No doubt NPH's Instagram will be a source of delight and amusement for many. His first photo:
At our great friends, Becky Baeling & Kris Lythgoe's murder mystery wedding. The game, as they say, is afoot.
Polish director Malgoska Szumowska's film, In The Name Of, takes on the Catholic Church.
Former NY Mets catcher Mike Piazza addresses gay rumors in newly published memoir: “If I was gay, I’d be gay all the way.”
Kim and Kanye hit up Rio.
Lesbian couple denied wedding cake by anti-equality cake shop have accepted ”Ace of Cakes” star Duff Goldman's offer to provide them one for free on their big day.
Justin Bieber made his SNL debut last night.
Anti-gay group gets funding by the Canadian government: "...the federal government is providing $544,813 in funding for Crossroads Christian Communications — an Ontario-based evangelical group that produces television programming — to help dig wells, build latrines and promote hygiene awareness in Uganda through 2014."
Madonna signs up for Instagram.
HRC call to action on marriage equality in Hawaii: "The momentum for marriage equality in the Aloha State is on our side and the deadline for the legislature to hear the marriage bill is this Tuesday, February 12th. Join us on Monday, February 11th at the Capitol Rotunda in Honolulu with hundreds of supporters making their voices heard by speaking face to face with their legislators."
Steve Jobs aspired to create an iCar.
Anti-gay group American Family Association announces a social media campaign to oust AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson from the board of the Boy Scouts of America: "He doesn’t espouse their values; he should move on.”
Instagram has relented on Terms of Service objected to by many members, according to a message from its co-founder Kevin Systrom:
Earlier this week, we introduced a set of updates to our privacy policy and terms of service to help our users better understand our service. In the days since, it became clear that we failed to fulfill what I consider one of our most important responsibilities – to communicate our intentions clearly. I am sorry for that, and I am focused on making it right.
The concerns we heard about from you the most focused on advertising, and what our changes might mean for you and your photos. There was confusion and real concern about what our possible advertising products could look like and how they would work.
Because of the feedback we have heard from you, we are reverting this advertising section to the original version that has been in effect since we launched the service in October 2010. You can see the updated terms here.
Going forward, rather than obtain permission from you to introduce possible advertising products we have not yet developed, we are going to take the time to complete our plans, and then come back to our users and explain how we would like for our advertising business to work.
You also had deep concerns about whether under our new terms, Instagram had any plans to sell your content. I want to be really clear: Instagram has no intention of selling your photos, and we never did. We don’t own your photos – you do.
Finally, there was also confusion about how widely shared and distributed your photos are through our service. The distribution of your content and photos is governed by our privacy policy, and always has been. We have made a small change to our terms to make that as clear as possible.
Instagram has announced a new Terms of Service, and the terms, not surprisingly, offer users few rights over their photos.
Under the new agreement, Instagram can share information about users with parent company Facebook, as well as outside affiliates and advertisers. It can use your image or any of your photos in advertisements without your consent, as well as anyone you've posted a photo of using the service.
The Guardian adds:
The new Instagram clause notes that "some or all of the service may be supported by advertising revenue" and says that, as a result, "to help us deliver interesting paid or sponsored content or promotions, you agree that a business or other entity may pay us to display your username, likeness, photos (along with any associated metadata), and/or actions you take, in connection with paid or sponsored content or promotions, without any compensation to you."
That means that Instagram photos could be used in advertising, without reference to the owner, with all the payments going to Instagram. There is no opt-out from that use except to stop using the service and to delete your photos.
But Dan Catt, who worked on the early development of Flickr – one of the first photo-sharing services online – pointed out on Twitter that any pictures which included recognisable people would require explicit permission in the form of a "model release" from Instagram to the advertiser seeking to use it, which might be impossible to grant.
Of course, the calls for boycott have begun.
Will the new Terms of Service be affecting your use of Instagram?
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
Recent Comments