Google Terms of Service

[mikewhatever]

Search engines:

http://duckduckgo.com/?q=google+do+no+evil&v=

http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=goo...l&ei=UTF-8&fr=

Are you suggesting I run 'Goole do no evil' on these? Why? Are you trying to derail the thread?

[ubunterooster]

Oops, I guess I am almost derailing. Sorry.

As directly realting to google Docs, see the first ten links of: http://duckduckgo.com/?q=can+google+...cs+security&v=

[mikewhatever]

Oops, I guess I am almost derailing. Sorry.

As directly realting to google Docs, see the first ten links of: http://duckduckgo.com/?q=can+google+...cs+security&v=

Please don't turn this into a bashing thread. What you posted is not at all relevant to the Google ToS, and I am not interested.

[t0p]

Just imagine: you write a novel, or screenplay, or thesis... whatever. You use Google Docs to do this. Then Google come along and publish the material. You send them an invoice, they just send it back: they don't owe you anything, because you explicitly gave them permission to do what they like with your material.

Another scenario: you write a diary, which contains very personal and sensitive material about your private life. One morning you find excerpts of the diary on the front covers of all the major newspapers. And there's nothing you can do, because you gave Google permission to do what they like with your material.

I realise these scenarios are unlikely. But they are legally possible. And I'd imagine that very few Google Docs users know this, as nearly everyone just clicks the "I accept" box without reading the terms and conditions. Google can destroy your ability to earn and your reputation without fear of consequences. But who cares? Almost nobody, because they don't think it will happen to them.

Wake up, sheeple! Anything that can happen, will happen. Or something.

[NMFTM]

I think of it like this. Say that whoever is reading this post and I were next door neighbors and you wanted to put up a shed. But, because of the way the zoning laws were you had to get my permission because it would be very close to the property line. I said that I would allow it only if you gave me permission to break into your house and have sex with you (i.e. rape) whenever I wanted. You give me a weird look and say that that's a crazy agreement that nobody in their right mind would ever sign into. I say in return that I have no intention of ever raping you. But that I just want you to sign over your right to refuse sex with me so that if I were ever accused of questionable activities that involves the two of us being alone in the future, I wouldn't have to worry about being sued and going to prison over it. Then I accuse you of being overly paranoid for thinking that I might actually make good on my agreement and say that I've gotten hundreds of other people to sign into similar agreements with me and I haven't raped any of them yet.

Even considering that last sentence, would you still sign into such an agreement?

[mikewhatever]

T0p, yes, these are all possible scenarios according to Google ToS, at least as far as I can understand. Why the hell do they ask for such rights?
I also have to admit this is the first time I've read Google ToS.

Meanwhile, I've been reading Zoho ToS for comparison, and here is the relevant clause:

Data Ownership

We respect your right to ownership of content created or stored by you. You own the content created or stored by you. Unless specifically permitted by you, your use of the Services does NOT grant Zoho the license to use, reproduce, adapt, modify, publish or distribute the content created by you or stored in your user account for Zoho’s commercial, marketing or any similar purpose. But you grant Zoho permission to access, copy, distribute, store, transmit, reformat, publicly display and publicly perform the content of your user account solely as required for the purpose of providing the Services to you.

Now, this is much more positive, all but the stuff marked in red. Why do they need to publicly display one's content and what does 'publicly perform' means?

[koenn]

Why does Google need a license to publish [and] publicly display one's content?
In my understanding, these have nothing to do with technology.

you're quoting from google's general ToS, which covers all of Google's applications/services, including eg Blogger and Google Sites - obviously, they'll need permission to, amongst others, "publish [and] publicly display" your content.

As it says in the ToS, "This license [...] may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services", i.e.for some services, you will allow them less, or different things. Eg. the Google Docs ToS include a reference to the Google Docs Privacy Statement, and alter the general terms you quoted somewhat (the part about "make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services [...]" apparently doesn't apply to Google Docs.
http://www.google.com/google-d-s/addlterms.html


Also, since Google Docs is a collaboration platform, Google needs the right to publish your content (to your collaborators)
see also: https://docs.google.com/support/bin/...n&answer=82366


I agree (like I said before) that even then, the wording is sometimes vague - they explain that they need such license in order to uphold their side of the agreement, but they don't, AFAICS, say that they will only exercise those rights when it is necessary in order for them to uphold their side of the agreement. The Zoho Tos you quoted are far more clear in that respect.

[HappinessNow]

Basically if you choose to keep your documents private on Google Docs you have no worries.

The clause you have highlighted clearly states that this only applies if you choose to publish your material online via Google Docs.

Zoho essentially 'means' the same thing it is just presented/worded differently.

Why does Google need a license to publish [and] publicly display one's content?
In my understanding, these have nothing to do with technology.

...because they offer you the service of sharing your docs "to publish as a web page" to get a URL link to share...these options are clearly up to you to choose.

Google has no interest in your content unless you choose to utilize their service which you utilize for free, thus the highlighted clause you bolded comes in to play.

[mickie.kext]

Just imagine: you write a novel, or screenplay, or thesis... whatever. You use Google Docs to do this. Then Google come along and publish the material. You send them an invoice, they just send it back: they don't owe you anything, because you explicitly gave them permission to do what they like with your material.

Another scenario: you write a diary, which contains very personal and sensitive material about your private life. One morning you find excerpts of the diary on the front covers of all the major newspapers. And there's nothing you can do, because you gave Google permission to do what they like with your material.

I realise these scenarios are unlikely. But they are legally possible. And I'd imagine that very few Google Docs users know this, as nearly everyone just clicks the "I accept" box without reading the terms and conditions. Google can destroy your ability to earn and your reputation without fear of consequences. But who cares? Almost nobody, because they don't think it will happen to them.

Wake up, sheeple! Anything that can happen, will happen. Or something.

This.

Google ToS explicitly says that they practically own any documents created with Google Docs. That is enough reason to steer clear from Google Docs. If they are not planing to publish anything, then they should remove those clauses.

[HappinessNow]

This.

Google ToS explicitly says that they practically own any documents created with Google Docs. That is enough reason to steer clear from Google Docs. If they are not planing to publish anything, then they should remove those clauses.

It is not they who choose to publish it is you who makes the choice.