在Facebook出PO聲明Facebook Does Not Have My Permission To Share Photos 是否真的有法律效用?

“Don’t forget tomorrow starts the new Facebook rule where they can use your photos. Don’t forget Deadline today!!! It can be used in court cases in litigation against you. Everything you’ve ever posted becomes public from today Even messages that have been deleted or the photos not allowed. It costs nothing for a simple copy and paste, better safe than sorry. Channel 13 News talked about the change in Facebook’s privacy policy. I do not give Facebook or any entities associated with Facebook permission to use my pictures, information, messages or posts, both past and future. With this statement, I give notice to Facebook it is strictly forbidden to disclose, copy, distribute, or take any other action against me based on this profile and/or its contents. The content of this profile is private and confidential information. The violation of privacy can be punished by law (UCC 1-308- 1 1 308-103 and the Rome Statute). NOTE: Facebook is now a public entity. All members must post a note like this. If you prefer, you can copy and paste this version. If you do not publish a statement at least once it will be tacitly allowing the use of your photos, as well as the information contained in the profile status updates. FACEBOOK DOES NOT HAVE MY PERMISSION TO SHARE PHOTOS OR MESSAGES.”

稍為有少許常識的朋友都知道,以上純粹笑話,試問,FACEBOOK怎有可能,會因為你「阿乜水物水」在自己的Newsfeed上發表聲明,然後就產生法律效力?

但這類平均每隔幾個月就會出現一次的網絡謊言,過去十年,卻無間斷地出現,樂此不疲,愚弄大眾。

最近,除了以上有關Facebook的惡作劇,類似的網絡流言,已經出現了Instagram的版本。

“Instagram DOES NOT HAVE MY PERMISSION TO SHARE PHOTOS OR MESSAGES.”

於是,又惹來一大班網絡的恐慌性分享,令我感到詫異的,是我身邊不少「中伏」的朋友,當中不乏我以為的「有識之士」,當中包括傳媒人、大公司高層、MBA校友。

無論你稱這些為hoax、spam或fake news都好,因為網民普遍不求真、求快PO的心態,反正Copy & Paste只是舉手之勞,於是,便很容易墮入了類似的網絡流言陷阱,成為散播流言的幫兇。

與其看人家講,不如看看Facebook的條文是怎樣寫。

“You own the content that you create and share on Facebook and the other Facebook Products you use,” Facebook’s Terms of Service state.

Specifically, when you share, post or upload content that is covered by intellectual property rights (e.g. photos or videos) … you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free and worldwide licence to host, use, distribute, modify, run, copy, publicly perform or display, translate and create derivative works of your content.

To provide our services, however, we need you to give us some legal permissions to use this content.

This means, for example, that if you share a photo on Facebook, you give us permission to store, copy and share it with others.”

直接一點,用「人話」講一次,的而且確,你放上Facebook的內容,你依然是版權持有人,但由於你要使用Facebook的免費服務,那就相當於,你已經賦予Facebook可以「用自己的方法」使用你所上載的內容的權利。

很多年前,當時還未流行品牌開個Facebook Page,我便有一位可能擁有全世界最多IP產品的國際大客戶,因為公司的法律顧問堅持反對以上條文,於是品牌遲遲未能開Page。

那麼,Facebook會拿我在某某餐廳上載過的照片,然後讓該餐廳(Facebook的廣告客戶),用我這張照片來賣廣告嗎?

理論上是可以的,而且Facebook亦曾經在很多年前測試過,但由於受到用戶的猛烈批評,於是這類型廣告亦很快地鳴金收兵。

那麼,Facebook還會繼續這樣做嗎?我個人覺得機會甚微,說到底,作為一家上市公司,除了股票持有人、美國國會議員、以及大量的監管機構,Facebook現在要面對的,還有大量國際廣告大客戶,維持一個公眾利益為先的用戶體驗和廣告體驗,都是Facebook能否經營下去的主要條件。

如果你很擔心,真的想”FACEBOOK DOES NOT HAVE MY PERMISSION TO SHARE PHOTOS OR MESSAGES.”,我會勸你不如及早離場,關閉你的Facebook或Instagram帳號,這是唯一的方法。

但拜託,不要繼續俾人愚弄,亦不要做愚民,請停止散播網絡流言。

伸延閱讀:


Also published on Medium.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *