Facebook U-turn on privacy changes

hamba

Inactive User
Joined
May 24, 2005
Messages
8,704
Reaction score
1,345
Location
Down Here
Facebook U-turn on privacy changes


Facebook has backed down on controversial changes to its terms of service that angered users and caused protests across the social networking site.

Two weeks ago the site altered its terms of service so that it continued to retain a copy of all a user's messages, actions and updates – even if they left the network. Until the change, Facebook's policy was to delete all traces of a user if they chose to quit the site.

After the potential scope of the new legal wording became clear, thousands of outraged Facebook users and privacy campaigners lobbied for the world's largest social network to revert to its old terms of service.

On Monday it seemed these calls were falling on deaf ears after Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg defended the changes in a blogpost, and suggested that users should trust the site with their data.

However, just 24 hours later the company decided to back down. In a message to users last night, Facebook said it would be reverting to its previous terms and conditions for the time being.

"Over the past few days, we have received a lot of feedback about the new terms we posted two weeks ago," the site told users. "Because of this response, we have decided to return to our previous terms of use while we resolve the issues that people have raised."

However, with Facebook's record of backing down on controversial changes before re-implementing them at a later date, privacy campaigners will be keeping a sharp eye on the company's moves.

In 2006 the site introduced its news feed – updates of activities shared between friends on the site. At first the change caused a major row, with users saying it was badly implemented and a gross invasion of their rights. However, after substantial tweaking took place and new controls were added, the news feed was reintroduced and is now considered the central selling point of the site.

The decision to revert to the old legal terms of use is the latest in a string of bad news for Facebook, which recently overtook MySpace as the world's most popular social network and now boasts more than 175 million users worldwide.

Last week it was revealed that the site had paid up to $65m (£46m) to settle a court case claiming that Zuckerberg had stolen the idea for Facebook from friends at Harvard.

Information from previous court documents also showed that the company valued itself at $3.7bn – substantially lower than the $15bn estimated when Microsoft bought a 1.6% stake for $240m in 2007.





Bobbie Johnson
Wednesday 18 February 2009 09.18 GMT
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2009
 
personally i never use Faceache or any of the other "social networking" sites.

i can see arguements for and against keeping this data, but like many others i like my privacy and would hate to see that being taken away from someone

(interestingly if some one likes their privacy why the hell live their life in a blog type format is beyound me).

With news of these type of sites being abused (recenet story in the uk about that guy that killed his GF etc) i can honestly see why this type of data should be stored.
 
Last edited:
Its stuff like these site that collect that much data on people that leads to stuff been lost and for what reason do they need for keeping people private messages and much more fair enough i can see the need for any forum related stuff but not stuff thats open to others to read.
 
Back
Top