28, 2023

@takelgryph @monbrielle That said, social media companies are afforded broad protections against people suing them for publishing their content (Section 230), and the fact that "everyone does it" does not mean that it is necessary. Corporations do it because they can. They have convinced you that giving them a license is OK. If you are cool with that, go ahead, but you do have the option of not giving up rights to your content by posting on Mastodon.

#twittermigration #ContentLicense

Show threadAustin (=> @[email protected])Apr 30, 2023
@mastodonmigration @takelgryph @monbrielle A comment of the Techdirt post noted that the term "non-exclusive" is missing, so I think the wording could be due to how Snapchat is a closed system (you must use the official apps to access content) not discoverable to the wider net (think webpages), so they can limit the scope whereas others just can't legally do that. Also, privacy policies still govern what the companies can do with your data.
Show threadLanda Apr 28, 2023
@monbrielle @mastodonmigration why would they „need“ to make screenshots with real customer content for their promotions?
It might be more convenient, but they could just as well use their own accounts or ask the author of the message/image/video for explicit permission, the same way news agencies (should) do when reusing videos or
Images from social media posts.
Show threadFediThing has moved!Apr 28, 2023

@monbrielle @mastodonmigration

They clearly don't need it.

There are apps that don't do this and operate just fine. The original post is pointing this out.

Show threadDesignDamonApr 28, 2023
@monbrielle @mastodonmigration As someone who works in this part of the industry, I can tell you it's entirely possible (in fact, usually preferable) to market an app/service and the way its UI looks without using actual live user content. There might be other reasons for this licence being needed, but this aint it.