Google Terms of Service

[mikewhatever]

I was reading the Terms of Service today, thinking I might use Google Docs, and I don't understand the meaning of the fo;;owing clause:
http://www.google.com/accounts/TOS?hl=en

11. Content license from you

11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. 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.

11.2 You agree that this license includes a right for Google to make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to use such Content in connection with the provision of those services.



Why would Google want to publish the content I submit? Or make it available to other individuals and organizations?
Anyone understands this?

Apparently, I was late to the party, but nothing has changed.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9768298-7.html

[LeifAndersen]

At this point in time, I don't think they would. With that being said though, if the document's that you're making need to remain confidential, I would steer clear of Google Docs.

[mikewhatever]

There is nothing particularly confidential about my documents, and I really don't want it to become a privacy concern thread. I am also not looking for privacy advice.;)

[McRat]

This has been an ongoing issue on the internet.

If you post content on somebodies site, it that content "yours"?

Yes and no. You can ALSO post it elsewhere, but you can't demand they remove your content, or won't use it for other purposes.

Example, I wrote a detailed tutorial for a webforum. It was a "free" site created by an enthusiast, originally started by donations. He sold the site to marketing corporation, who basically sells the member content to advertisers.

Now, I would have NEVER written that tutorial for free if it was a "for-profit" site.

The legal decisions have sided with the current host, so I imagine Google is just putting down what is already common law into writing.

I would not sweat it. Any content you post on a site, you have released rights to. As far a personal documents go, that is a very strange situation. I don't think they are going to sell your personal files, but there are hyperlink issues that could cause a blurring of the line between personal and public.

[mikewhatever]

McRat, I don't see how the analogy with a public forum post has anything to do with Google docs. Are you implying they are the same or similar?

[McRat]

McRat, I don't see how the analogy with a public forum post has anything to do with Google docs. Are you implying they are the same or similar?

You are putting content for free on somebodies server in both cases. Similar. Think YouTube, PhotoBucket, etc, etc, etc.

I haven't used Google Docs, but I'd assume they have some mechanism for "publishing" by users on their site. The minute any of the content could be public or linked publically, there becomes an issue. If it was a situation where none of the content could be public, then I don't imagine that agreement would stand long in court.

[koenn]

Anyone understands this?
it means exactly what it says :
in order for google to provide its 'service' (Google Docs ?) to you, they may need to copy, modify, ... your content. Eg copy it across multiple mirrors, make backups, etc.

Likewise, they might need to hand over your data to sub-contracters in order to provide "the service you subscribed to".


The way it's worded suggests that you license them to do so because their technology requires such copying, redistribution, etc etc, - they could not provide their 'service' without you allowing them to duplicate, distribute, etc etc your data.


Whether or not such license would also cover cases where there is no technical necessity, is imo not clear from the wording - you probably need a lawyer or someone with a legal background to judge that.

[mikewhatever]

McRat,
sites like public forums, youtube, photobucket, etc are meant to be public, it's in their Terms of Service. Google ToS don't say one's documents will be publicly available.

koenn,
that's understandable, but isn't the part I asked about. Just see the highlighted text in post #1.

[koenn]

koenn,
that's understandable, but isn't the part I asked about. Just see the highlighted text in post #1.

hm, I actually thought a was paraphrasing the highlighted text in post #1


you may want to rephrase your question, then.

[squilookle]

They probably put this stuff in partly because, as others have said, their technology might require it.

I would also guess that they have no intention of selling your documents from Google Docs (as this would ruin the reputation of Google Docs and possibly Google, and send all the users fleeing elsewhere) but that they are covering themselves in case something gets leaked or changed by accident, or in case Google changed hands or something... my examples aren't convincing: but they probably are trying to make sure that whatever happens, you don't end up taking them to court.

[mikewhatever]

hm, I actually thought a was paraphrasing the highlighted text in post #1


you may want to rephrase your question, then.

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

[McRat]

McRat,
sites like public forums, youtube, photobucket, etc are meant to be public, it's in their Terms of Service. Google ToS don't say one's documents will be publicly available.

koenn,
that's understandable, but isn't the part I asked about. Just see the highlighted text in post #1.

Do they have a user mechanism that permits public access to any of the documents created by their Suite?

Like I said, I seriously doubt that areas that are private are going to be subject to distribution.

But think about this. Say you are using their site for doing something that is "gray area". Do they have the right to release your "private" content to police agencies on request? Or delete your content if they deem it too risky to deal with considering they have Deep Pockets?

I imagine the Cloud is going to make a lot of lawyers wealthy.

[mikewhatever]

McRat,
giving the content to the police is not the same as publish [and] publicly display it.

[lisati]

Other than the opportunity to learn something or help others, the ambiguity here is one of the reasons I decided to host my own web site. I have control over what is made public and what isn't. I can even put in place measures to block some viewers from seeing anything which would otherwise be available public viewing.

No matter how careful you are, storing your data on someone else's computer always carries a risk that the "wrong" people will somehow be able to see it.

[McRat]

McRat,
giving the content to the police is not the same as publish [and] publicly display it.

No, that comes into play when you've put it in a public area, and removing it would harm them. Or if they want to collect pages into a new mode and you don't agree to it.

It also permits them to sell off their business without your permission, and confer all the rights to the content on their servers to the new owners.

[mikewhatever]

McRat,
if a document is put into a public area by the user/owner, the privacy expectation is obviously forgone, but there is no mention of the public area in the ToS. Can we please stick to the text.;)
As said above, I don't think the term 'public content', which you keep referring to, is applicable to Google docs, nor is it mentioned or implied in the ToS. Google obviously asks for rights on non-public content, and why is something I'd like to know.

[McRat]

McRat,
if a document is put into a public area by the user/owner, the privacy expectation is obviously forgone, but there is no mention of the public area in the ToS. Can we please stick to the text.;)
As said above, I don't think the term 'public content', which you keep referring to, is applicable to Google docs, nor is it mentioned or implied in the ToS. Google obviously asks for rights on non-public content, and why is something I'd like to know.

If you are asking "Can Google Give Out My Documents To Others?", then sure, the contract is telling you right there that they have reserved that right.

It's certainly not ambiguous.

Will they? Unlikely. I doubt that use of customer data would hold up in court if sued.

[ubunterooster]

For more info on this Yahoo (or duckduckgo) the words "Google do no evil"

Oh, and in B4 moved to "recurring discussions"

[mikewhatever]

For more info on this Yahoo (or duckduckgo) the words "Google do no evil"


English please.

[ubunterooster]

Search engines:

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

http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=google+do+no+evil&ei=UTF-8&fr=

[mikewhatever]

Search engines:

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

http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=google+do+no+evil&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+share+my+docs+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+share+my+docs+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/answer.py?hl=en&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.

[cascade9]

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.

Yes, that is just some of the reasons why they have the clauses they do.



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.

+1.


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

No, by using google docs you are giving them the option to publish, etc anything you did using google docs.

[mickie.kext]

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

Yes, you are making the choice by clicking "I accept Google ToS". No regrets after that, unless you have millions for lawyers to prove that Google didn't mean exactly what they said.

[mikewhatever]

koenn,
thanks for posting these links.
http://www.google.com/google-d-s/addlterms.html
https://docs.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=82366

Apparently, according to both the ToS and the additional terms, Google has the license to 'publish' and 'publicly display' all documents submitted to Google docs. The same seems to be the case with Gmail. Such a license is an obvious overkill and is not needed for providing the services.