Google take on Dropbox ?

zaphod79 · **Joined:** 16th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 14518

Google drive

#home">https://drive.google.com/start#home

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17831725

Quote:

Google Drive to offer free storage in the cloud
Google Drive screenshot Google's rate for 100GB of space is cheaper than Dropbox but more expensive than SkyDrive

Google has launched a new consumer service offering up to 16TB (terabytes) of storage for photos and other online content.

Dubbed Google Drive, the service goes head to head with rival cloud services such as Dropbox and Microsoft's SkyDrive.

It offers 5GB (gigabytes) of storage for free. People pay on a rising scale for more space.

Experts say that Google is "late" to the market.

16TB of space could hold more than 4,000 two-hour movies coded in 720p high-definition resolution.
Cloud living

"Today, we're introducing Google Drive - a central place where you can create, share, collaborate and keep all of your stuff," said Sundar Pichai, senior vice president of Chrome and Apps in a blog post.

"Whether you're working with a friend on a joint research project, planning a wedding with your fiancé or tracking a budget with roommates, you can do it in Drive."

The service will allow users to upload and access videos, photos, Google Docs, PDFs and other documents.

It can be installed to a Mac or PC or as an app to an Android phone or tablet. Google said that it was working on an app for Apple's mobile operating system, which should be available in the coming weeks.

For blind users, Drive can be accessed with a screen reader.

"Google Drive will hit some competitors very hard and shake up the market," said Hanns Kohler-Kruner from tech research firm Gartner.

"It will also create another stream of more focused and potential ad revenue for Google around the content of personal files on Google Drive."
Google Drive screenshot Videos stored on Google Drive become available on Google+, helping to promote the social network
Grand canyon

Google will draw on its search expertise to help differentiate the service.

Users will be able search by keyword and filter by file type, owner or activity. Drive will also recognise text in scanned documents using optical character recognition (OCR) technology.

This would allow someone, for example, to upload a scanned image of an old newspaper clipping and search for a word from the text of the news article.

Google Drive will also use image recognition.

"If you drag and drop photos from your Grand Canyon trip to Drive, the next time you search for Grand Canyon, photos of it will pop up," said Mr Pichai.

The first 5GB of storage comes free.

After that users can choose to upgrade to 25GB for $2.49 (£1.50) a month, 100GB for $4.99 a month, 1TB for $49.99 or 16TB for $799.99.

When users upgrade to a paid account, their Gmail account storage will automatically expand to 25GB.

By contrast, Microsoft offers yearly contracts. It charges $50 for maximum storage of 100GB.

Dropbox offers individual users up to 100GB at a rate of $19.99 per month or $199 per year. It also sells larger amounts to groups with the cost and size determined by how many people share the space.
Facebook?

Cloud services have become hugely popular as people seek to access content from a variety of places and devices.
Dropbox graphic Dropbox helped popularise the idea of storage in the cloud, but risks being undercut by its rivals

Richard Edwards, principal analyst at research firm Ovum, said that Google was "very late" to the market but that its move could spur others.

"Facebook doesn't have a cloud service but this may prompt it into an acquisition," he said.

"If Facebook was to buy Dropbox that would be a game-changer."

In anticipation of Google's announcement, rivals updated their own services.

Dropbox now allows users to give non-members access to files via emailed links. Until now it had required both parties to sign up to its service and have shared folders.

Microsoft has also improved its SkyDrive service.

Among other features, it has integrated the drive into Windows Explorer and Apple's Finder so that it works as an extension of the desktop.

It also added capability to access files stored on the drive from an iPad as well as the iPhone and Windows Phone-based handsets.

markg · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 16639

Microsoft just updated their SkyDrive thingy too I was messing with it yesterday. It's pretty nifty actually, if you authorize it on your PC then you can browse all the folders from anywhere. 25GB free on there though.

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32624

@hotdogsladies: https://twitter.com/#!/hotdogsladies/st ... 4307158017

Quote:

Imagine a guy who's REALLY into panties who makes ALL his money selling data about panties. Now he offers to store your panties.

Yeah—that.

TheVision · **Posted:** Wed Apr 25, 2012 14:09

I would have been interested in this if only it wasn't for Dropbox. All my cloud storage needs are handled nicely by that, and I've managed to get all my friends to sign up for a shared folder.

myp · **Posted:** Wed Apr 25, 2012 14:44

Too late for me. I'm already a Dropbox user.

Bamba · **Joined:** 25th Jul, 2010 **Posts:** 11128

I'd be interested in some kind of Google service if it integrated with Android properly. My use case for Dropbox is storing pictures/video I take on my phone, but currently I need to use an intermediate app (Folder Sync) which allows me to nominate folders on my phone which it will then push to my Dropbox account at scheduled times. The actual Dropbox app will only sync the contents of your single dedicated dropbox folder so on it's own it's no use to me. If there was a Google app that did for me what Dropbox + FolderSync are currently doing I'd take them up on it.

devilman · **Posted:** Wed Apr 25, 2012 15:04

myp wrote:

Too late for me. I'm already a Dropbox user.

My tablet installed Drive the other day, but I don't see me using it. I spend most of my time on desktops though so having dropbox integrated into Explorer is all I need and it works fine, so I won't be switching away from their service any time soon.

Grim... · **Posted:** Wed Apr 25, 2012 15:04

Bamba wrote:

If there was a Google app that did for me what Dropbox + FolderSync are currently doing I'd take them up on it.

Google Plus grabs your photos and videos, I think. Dropbox only does your photos.

asfish · **Joined:** 5th Dec, 2010 **Posts:** 3353

I use dropbox for Home\Work\Ipad data. Much better that pissing around with VPN conections

Also use SKYDrive as there is 25GB per email account you use, have all my pictures on it as a 2nd back up

Also bought something called SDExplorer that gives a file view of the SKYDrive.

Thing with all of these things is that you need a good "up" speed. I had 12GB of pictures so used the 100MB each way link at work on a weekend.

Now I have 15mb up at home cloud stuff is pretty cool. I'll be getting a free Google drive

Bamba · **Joined:** 25th Jul, 2010 **Posts:** 11128

Grim... wrote:

Google Plus grabs your photos and videos, I think. Dropbox only does your photos.

Surely Dropbox does 'whatever files you stick in the dropbox folder'? It's fussy about what folder it takes from but now what file formats is picks up. Certainly, via FolderSync, my phone will happily push video files into my Dropbox account if I take any video using my phonecam.

Google Plus would need to allow me to nominate multiple folders on my phone and take everything from all those folders to fit my needs. Actually, it would also need to not be fucking social networking either as I'm not at all interested in that sort of thing.

Grim... · **Posted:** Wed Apr 25, 2012 17:26

Oh, so it's not just images and videos, then? Understood.

If you've rooted your phone, you could create symlinks with the terminal inside your dropbox folder which would have the desired effect.

Actually, as your dropbox folder is on your SDCard, you should be able to do this anyway.

[edit]Bah, the card is FAT32 formatted.

Bamba · **Joined:** 25th Jul, 2010 **Posts:** 11128

Grim... wrote:

Oh, so it's not just images and videos, then? Understood.

No, it is just images and videos but in your last post you said for some reason that Dropbox wouldn't 'do' videos; I was disagreeing and saying that it does indeed do videos.

My issue though isn't the file formats it handles (which is 'all'), but just with the fact that it'll only sync from one folder but I need it to sync from a couple of different folders.

I don't think I'm explaining myself very well here am I?

Ramsea · **Joined:** 20th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 963

Grim... wrote:

Bamba wrote:

If there was a Google app that did for me what Dropbox + FolderSync are currently doing I'd take them up on it.

Google Plus grabs your photos and videos, I think. Dropbox only does your photos.

Dropbox does grab videos as well as photos.

Grim... · **Posted:** Wed Apr 25, 2012 18:43

Dropbox will upload photos you take, regardless of where they're stored. It even gives you extra space to store them.
I didn't know it did video too.

Grim... · **Posted:** Wed Apr 25, 2012 18:46

So it does.
Only ones you take with your camera, though (is what I've been on about).

GovernmentYard · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 5318

I just went into google docs and, having emailed to be notified about google drive yesterday, had a "welcome and read shite" screen for drive come up when the docs page loaded. Needing to get at one of my docs, I clicked "not now" and got to the doc I was after, however it's all labelled Drive now, and I can't find any new t&cs, so do google own all the stuff I have in docs like my CV and so on now?

I've already got Dropbox on iPad and might be trying skydive as I use a win7 desktop, if docs is going evil, I might need another word processor on iOS so does anyone know if Pages is worth six quid?

Plissken · **Posted:** Wed Apr 25, 2012 23:00

GovernmentYard wrote:

I can't find any new t&cs, so do google own all the stuff I have in docs like my CV and so on now?

Of course they don't.

Trooper · **Joined:** 4th Mar, 2010 **Posts:** 22392

Plissken wrote:

GovernmentYard wrote:

I can't find any new t&cs, so do google own all the stuff I have in docs like my CV and so on now?

Of course they don't.

Plissken · **Posted:** Wed Apr 25, 2012 23:52

Fucks sake. Second time I've seen that today. Why don't we try again, this time without the selective editing.

Quote:

Some of our Services allow you to submit content. You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours.

When you upload or otherwise submit content to our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide licence to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes that we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights that you grant in this licence are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This licence continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing that you have added to Google Maps). Some Services may offer you ways to access and remove content that has been provided to that Service. Also, in some of our Services, there are terms or settings that narrow the scope of our use of the content submitted in those Services. Make sure that you have the necessary rights to grant us this licence for any content you submit to our Services.

You can find more information about how Google uses and stores content in the Privacy Policy or additional terms for particular Services. If you submit feedback or suggestions about our Services, we may use your feedback or suggestions without obligation to you.

Plissken · **Posted:** Wed Apr 25, 2012 23:55

I know I sound grumpy, and I apologise. But (coincidentally) I've spent all day going through Googles privacy policies for the last four years as part of my MSc and at no point has the idea of Google taking ownership of your intellectual property ever been true.

GovernmentYard · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 5318

Couldn't

Quote:

The rights that you grant in this licence are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting and improving our Services, and to develop new ones.

be anything at all, though?

I'll take your word for it but it still seems a bit open ended.

Ramsea · **Joined:** 20th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 963

GovernmentYard wrote:

Couldn't

Quote:

The rights that you grant in this licence are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting and improving our Services, and to develop new ones.

be anything at all, though?

I'll take your word for it but it still seems a bit open ended.

True, but there is no way in hell Google would abuse their position. They stand to lose far too much.

TheVision · **Posted:** Thu Apr 26, 2012 0:06

Quote:

Some of our Services allow you to submit content. You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours.

I think this bit kind of solves the problem for me. Nothing open ended about that.

Plissken · **Posted:** Thu Apr 26, 2012 0:09

GovernmentYard wrote:

Couldn't

Quote:

The rights that you grant in this licence are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting and improving our Services, and to develop new ones.

be anything at all, though?

I'll take your word for it but it still seems a bit open ended.

Which bit of

Quote:

You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours.

is open ended?

Edit: Basically, you are granting them a licence to deal with the file for the purpose of operating the service. For instance, if you upload it to server A and they want to make a backup or move it to server B to ensure you still have access to the file in the event of server A dying, then you let them do so. Promoting is down to "we have X million users and Y million files". Improving is testing for speed and reliability.

I'm going to be doing a survey RSN about privacy of personal data and social networking and I'll be asking people here to take part. Don't want to prejudice the results, but after it is closed, I'll happily answer stuff in more detail if you want.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49244

You absolutely retain ownership. You are, however, granting Google the right in perpetuity to do pretty much whatever they like with it other than assert ownership.

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32624

Like, scan the contents and use those contents to generate ads.

Plissken · **Posted:** Thu Apr 26, 2012 8:17

Yup. They take your content and use it right back at you. They don't take your content and use it at me.

Trooper · **Joined:** 4th Mar, 2010 **Posts:** 22392

Like, scan the contents and send information to publishing houses if they find any pirated material?

itsallwater · **Posted:** Thu Apr 26, 2012 9:03

Using image recognition and OCR to help you manage said content but also use the same information to advertise and update their own service. It sounds like essentially they are trying to keep the door open so they can add additional services or data mine.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49244

Plissken wrote:

Yup. They take your content and use it right back at you. They don't take your content and use it at me.

Well, they can if they want.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49244

Craster wrote:

Plissken wrote:

Yup. They take your content and use it right back at you. They don't take your content and use it at me.

Well, they can if they want.

This, which you quoted earlier:

Quote:

Some of our Services allow you to submit content. You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours.

When you upload or otherwise submit content to our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide licence to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes that we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights that you grant in this licence are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This licence continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing that you have added to Google Maps). Some Services may offer you ways to access and remove content that has been provided to that Service. Also, in some of our Services, there are terms or settings that narrow the scope of our use of the content submitted in those Services. Make sure that you have the necessary rights to grant us this licence for any content you submit to our Services.

You can find more information about how Google uses and stores content in the Privacy Policy or additional terms for particular Services. If you submit feedback or suggestions about our Services, we may use your feedback or suggestions without obligation to you.

Means that if Google wanted to take one of your pictures from Picasa and put it on 30' billboards with the tagline "Use Picasa, it's amazeballs", they're absolutely allowed to do so. Moreover, "This licence continues even if you stop using our Services " rather suggests that if you're unhappy with that and delete your Picasa account, they can quite happily carry on using that image.

ApplePieOfDestiny · **Joined:** 17th Dec, 2008 **Posts:** 8293

There is. however, a question of intent. I see (non IP based) Ts&Cs that the company has no intention of actually using, or planning to use, but is there as a legal cover in case they do it by mistake.

Taking Crasters picassa point above. It is exceptionally unlikely that Google would do that without seeking permission, regardless of what the terms say. But there is a risk that they could do so and miss a step in their compliance. The terms help to protect them from being sued.

MaliA · **Posted:** Thu Apr 26, 2012 9:56

I view it as the cost of using a free service. I figure that if I don't like it, I'll pay for one that has more favorable terms.

Trooper · **Joined:** 4th Mar, 2010 **Posts:** 22392

MaliA wrote:

I view it as the cost of using a free service. I figure that if I don't like it, I'll pay for one that has more favorable terms.

But there are other free services that have more favourable terms.

MaliA · **Posted:** Thu Apr 26, 2012 10:07

Trooper wrote:

MaliA wrote:

I view it as the cost of using a free service. I figure that if I don't like it, I'll pay for one that has more favorable terms.

But there are other free services that have more favourable terms.

In which case I'm confused as to what the kerfuffle is about.

Curiosity · **Posted:** Thu Apr 26, 2012 10:26

MaliA wrote:

Trooper wrote:

MaliA wrote:

I view it as the cost of using a free service. I figure that if I don't like it, I'll pay for one that has more favorable terms.

But there are other free services that have more favourable terms.

In which case I'm confused as to what the kerfuffle is about.

That people will not realise what they are giving away.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49244

ApplePieOfDestiny wrote:

There is. however, a question of intent. I see (non IP based) Ts&Cs that the company has no intention of actually using, or planning to use, but is there as a legal cover in case they do it by mistake.

Taking Crasters picassa point above. It is exceptionally unlikely that Google would do that without seeking permission, regardless of what the terms say. But there is a risk that they could do so and miss a step in their compliance. The terms help to protect them from being sued.

While there's a good chance that's correct, I don't think it's acceptable practice to be asking the end user to sign away legal rights to something in the event that you fuck up and use it for a purpose you didn't intend to. You're supposed to be able to sue if a company uses your data/property in an way that isn't commensurate with the service it's providing.

Imagine a hotel where the Ts&Cs state that you give permission for one of the hotel staff to let themselves into your room and fuck your wife? They don't intend to do that, but y'know it might happen, so lets get the guest to sign a waiver just so they can't sue if it does.

A ridiculous parallel, obviously - but you take my point.

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32624

Craster wrote:

While there's a good chance that's correct, I don't think it's acceptable practice to be asking the end user to sign away legal rights to something in the event that you fuck up and use it for a purpose you didn't intend to.

I'm also not comforted by contracts that give a third party permission to do something potentially unpleasant, but come with non-contractual promises that "hey, it's cool, those clauses will never be invoked".

ApplePieOfDestiny · **Joined:** 17th Dec, 2008 **Posts:** 8293

Craster wrote:

ApplePieOfDestiny wrote:

There is. however, a question of intent. I see (non IP based) Ts&Cs that the company has no intention of actually using, or planning to use, but is there as a legal cover in case they do it by mistake.

Taking Crasters picassa point above. It is exceptionally unlikely that Google would do that without seeking permission, regardless of what the terms say. But there is a risk that they could do so and miss a step in their compliance. The terms help to protect them from being sued.

While there's a good chance that's correct, I don't think it's acceptable practice to be asking the end user to sign away legal rights to something in the event that you fuck up and use it for a purpose you didn't intend to. You're supposed to be able to sue if a company uses your data/property in an way that isn't commensurate with the service it's providing.

Imagine a hotel where the Ts&Cs state that you give permission for one of the hotel staff to let themselves into your room and fuck your wife? They don't intend to do that, but y'know it might happen, so lets get the guest to sign a waiver just so they can't sue if it does.

A ridiculous parallel, obviously - but you take my point.

Does this hotel have a bar in the pool?

Squirt · **Joined:** 31st Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 6608

Doctor Glyndwr wrote:

Craster wrote:

While there's a good chance that's correct, I don't think it's acceptable practice to be asking the end user to sign away legal rights to something in the event that you fuck up and use it for a purpose you didn't intend to.

I'm also not comforted by contracts that give a third party permission to do something potentially unpleasant, but come with non-contractual promises that "hey, it's cool, those clauses will never be invoked".

It's like those Anti-Terror laws. "I know we're giving the police crazy powers, but they'll only be used in emergencies against nasty evil men, not to evict protesters and hecklers, or to spy on petty criminals!"

Plissken · **Posted:** Thu Apr 26, 2012 11:24

Craster wrote:

Means that if Google wanted to take one of your pictures from Picasa and put it on 30' billboards with the tagline "Use Picasa, it's amazeballs", they're absolutely allowed to do so.

No it doesn't - because that means they are using your IP. There is an ad at the moment, I think for Virgin Media, which is using a nicked image (the baby holding the fist pump) - I expect them to be hit hard soon.

What it does mean is that your image can appear in, for instance, a Google Image search. Or if you have made a blog post, then that blog post can by default appear in a Google search. (Blogger being part of Google, and that T&Cs spans all of Googles services from YouTube, Blogger, GMail, Google Docs etc. Which is a mistake, IMO.)

I suggest you actually read their privacy policy, http://www.google.co.uk/privacy rather than focussing on the T&Cs.

Quote:

Moreover, "This licence continues even if you stop using our Services " rather suggests that if you're unhappy with that and delete your Picasa account, they can quite happily carry on using that image.

No, it means that if you remove your information, the previous processing that Google have done on it doesn't get removed.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49244

Plissken wrote:

Craster wrote:

Means that if Google wanted to take one of your pictures from Picasa and put it on 30' billboards with the tagline "Use Picasa, it's amazeballs", they're absolutely allowed to do so.

No it doesn't - because that means they are using your IP.

Using your IP is perfectly fine. According to those Ts&Cs, you are granting them the right to use that IP. You're not granting them ownership of that IP - you explicitly retain ownership. But you're absolutely granting them license to use it.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49244

Plissken wrote:

I suggest you actually read their privacy policy, http://www.google.co.uk/privacy rather than focussing on the T&Cs.

Why? This is nothing to do with data privacy. Google's privacy policy (and yes, I've read it) directly covers information about you that Google receive as a result of you using their services. Such as account information, log data etc. It does not cover their obligations regarding the IP you store within their services - their Ts&Cs do.

Plissken · **Posted:** Thu Apr 26, 2012 12:42

Craster wrote:

Using your IP is perfectly fine. According to those Ts&Cs, you are granting them the right to use that IP. You're not granting them ownership of that IP - you explicitly retain ownership. But you're absolutely granting them license to use it.

To use that IP internally in order to provide the advert supported service that you signed up for. They are not going to take the recipe for strawberry jam that you stored in Google Docs and then release a book of recipes for strawberry jam with your recipe in it. What they are going to do is add you to the list of people who like strawberries, jam and do home baking. And then give you adverts based on that.

markg · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 16639

I think what people are concerned about is not what Google probably will or won't do but what they legally can do given their terms and conditions.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49244

Plissken wrote:

Craster wrote:

Using your IP is perfectly fine. According to those Ts&Cs, you are granting them the right to use that IP. You're not granting them ownership of that IP - you explicitly retain ownership. But you're absolutely granting them license to use it.

To use that IP internally in order to provide the advert supported service that you signed up for. They are not going to take the recipe for strawberry jam that you stored in Google Docs and then release a book of recipes for strawberry jam with your recipe in it. What they are going to do is add you to the list of people who like strawberries, jam and do home baking. And then give you adverts based on that.

You're making the same argument APoD did though. I don't think Google are likely to publish a book containing my strawberry jam recipe. However, the Ts&Cs state that if they chose to do that, they are more than welcome to do so because I've granted them license to do that.

Let's read it again.

Quote:

you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide licence to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes that we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights that you grant in this licence are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting and improving our Services, and to develop new ones

Can they create derivative works, publish and distribute them? Yes. You've granted them license to do so.
Can they do so for the purpose of promoting their services? Yes. You've granted them license to do so.

If those Ts&Cs cover things that they wouldn't want to do, they need to tighten them up. I really don't get why you're defending this wording.

Doctor Glyndwr · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 32624

Plissken wrote:

They are not going to take the recipe for strawberry jam that you stored in Google Docs and then release a book of recipes for strawberry jam with your recipe in it.

"Are not going to" or "legally cannot"? There's a world of difference.

Quote:

What they are going to do is add you to the list of people who like strawberries, jam and do home baking. And then give you adverts based on that.

This is plenty creepy enough for some folk, of course.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49244

markg wrote:

I think what people are concerned about is not what Google probably will or won't do but what they legally can do given their terms and conditions.

I should never have to sign away rights to my stuff unless doing so is a prerequisite for the services I need to use.

Plissken · **Posted:** Thu Apr 26, 2012 14:19

Craster wrote:

Can they create derivative works, publish and distribute them? Yes. You've granted them license to do so.
Can they do so for the purpose of promoting their services? Yes. You've granted them license to do so.

You've split the two things up - they are combined. And they need to be there in order for the Service to work.

Doctor Glyndwr wrote:

This is plenty creepy enough for some folk, of course.

The evidence suggests otherwise.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49244

Plissken wrote:

Craster wrote:

Can they create derivative works, publish and distribute them? Yes. You've granted them license to do so.
Can they do so for the purpose of promoting their services? Yes. You've granted them license to do so.

You've split the two things up - they are combined. And they need to be there in order for the Service to work.

I've split them up because they're separated in the quote. However, those two combined give Google the absolute legal right to take my jam recipe and reprint it as a promotional book of jam recipes advertising their services. Exactly what you said they wouldn't be able to do.

They need to be able to sell a book of people's jam recipes in order for the service to work? Didn't think so. So what you do is you rewrite your terms and conditions to cover the things you do actually need to do, and not cover the things you don't need to do.

When regarding handing over your rights to your IP, there is no excuse for lax language.

Be Excellent To Each Other

Google take on Dropbox ?

Who is online