Google Drive
Yesterday, Google presented the Google Drive service, which caused a lot of conflicting opinions - on the one hand, the corporation had been waiting for online storage and synchronization / backup services for a long time, on the other hand the increase in the price for paid storage made Drive “another cloud storage”. But let's not talk about this, but about the strange conditions of use, which are now the same for all Google services, including Google Drive.
In the current wording of the terms of use there is an extremely curious paragraph.
By uploading or otherwise adding content to our Services, you provide a worldwide license to Google and its partners that allows us to use this content, post it, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works from it (for example, translations, adaptations and other ways to optimize materials), share them, publish it, openly reproduce, display, and distribute . The listed rights that you grant to us are used solely to ensure the operation of existing Services, their promotion and improvement, as well as to develop new ones. This license will also be valid after you refuse to use the Services (for example, we will still use the company information you added to Google Maps). Some Services allow you to view and delete content added to them. Some of them also have conditions and settings that impose a restriction on our use of such materials. Before you send us the content and thereby grant a license to use it, make sure that you have the appropriate rights to do so.
Nevertheless, Google stipulates that it does not claim the user's intellectual property.
However, all intellectual property rights in relation to these materials remain with their owner.
The existing formulations leave quite a wide scope for interpretation - on the one hand, Google seems to be not claiming to be authorship of documents loaded, say, but nevertheless automatically receive a license to use these products with very wide rights of free cultural work a la Creative Commons Attribution without copyleft Google, of course, claims that this is done solely to improve the quality of services, but no matter how it was a story with Wi-Fi passwords .
For comparison, here are the terms for using Microsoft SkyDrive, Dropbox, Ubuntu One and Crashplan.
Microsoft from Google is not far away:
With the exception of content that we license to you, we do not claim ownership of the content provided in the service. Your content remains your property. We do not control, check or approve content that you or others provide in the service.
On the one hand, everything is great, but the following paragraphs say the same thing as Google, but more concisely:
You understand that Microsoft may need to use, modify, adapt, reproduce, distribute, and display the content sent to the service solely to the extent necessary to provide the service, and hereby grant Microsoft the right to do so.
Dropbox , unlike the giants, is much more specific, describing why it needs certain permissions and within what frameworks it will use them:
By submitting your information to your user’s Dropbox (together, “your stuff”). You retain full ownership to your stuff. We do not claim any ownership to any of it. It is not necessary to make a difference.
')
For example, hosting your files. For example, image thumbnails or document previews. It also includes what you need to do. You can only provide those services. For example, Amazon, which provides for our services.
In a nutshell: no one infringes on copyright, permissions are needed for the provision of sharing services, creating thumbnails, previewing documents, and the same rights are given to Amazon, whose service is hosted.
Ubuntu One reports that data can be disclosed only in the case of legal requirements or a court decision.
If necessary, you must be able to send you a message. Ubuntu One privacy policy
The rest of the data collected by the service is non-personalized — such as the version of the system, the frequency of client usage (it is distributed under the GPL v3), the quality of the Internet connection. Canonical provides an opportunity to get a copy of all the data stored by the company.
Crashplan writes the following in its privacy policy
Code 42 may be used for business purposes; to establish or maintain client and business relationships; to provide access to Internet-based and e-commerce activities; to perform accounting functions; It is necessary to ensure that it is not a problem.
This applies to the name / surname, email address, address of residence, etc. When using a private password, Crashplan does not know what users are storing on their server due to encryption. This is how she looks like LaCie Wuala.
I myself sympathize with U1, but Crashplan for backup is better because of cheap unlimited storage and clients for different operating systems, including Solaris and Windows Phone, which are supported only on large holidays.
Thus, to Google (and to a large extent to Microsoft) there are quite clear complaints:
but). Put the terms of use of Drive in a separate document
b). Remove wording on such extended rights
at). Decrypt each item of permissions - select specific cases of using the user's materials, recognizing all others as illegal
PS The habrauser soomrack raised the same problem in the comments, and also he made a comparison with Yandex Disk / Dropbox on roem and LOR 'e.
In the current wording of the terms of use there is an extremely curious paragraph.
By uploading or otherwise adding content to our Services, you provide a worldwide license to Google and its partners that allows us to use this content, post it, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works from it (for example, translations, adaptations and other ways to optimize materials), share them, publish it, openly reproduce, display, and distribute . The listed rights that you grant to us are used solely to ensure the operation of existing Services, their promotion and improvement, as well as to develop new ones. This license will also be valid after you refuse to use the Services (for example, we will still use the company information you added to Google Maps). Some Services allow you to view and delete content added to them. Some of them also have conditions and settings that impose a restriction on our use of such materials. Before you send us the content and thereby grant a license to use it, make sure that you have the appropriate rights to do so.
Nevertheless, Google stipulates that it does not claim the user's intellectual property.
However, all intellectual property rights in relation to these materials remain with their owner.
The existing formulations leave quite a wide scope for interpretation - on the one hand, Google seems to be not claiming to be authorship of documents loaded, say, but nevertheless automatically receive a license to use these products with very wide rights of free cultural work a la Creative Commons Attribution without copyleft Google, of course, claims that this is done solely to improve the quality of services, but no matter how it was a story with Wi-Fi passwords .
For comparison, here are the terms for using Microsoft SkyDrive, Dropbox, Ubuntu One and Crashplan.
Microsoft from Google is not far away:
With the exception of content that we license to you, we do not claim ownership of the content provided in the service. Your content remains your property. We do not control, check or approve content that you or others provide in the service.
On the one hand, everything is great, but the following paragraphs say the same thing as Google, but more concisely:
You understand that Microsoft may need to use, modify, adapt, reproduce, distribute, and display the content sent to the service solely to the extent necessary to provide the service, and hereby grant Microsoft the right to do so.
Dropbox , unlike the giants, is much more specific, describing why it needs certain permissions and within what frameworks it will use them:
By submitting your information to your user’s Dropbox (together, “your stuff”). You retain full ownership to your stuff. We do not claim any ownership to any of it. It is not necessary to make a difference.
')
For example, hosting your files. For example, image thumbnails or document previews. It also includes what you need to do. You can only provide those services. For example, Amazon, which provides for our services.
In a nutshell: no one infringes on copyright, permissions are needed for the provision of sharing services, creating thumbnails, previewing documents, and the same rights are given to Amazon, whose service is hosted.
Ubuntu One reports that data can be disclosed only in the case of legal requirements or a court decision.
If necessary, you must be able to send you a message. Ubuntu One privacy policy
The rest of the data collected by the service is non-personalized — such as the version of the system, the frequency of client usage (it is distributed under the GPL v3), the quality of the Internet connection. Canonical provides an opportunity to get a copy of all the data stored by the company.
Crashplan writes the following in its privacy policy
Code 42 may be used for business purposes; to establish or maintain client and business relationships; to provide access to Internet-based and e-commerce activities; to perform accounting functions; It is necessary to ensure that it is not a problem.
This applies to the name / surname, email address, address of residence, etc. When using a private password, Crashplan does not know what users are storing on their server due to encryption. This is how she looks like LaCie Wuala.
I myself sympathize with U1, but Crashplan for backup is better because of cheap unlimited storage and clients for different operating systems, including Solaris and Windows Phone, which are supported only on large holidays.
Thus, to Google (and to a large extent to Microsoft) there are quite clear complaints:
but). Put the terms of use of Drive in a separate document
b). Remove wording on such extended rights
at). Decrypt each item of permissions - select specific cases of using the user's materials, recognizing all others as illegal
PS The habrauser soomrack raised the same problem in the comments, and also he made a comparison with Yandex Disk / Dropbox on roem and LOR 'e.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/142779/
All Articles