Kottke is linking to a rant at Jacobian.org taking a somewhat hysterical and paranoid view on the Google Video Terms of Service (“TOS”). I feel compelled to reply to this inaccurate reading.
After the jump are the excerpts from the TOS, Jacobian’s interpretation, and the reality.
Google TOS:
By accepting this Agreement and uploading Your Authorized Content to Google, you are directing and authorizing Google to, and granting Google a royalty-free, perpetual, non-exclusive right and license to, host, cache, route, transmit, store, copy, distribute, perform, display, reformat, excerpt, analyze, and create algorithms based on the Authorized Content.
Jacobian:
In other words, “we can do anything we want with your content.”
Reality:
The whole point of the Google Video service is to let users upload videos for free. In order to display these videos, Google needs these unlimited rights. Imagine if they didn’t have these rights — you could upload your video, then sue Google for copyright infringement when they shared your content.
Note, the words “non-exclusive” in the terms. This means that you’re not giving up anything by uploading video to Google; all you’re doing is giving them the right to host your files.
Google TOS:
Google reserves the right to display advertisements in connection with any display of Your Authorized Content.
Jacobian:
In other words, “we can make money from advertising your content.”
Reality:
Duh! You don’t get free worldwide hosting for nothing.
Google TOS:
You may use the Uploader for the sole purpose of providing Your Authorized Content to Google. […] You may not use the Uploader for any other reason, including but not limited to […] (ii) modifying, adapting, translating, or reverse engineering any portion of the Uploader; […]
Jacobian:
In other words, “If you create your own version of a video upload that runs on Linux or Mac, we’ll sue you.”
Reality:
No, that’s not what it says. What it says is that you cannot use Google’s software for any other purpose. They invested in developing this software and they want you to use it on Google alone. This is eminently reasonable.
Google TOS:
In the event We decide in our sole discretion to charge for video playback of any of Your Authorized Content, We will pay to You seventy percent (70%) of the gross revenues, if any, recognized by Google and attributable to such video playback of Your Authorized Content based upon the price you designate. If We incur extraordinary costs and expenses in hosting, indexing and displaying Your Authorized Content relative to its designated price, then We may retain a greater percentage of the revenues in order to defray these costs. If You have not designated a price for Your Authorized Content and We incur extraordinary costs and expenses in hosting, indexing and displaying Your Authorized Content, we may charge a fee in order to defray these costs.
Jacobian:
In other words, “you get 70% of revenues, unless we decide it cost us too much, then you get less. By the way, we decide what ‘too much’, and ‘less’ means. Oh, and if your free video is popular, we’ll bill you for the bandwidth.”
Reality:
While I agree that there’s a lot of wiggle room here, you’ve got to hand it to Google for developing a free service like this in advance of a specific revenue model. The fact that they are outlining rights for the user is actually a proactive step. They could very well have not included any provisions for a pay service, then slapped it up at a later date through a TOS revision.
Google TOS:
14. Privacy and Information Rights. […] In addition, You agree that Google may transfer and disclose this information, including personally identifiable information, to third parties for the purpose of approving and enabling your participation in the Program, including to third parties that reside in jurisdictions with less restrictive data laws than Your own.
Jacobian:
In other words, “we’re going to sell your name and email address to spammers.”
Reality:
No. That’s not what it says. “For the purpose of approving and enabling your participation in the program.” That means that if Google sets up a revenue sharing arrangement with a subscription service like RealOne, they may have to share your info with the partner in order to share revenue back to you