If my assumption of dropbox's intent is correct, I prefer facebook's approach to this problem. Instead of wording terms exclusively in their favor they could ha

If my assumption of dropbox's intent is correct, I prefer facebook's approach to this problem. Instead of wording terms exclusively in their favor they could have extended an olive branch... "For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos ("IP content"), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook ("IP License"). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it." (from https://www.facebook.com/terms.php https://www.facebook.com/terms.php) facebook's license to share the picture of your cat terminates after you delete it from your profile. Had dropbox used similar strategy while drafting their terms, this would not be news... (Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and do not pretend to be one on TV.)