If I upload a 1024px image to FB (which FB actually appears to store), it will have no rights over the 5100px image I decide to transform into a huge print later, right? I'm just confused about what the legal definition of a "work" is, with regards to resolution and resizing.

they own the RAW file as well as the memory card, camera and the lens that took the picture. includes the strap that is on the camera and any grips or accessories, not limited to pocket wizards, remote controls, bellows, extension tubes, gps recorders, microphones, flashes, etc.
in case you used a wifi card or shoot tethered, they own the computer, and all the cabling used
It's in the TOS

i just made that up like they did as well.

If I understand it correctly ...

FB never said they own it ... they say in their TOS that you are AGREEING to let them use whatever you upload to their site however they want (i.e. you are AGREEING to extend them usage rights) , either for themselves or to allow others to use it as FB deems.


You still own it ... you still have copyright ... you can still do with it as you desire, but you have AGREED to let them use what you uploaded however they deem as well.

RustyBug wrote:
If I understand it correctly ...

FB never said they own it ... they say in their TOS that you are AGREEING to let them use whatever you upload to their site however they want (i.e. you are AGREEING to extend them usage rights) , either for themselves or to allow others to use it as FB deems.


You still own it ... you still have copyright ... you can still do with it as you desire, but you have AGREED to let them use what you uploaded however they deem as well.

That is precisely my understanding too.

RustyBug wrote:
If I understand it correctly ...

FB never said they own it ... they say in their TOS that you are AGREEING to let them use whatever you upload to their site however they want (i.e. you are AGREEING to extend them usage rights) , either for themselves or to allow others to use it as FB deems.


You still own it ... you still have copyright ... you can still do with it as you desire, but you have AGREED to let them use what you uploaded however they deem as well.

I agree with you on your interpretation and that is why I do not upload anything to FB.

Facebook's license is nonexclusive which means that they cannot control how you use your own photos, but by uploading your content to their service you have given them permission to use your photos for their purposes.

Not only do FB not own your photos but, what many people seem to misunderstand, the rights you grant them are limited to using your images etc on/within FB.

FB is (at least) two companies (Facebook and Facebook Ireland). When you upload an image to FB they can't actually transfer that between the companies unless you grant them a license to redistribute your content. Likewise they need to be able to pass your images etc to third party companies like Zynga, who offer services within FB. However that license is limited to use on Facebook. The usage rights they pass to Zynga etc are the same as those you grant to FB. They can only use the content on/in conjunction with FB. FB can't give your content away to a newspaper or sell it to some other company for use in advertising. What is more the license ends when you delete you account.

+1 @ the agreement ends when you delete your account ... unless those images also still exist elsewhere in FB (see fine print) where they reside with someone else who has the same agreement with FB. Also, check fine print that you are agreeing to allow FB to extend usage.

I'm not saying that I agree with any of this to be proper (but the law doesn't preclude you from agreeing to what amounts to poor judgment), but ... if you've agreed to it (by virtue of their TOS that you've agreed to) ... you've agreed to it. Not unlike when a person agrees to pay a zillion % interest on a loan ... poor judgment on them, shame ( ) on the one granting the loan, but you still (voluntarily) agreed to it.

Short answer ... just say "No." to pics on FB

" Not unlike when a person agrees to pay a zillion % interest on a loan ... poor judgment on them, shame "


1. It's not necessarily poor judgement when the terms calculating the interest rate are written in densely worded legaleese so obtuse that no one can understand that the rate can be jacked more than 3x the initial rate. I betcha you could not tell me how your credit card interest rate is calculated.

2. Nor is it poor judgement when the rate becomes "zillion %" because they are charging interest on interest and tacking on fees on defaulted amounts. And interest on the fees.

3. Your analogy is poor. Many states (all ?) have usury laws (which rates have not been adjusted downward to reflect the interest rate environment). Even if the lender is federally chartered it's not as straightforward as they would like the general public to believe in terms of collecting when it comes to charging higher than the borrower's state law allows for interest.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ny-district-court/1519777.html

+1 @ not the ideal "legal" analogy ... but even so, the conceptual point is that there is a disconnect between what people think "oughta be" and what "legally is".

If the agreement says that you agree to letting them charge interest on interest, etc. .. and you agree to that, it kinda does corroborate "poor judgment" don't ya think?

If you agreed to it ... you agreed to it. And that makes it somewhat "more difficult" to claim that you've been wronged, be that by a CC or FB, when you agreed with them in the first place. I'm not saying that usury, protection and exception doesn't exist, but rather that if you don't agree with it in concept or philosophy ... then don't agree to agree with it in practical application to begin with.

Pretty simple, imo.
If you agreed ... you agreed.
If you don't agree with the TOS for use ... then don't use.

"it kinda does corroborate "poor judgment" don't ya think?"

I disagreed the first time you stated it but I'm happy to do so again.

Not necessarily. But it's a tangent from FB TOS discussion so I'll drop it.