The other day, Biz Stone of Twitter came out with an email broadcast that changes had been made in Twitter’s Terms of Service (TOS). The modifications address issues relating to advertising, tweet ownership, APIs and spam.
Already we hear criticisms regarding the changes in Twitter’s TOS. The criticisms are not so much on advertising, APIs and spam. To me, Twitter’s stance on these aspects of web publishing is pretty much standard.
The one aspect that attracts much attention is with regard to tweet ownership. If memory serves right, I think a similar reaction was heard when Facebook announced modifications to its Terms of Service many months ago.
Here is one criticism which I read in one of the email alerts hitting my mailbox:
If Twitter can do what they want with ‘our’ tweets, including reproduction for their own (financial) gain, what do we actually ‘own’?”… “If Twitter loses our data, closes our accounts or goes out of business, do we still own those tweets? Or are they retrievable in any way?”
As a Twitter-er and web publisher, I can look at this issue from both sides.
Like other Twitter-ers, I want to retain rights to my posts / updates / tweets (for whatever they are worth). This means that I retain the right to publish my tweets or do whatever I want to do with them. No publisher can tell me that I cannot publish or re-publish my tweets. My tweets are my own. Needless to say, I acknowledge that I am responsible for what I write or tweet.
In that respect, Twitter’s stance is quite acceptable to me. It has enshrined my rights in its TOS by declaring:
“You retain your rights to any Content you submit, post or display on or through the Services.” and “But what’s yours is yours – you own your content.”
Like other web publishers, I can understand too where Twitter is coming from when its TOS declares:
“By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through the Services, you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute such Content in any and all media or distribution methods (now known or later developed).
“You agree that this license includes the right for Twitter to make such content available to other companies, organizations or individuals who partner with Twitter for the syndication, broadcast, distribution or publication of such Content on other media and services, subject to our terms and conditions for such Content use.”
If Twitter or any other web publisher for that matter, especially those providing free publication and promotional services, do not have a licence to use or reproduce its website content, what is then the point of maintaining the website?
Twitter exists for a reason. Twitter is a business. It exists therefore for a business reason.
Don’t you think that is fair for Twitter as a publisher to claim a share in the publication rights?
But what about the content owner? As a Twitter-er, I am already benefiting from using Twitter’s free promotion services. And I can still publish my tweets if I want to. I could not ask for more.
What do you think?
Other suggested articles
[Not necessarily related to above post; Automatically generated]
