Google+ anyone?

[caradoc]

So far I’m not seeing much to make me favor this over Facebook.

There’s one thing that’s gotten me using G+ over FB immediately:

NO GODDAMNED FARMVILLE (or other stupid effing game/app) SPAM!

[Elsinore]

I’m concerned with Googles TOS for content; it really makes me not want to share photos on there. I did read the Washington Post article Rav linked to, and it does say this at the bottom:

Update, Monday 12:57 p.m.

Many readers have pointed out that Google?s TOS includes the line, ?You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services,? which seems like it should allay photographers? fears.

But in an article entitled ?Clarification would be nice, but no need to panic,? intellectual property lawyer Denise Howell writes that Google?s TOS still needs to be examined, and could be more clearly worded.

And this:

Update, Monday 1:27 p.m.

Google?s TOS also includes the line: ?This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services.? This line acts as a limitation Google has imposed on itself.

But overall, their TOS wording is murky. If they are expecting people (and more importantly businesses and artists) to abandon FB for G+, they will need to clarify and clean the wording up a bit. Corporations sure as hell aren’t going to stand for wording that allows their content to be usurped for Google’s own promotional purposes, and in a way that is “non-revocable” as per the main TOS wording. Hopefully since that won’t fly for bigger guns, Google will take the time and consideration to rework their TOS to clarify and put these kinds of concerns to rest.

Be that as it may, FB has for a long time had a feature that allows you to do what G+’s Circles do. Under the Account tab, go to edit friends, then click the “Create a list” button up at the top. You can create separate lists for family, college friends, drinking buddies, local people, acquaintances you don’t want to share family photos with, etc. Granted, you will need to go back and edit photo albums and notes to limit things in the way you want to limit (or allow), but once that’s set up, it’s pretty handy. Status messages, notes, links, photo albums can all be shared with as many or as few people/groups as you choose.

[olavf]

Yeah I agree the TOS is murky, but mostly sounds like a poorly-worded version of what everyone else is doing. It does neeed to be cleaned up before it can be used professionally though. AFaIK those are the TOS for Gogle as a whol, not just Google+ to, so take that for what you will.

On the circles, I find them much more intuitive than the FB lists, which I honestly don’t bother with. I’ve taken to not adding people that I don’t think can handle my shiat 😛

[ravnostic]

I’ve been having this discussion about privacy with a friend who’s a professional photographer (from MySpace, refound on G+, never saw on FB). For her, it’s an issue. For me, it’s not. I long ago decided that anything I ‘publish’ anywhere on line is going to be taken if people like it, for personal use or otherwise, and I’ll likely never know. Most of my stuff gets posted at lower resolutions than the originals anyway. I choose not to worry about it as I’m not pursuing any kind of living off my photos.

That said, I respect anyone who does take issue with the terms, and if I found someone was actually profiting off my work, I’d certainly take issue with that. I think it’s sad, though, that we miss out on good photos because of stuff like this. I’m fairly certain if Google wants to pursue businesses, the TOS will get a rework.

I’m with olavf on the circles. Better and more intuitive than any I’ve seen, since the early blogspot days.

[Author]

Posts