Facebook’s Insurance Policy
Mark Zuckerberg says, with regards to the changes in the privacy and data ownership, that the issues are not so cut and dry. When you share your data with someone else, whether it be an email or a photo, it becomes their data as well. You cannot normally rescind data you share with other people in an e-mail. So why should a social network be any different? Zuckerberg explains:
Our philosophy is that people own their information and control who they share it with. . . . One of the questions about our new terms of use is whether Facebook can use this information forever. When a person shares something like a message with a friend, two copies of that information are created—one in the person’s sent messages box and the other in their friend’s inbox. Even if the person deactivates their account, their friend still has a copy of that message. We think this is the right way for Facebook to work, and it is consistent with how other services like email work. One of the reasons we updated our terms was to make this more clear.
In reality, we wouldn’t share your information in a way you wouldn’t want. The trust you place in us as a safe place to share information is the most important part of what makes Facebook work. . . .
Still, the interesting thing about this change in our terms is that it highlights the importance of these issues and their complexity. People want full ownership and control of their information so they can turn off access to it at any time. At the same time, people also want to be able to bring the information others have shared with them—like email addresses, phone numbers, photos and so on—to other services and grant those services access to those people’s information. These two positions are at odds with each other. There is no system today that enables me to share my email address with you and then simultaneously lets me control who you share it with and also lets you control what services you share it with.
This very interesting perspective in his latest statement statement, indicates panic. With no clear business model evolving Facebook’s lates move suggests that they are hoping to keep control in the hopes of figuring out what to do with the data … its a defensive move, an insurance policy - nothing more!
February 16th, 2009 at 8:41 pm
[...] Socialesque Blog wrote an interesting post today on Facebook’s Insurance PolicyHere’s a quick excerpt. . . One of the questions about our new terms of use is whether Facebook can use this information forever….The trust you place in us as a safe place to share information is the most important part of what makes Facebook work….We think this is the right way for Facebook to work, and it is consistent with how other services like email work…. [...]
February 16th, 2009 at 11:28 pm
Obviously, they are in a state of panic on many levels, the most obvious being the backlash to the TOS, and it would also appear that financial issue may also play a role, as well as a business model that just “became” with not much foresight since its inception as a means for old college buddies to stay in touch.
I could tell you a bunch of Big Brother-esque things they could do with the data for monetary purposes, but I am not going to give them any ideas, and I am sure anyone of intellect has already had the same thoughts!
Hmm… I wonder how many servers was this reply just archived on?!
February 16th, 2009 at 11:54 pm
This is going to put atleast quite a few ppl off. I suspect another “beacon-like” retraction is coming soon!
February 17th, 2009 at 1:04 am
What social network’s like FB are realizing is that
1) They are floundering in attempts to create revenue streams
2) They are not the end-all in the evolution of the internet. Meaning this - web 2.0 ideas were short-sighted in the assumption that “social networks” was where people would stop in their quest for cyber identities. The ability for the everyday person to develop a website, now combined with the cost being relatively insignificant means more and more people are going to have their own, autonomous websites. Social networks will merely be for reconnecting, while someone’s true identity will be their website.
Coincidentally, I was writing a short article about this evolution when the FB story broke.
http://notarobotmarketing.squarespace.com/personal-branding/its-your-website-its-your-story.html
February 17th, 2009 at 1:35 am
Couldnt agree more John. This is fundamentally challenging (and rightly so!) the assumption that with traffic comes revenue. Facebook needs to seriously start thinking about their business model and it needs to be based on a unique value proposition - I am not seeing that yet.
Varun
February 17th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
“When you share your data with someone else, whether it be an email or a photo, it becomes their data as well. You cannot normally rescind data you share with other people in an e-mail. So why should a social network be any different?”
Substituting ‘telephone’ for ’social’, we can ask why a telephone network should be any different. Whenever you share data, whether it be an email or a photo, with somebody over the telephone network, why shouldn’t it become the telephone network’s data as well? This seems to be the de facto policy of the NSA, so there is precedent.
All your data are belong to us.