E-mail:
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu
Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu
Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu
Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu
Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu
Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu
Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu
David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu
Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu
K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu
Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu
David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu
Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu
Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu
Yesterday, Instagram, the popular photo sharing site owned now by Facebook, announced new terms of service effective January 13 under which Instagram purported to gain the right to license to advertisers photos users had posted to the site unless users opted out of the arrangement by closing their accounts. Instagram users around the web immediately voiced strong opposition to this proposal to make money off their photos. The collective outrage worked. A few hours ago, Instagram abandoned its plan with a face-saving announcement that the language contained in the proposed terms of service had been unclear and misinterpreted and that the company had no intention of hawking users' photos. I have written a lot about overreaching claims with respect to intellectual property. Even so, Instagram's audacious plan--to confer upon itself by a contract of adhesion licensing rights and immunity from violations of rights of publicity claims--was extraordinary. More striking, though, was the 24-hour correction. Imagine if government worked that way. Posted
9:02 PM
by Jason Mazzone [link]
Comments:
Terms of use agreements are ordinarily enforced are they not? And I don't get the point about immunity from rights of publicity claims -- if there's a license, where's the violation of the right of publicity?
@AF: Use of a person's image in advertising can give rise to a right of publicity claim. In this case, the right is of the person in the photo not of the photographer so a license to use the photo itself makes no difference.
Was watching MLB and heard that insane overreach and thought, uh, that would never stand up. Why do they even pretend it would? Did a web search and found your stuff.
I would agree that copyfraud is not just annoying, it's corrosive, expensive, extortionate. We have a compelling interest in exposing it and fighting it. Sadly, most of it goes without challenge or even notice.
Terms of use agreements are ordinarily enforced are they not? And I don't get the point about immunity from rights of publicity claims -- if there's a license, where's the violation of the right of publicity? 英雄联盟代练elo boostFifa 15 CoinsLeague of legends boosting