I’ve been working with gorgeous blogger Jennine on an Independent Fashion Bloggers post about how some social-networking sites redistribute user-generated content to third parties. This issue is relevant to everyone who uses Facebook as well as fashion-oriented sites.
Read the story here.
Wow, that is an eye opening article, thank-you. I’m glad you use your journalistic skills for good and not evil.
thanks for helping out with this article…it really would be a hot mess if it weren’t for you. the whole adventure was fascinating.
🙂
“Chictopia’s terms of service is no different than that of Twitter, Facebook, and many others.”
Um – is it too much to ask that a verb and noun might occasionally agree on the internet? Arrrrgh. It’s just so distracting!
PS – What you’ve written is immaculate (and astute, but that’s a separate issue.) I think, for example, that “ToS” SHOULD be treated as a singular. My only objection is to the mangled wording in material that you quoted (and therefore can’t be expected to alter.)
f@*k facebook is all i have to say.
(somehow you have the best anti-spamwords: today’s is “neimans”)
The web and intellectual property, beyond copyright, are sort of let’s make it up as we roll (troll?). Chictopia,and I don’t mean to single it out, represents an opportunistic community. It’s obvious that neither asking a blogger’s explicit permission or offering a credit to or link is wrong and in any other medium the rules would already be mandated. Good to deal with this now as a template and not simply click on “agree” to pages of TOS that lacks clarity. Nicely done.
As I said over there, this is a fantastic and important piece and is pertinent to fashion and non-fashion bloggers alike.
Great post. I hope that this doesn’t become a generational issue with younger generations becoming inured to the abuse of their rights.
On the other hand, I suspect that this is just the beginning of the user-generated-content debate. As we use more website and software tools to create UGO, the boundaries are going to become even less clear. Second Life and online game character personalisation come to mind. And the way companies are mining Flickr – ugh.
Thanks for co-writing the article!
I’m really glad that IFB is committed to exposing these kinds of things. I feel like I get real advice when I visit rather than the usual sugar-coated crap.
These sites act as if they are immune to bad press or the truth rather but aren’t they afraid of a serious user backlash?
It was a brilliant piece.
I think people need to really be sure what they’re doing when they advocate products. I know I’d be horrified if I posted a photo of myself in some athletic gear, and the maker siphoned my photo off to use on their site to sell clothes. And I don’t even want to think of what my employers would say if that happened. There’s a lot at stake here. We all need to be careful.
“no different than”
May I jump in as another person who likes proper grammar? and point out that the above phrase is meaningless! The correct phrase is “different FROM.”
Things differ FROM each other, not THAN each other. Makes sense eh? People are confusing comparisons with dichotomies…we can say “swear rings are cooler THAN (insert dorky item here)” because there are relative qualities being compared.
I know nobody appears to know the DIFFERENCE anymore, but somebody out there still cares right?
Aanyway…love the issue being brought up here, I am checkin’ out that article!
YAY! Your blog works in China too 🙂
Now if we could just get mine to work…….
Cool, baby!
Will go check it out!
xoxox,
CC
Fantastic — smart, needed, pioneering.
It’s a great article Wendy, I am so glad I am part of the IFB community.
Thanks for this post because that second image is me and I had absolutely no idea!
– Adele
moltocuriosa.com
OMG I had a comment but then my captcha word was FANGBANG!!!!!!!!!!!
AWESOME.
Fantastic article. It’s so important that someone is calling Chictopia to task. From what I read last week, their explanation is disappointing. And I’m skeptical of these partnerships and their claim that they aren’t profiting. How much do these partners pay for advertising on their site?
Facebook is, yes, even scarier. My sister recently deleted her account after discovering, on the WaPo site (I think) that when she clicked on the Facebook icon, it showed her who had “shared” the article. Arggh! Creepy.
Great, comprehensive follow-up- I had read the first story the other week. I’m on Chictopia but I think I only have one photo up there…. xo, mel
My verification word was gigidog – how interesting. Thank you very much for particpating in this and helping to spread the word.