3 ms·
> If I share a photo, it’s still my photo This is where it becomes murky for me. If you send me that photo via email, should you subsequently be able to revok
by goatforce5 8y ago
> If I share a photo, it’s still my photo
This is where it becomes murky for me.
If you send me that photo via email, should you subsequently be able to revoke my access to that photo. If so, by what means?
If you used a closed messaging system (say Facebook's messaging system, or Apple's Messages), should you be able to revoke access?
If you follow the argument a hop, skip and a jump away, what happens if I submit a photo to a publication and they run it on their website? Can I revoke access? What if that publication has published that photo in a physical form?
ie, where is the line where a reasonable person should expect that the data they have willingly shared/published has slipped beyond their control?
- toomuchtodo 8y agoIf you give someone a license to reproduce a digital asset, you lose the ability to revoke access to it. All other rights are reserved. Would it change the dynamic to be able to revoke access to assets in a private messaging system? For sure. But copyright law (at least in the US) supports this right of the copyright owner. The inability to revoke access is a failing of the tool or the product, not the law.
- goatforce5 8y agoIsn't it pretty standard for website T&Cs to say something along the lines of "by uploading content to this website you are providing [website owner] with a license to reproduce the content"? Sometimes those T&Cs will be quite broad - non-revokable, across all media (including forms not yet imagined). > The inability to revoke access is a failing of the tool or the product, not the law. Does the law need to change? Or (in the case of email) is it fine as is because the reasonable person realizes that once you hit 'send', the content is out of your control?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]