Posted: September 8th, 2008 | Author: Catherine | Filed under: General | Tags: amendment, Chrome, copyright, google, terms of service | 1 Comment »
When Chrome was released initially, there were those who read the terms of service. It appeared to give Google perpetual rights to content. Google has explained the problem with the initial licence:
“…Rebecca Ward, senior product counsel for Google Chrome, said the problem arose because Google re-uses swathes of its Universal Terms of Service across all its offerings “in order to keep things simple for our users”.
“Sometimes, as in the case of Google Chrome, this means that the legal terms for a specific product may include terms that don’t apply well to the use of that product,” she said.”
link: Google tweaks Chrome licence text
It seems that the original creator of the work retains “copyright and any other rights“. What has been initially impressive is that Google has been responsive to concerns. Google seems to address issues without the usual corporate defensiveness. An explanation is given and corrective action taken. It is what one would hope from a business. That it actually happens is surprising.
Catherine Forsythe
Posted: September 2nd, 2008 | Author: Catherine | Filed under: General | Tags: advertising, Chrome, copyright, creative commons license, google, revenue, terms of service | 3 Comments »
Chrome went ‘live’ here. It is interesting to look at the terms of service that Google is setting. Here is an example:
“…”By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any content which you submit, post or display on or through, the services. 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.”
It seems that this is not an infringement of copyright. It appears that the original creator of the work retains copyright. However, it does seem to extend Creative Commons license and gives Google perpetual rights.
Undoubtedly, Google has had its legal department carefully scrutinizing the terms of service. It is interesting reading to see how Google is self protective and crafts its terms of service. The terms of service is one section that most users will by-pass in order to access Chrome itself. However, it is interesting to see Google prepare. Google has been thorough and gives hints to what Chrome may have in store vis-a-vis advertising and generating revenue.
Catherine Forsythe
