The Content in Google Apps Belongs to Google
Summary: An alert reader, SentryWatch, commented per my last blog that the Terms of Service posted on the Google Docs and Spreadsheets site assigns content rights of anything saved on Doc and Spreadsheets to Google.
An alert reader, SentryWatch, commented per my last blog that the Terms of Service posted on the Google Docs and Spreadsheets site assigns content rights of anything saved on Doc and Spreadsheets to Google. It’s almost too incredible to believe, so here’s the wording from the mighty Google maw itself:
“… you grant Google a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to reproduce, adapt, modify, publish and distribute such Content on Google services for the purpose of displaying, distributing and promoting Google services…”
Now, I’m not a lawyer, though I have been accused of that and more, so I encourage all you lawyerly types to check it out for yourself. There may be some wriggle room for Google on this, as they may have some internal distinction they mean to be making regarding the difference between services “intended to be available to the members of the public” -- which is the subject of this content land grab – and other unspecified “services” that aren’t intended to be available to the public. But as far as I can tell Google Apps are intended for the public, and their use gives Google the right to repurpose your content for their marketing or other purposes.
I’ve said it before – Google is the new evil empire – but now I really am beginning to believe it. I know that user agreements are typically ignored by most users, but anyone in the corporate world who ignores this risks seeing their IP in a Google marketing campaign, or worse.
All I can say is this: Are they out of their minds?
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Horrible
inconsistencies
could be worded better but...
I think they covered themselves. Could be worded better.
Google has always been good about transparency on rights, privacy, and has been known for protecting consumer data.
Follow the Grqammar
Josh, show me a vendor contract...
Vendor Contract Don't Claim Rights to Customers Data
Josh
Read it more carefully
As we state in our terms of service, we don't claim ownership or control over your content in Google Docs & Spreadsheets, whether you're using it as an individual or through Google Apps. Read in its entirety, the sentence from our terms of service excerpted in the blog ensures that, for documents you expressly choose to share with others, we have the proper license to display those documents to the selected users and format documents properly for different displays. To be clear, Google will not use your documents beyond the scope that you and you alone control. Your fantasy football spreadsheets are not going to end up shared with the world unless you want them to be.
Not the point
See my grammatical posting above
You're not on solid ground here
This is made even more clear by the previous two sentences in the TOS:
"Google claims no ownership or control over any Content submitted, posted or displayed by you on or through Google services. You or a third party licensor, as appropriate, retain all patent, trademark and copyright to any Content you submit, post or display on or through Google services and you are responsible for protecting those rights, as appropriate."
1 smart lawyer > 100 people
You miss the point of the ownership clause -- they can deny any ownership claim and still claim the right to use the information: this indeed is a standard intellectual property action. I can retain copyright (ownership) of an article and still give rights to its use. In effect this is what the two clauses taken together say: you own it, but we have rights to use it.
here is a quote from their terms
Evil empire?
"Our sites include ... content ... that our users create. All materials published on our sites...are protected by our copyrights or trademarks or those of our partners. You may not ...reproduce....or in any way exploit any of the materials or content on our sites in whole or in part."
Guess whose site that TOU came from? Hint - you're on it. (http://www.cnetnetworks.com/editorial/terms.html)
I can't even copy my own comment on this ZDNet site or read it to my wife! Evil! [cue faraway screams]
:-D
Hoo-wee, I didn't even see this part...
public versus private
I don't think so.
Second, my point was not a public/private info debate. It was about your calling Google "Evil" for having vague or overly gratuitous contract language. This site's TOU tells me I can't use MY comments anywhere else, and it also tells me they can use MY comments FOREVER on ANY media they so choose whether or not that media has even been invented yet! That's not "Evil"? It certainly isn't a "reasonable" expectation.
Like, Oh My God!
Some one had better get the government involved in this, we can't have companies doing what you actually asked them to do!
Really, do you need to make stuff up to get people to read your column or what?
please read the column again
Web 2 means you write, they own.
BB
This is standard
The only thing "evil" here is your apparent anti-Google bias. They are in business to make money just like ever other profit earning corporation, get over it.