One Small Sentence for Facebook... But Potentially One Giant Impact for Some Users.
New Update To Facebook's Terms of Service.
You may already have received the notification coming from Facebook. It is an update to its Terms of Service, an addition on its clause 3.2 saying that "We also can remove or restrict access to your content, services or information if we determine that doing so is reasonably necessary to avoid or mitigate adverse legal or regulatory impacts to Facebook."
Basically, all the wordings of section 3.2 are the same except for the addition of the said sentence above. What this means is that Facebook can now remove any content it deemed to put them in legal trouble. This will take effect on October 1, 2020.
It seems to me that it is Facebook's reaction to what is Australia's latest ruling that will force Facebook and Google to share ad revenue with local media, particularly news outlets. Now the two companies will be forced to share data and revenue generated from news and will face a penalty if they don’t.
Bad for Facebook and Google Business.
Obviously, this government ruling disappoints the two companies as the majority of their income comes from advertising. In adverse reactions, this may imply that Facebook may block users and publishers in Australia from sharing news on the platform. A counter move due to this landmark, new proposed legislation.
Do You Agree or Not?
What do you think? Do you agree with the updated terms of services by Facebook? Do you think it is ok for them to remove content that may cause them legal troubles?
I am using this crypto trading bot to automate my earnings. Try it for FREE! Just click the image below.
And if you have not done it yet, please join with me and sign up on the trusted crypto exchanges below. You'll love it, I promise you.
@tipu curate
Upvoted 👌 (Mana: 0/9) Passive income with @tipU :)
I believe they are the sole owner so they have the right to remove content that may cause legal damage to them
You have a point. The other option is to just share its ad revenues with news agencies.
But that is entirely against Facebook's business model, which is based on generating attention for free thanks to users sharing content. If Facebook had to pay for shared content, they could as well close shop.
There are many potential reasons for Facebook to do so. One is to give Facebook legal grounds to remove any content that may expose them to legal liabilities, as suggested by Jordan Wildon (https://twitter.com/JordanWildon/status/1300706794654904320), another - more worrisome - is to allow them to justify censorship by immediately comply with local government takedown requests as hinted by human rights commenter Ananya Ramani (https://twitter.com/AnanyaRamani/status/1300625193191182338). Then of course there's the Australian bill. Either way, the real reasons won't be evident until the new terms come into effect, and even then they might be just a precaution that won't determine immediate action.
Well said. Thanks.
I haven't even logged in to Facebook for a long time which means I am ignorant to this update, we really do not know what type of content will be considered unacceptable by the community.
Exactly .... but of course they will have to find a way to make it look justifiable.