privacy: October 2007 Archives

Dissecting the Facebook 'Terms of Use'

| | Comments (2)
After a seminar today run by Peter Black on the use of 'Web 2.0' in teaching, Peter and Jessica Coates tried to convince me that Facebook is not, in fact, crap, and is substantially better than Myspace; which is presumably, impliedly, crap.  Unless you're a ditzy teenager whose life ambition is to be on Paris Hilton's friends list and thereby gain some kind of incredibly lame validation.  But I digress...

Earlier in the seminar, I'd voiced my objection to the possibility that students might be compelled to become members of some of these 'Web 2.0' services to do mandatory assessment items in some subjects.  This would, of course, require those students to enter into a contractual relationship with those service providers, with associated legal liability and privacy risks.  It might also constitute third line forcing, which is per-se illegal in Australia, but that's a different issue.

The concerns I raised were largely dismissed as paranoia.  So, I got to thinking, exactly what is in the applicable contracts for a service like Facebook?  In this posting, I dissect the Facebook 'Terms of Use'...  You know, that massively long (over 6000 words), complicated, contractual document that nobody ever reads when they sign up.

About this Archive

This page is a archive of entries in the privacy category from October 2007.

privacy: August 2007 is the previous archive.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

privacy: October 2007: Monthly Archives