3 ms·

Note: I think you should have started your post stating that you work for Google. It's relevant information in this context. 3) iCloud Photo Library is not enc

Note: I think you should have started your post stating that you work for Google. It's relevant information in this context. 3) iCloud Photo Library is not encrypted client side in a way that prevents Apple from decrypting it on the server, so like Google Photos, Apple will have your photos. Having the data is only one part, the other part is what you can do with the data. Google's rights are extremely broad, although they conveniently did not put most stuff in the privacy policy: When you upload, submit, store, send or receive content to or through our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This license continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing you have added to Google Maps). Source: https://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/terms/ https://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/terms/ tl;dr: Google can keep your data, even if you stop using their services. Google can use your data for promoting their service and in new services. I don't think most people realize that there is no way back: once you store your data (e.g. photos) in a Google service, it's theirs to keep (how that works with Dashboard, I don't know). Please show me comparable terms for Apple Photos (Apple can keep your stuff forever and use it to promote services). If they are not there, there is clearly a difference between storing photos in iCloud or Google Photos.

Shooti 11y ago
We also use personal information to help us create, develop, operate, deliver, and improve our products, services, content and advertising, and for loss prevention and anti-fraud purposes. We may also use personal information for internal purposes such as auditing, data analysis, and research to improve Apple’s products, services, and customer communications. https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/ https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/ No time limit specified = No time limit
- danieldk 11y ago
  You have to read the iCloud terms: Upon termination of your Account you will lose all access to the Service and any portions thereof, including, but not limited to, your Account, Apple ID, email account, and Content. In addition, after a period of time, Apple will delete information and data stored in or as a part of your account(s). https://www.apple.com/legal/internet-services/icloud/en/terms.html https://www.apple.com/legal/internet-services/icloud/en/term...
  - cromwellian 11y ago
    This is basically the same as the Google terms, which appears to be, eventually it'll be deleted but no guarantees will made. Any Cloud provider worth their salt will have multiple datacenter copies as well as tape storage. It's not easy to go back and surgically delete data on tapes, so you've got to expect this will happen slowly, at unspecified times, for example, when old tapes or harddisk clusters are wiped and destroyed. I mean, if you want to be pedantic, Apple doesn't say how they delete the data. What secure procedures do they use to ensure a clean wipe?
cromwellian 11y ago
I'm not a lawyer, and this is strictly my own guessing, but I think often times these privacy policies exist to prevent being sued for regular app behavior. For example, ability to create derivative works, publish, or distribute content could cover things like transcoding, proxying, caching, and redisplay. So for example, if you don't claim the right to create derivative works, then transcoding an image, sending it from a different CDN domain, etc could get you in trouble. Trying to read worst case scenarios by reading between the lines I think amounts to FUD because the policies are authored for the judicial system, not the consumers. Lawyers try to stake out as much leeway as they can. These companies will be judged on what they say they will and will not do and that doesn't just mean the legalese. For example, if Google Photos says they will not do X or Y with your photos, they will be judged on whether or not they ever do that, whether or not that particular restriction is part of the general blanket policy for all services. My general opinion is to attack people for actually what they do, not what they could theoretically do. Really, do you think Google Photos is going to people's private photos and use them without permission in promotional materials without permission? You've taken a particular example (a public business listing) and applied it to a case like Photos. If you link here: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/ http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/ You find this: "Because of this, after you delete information from our services, we may not immediately delete residual copies from our active servers and may not remove information from our backup systems." Which seems to suggest that if you delete data, it will eventually be removed, but might linger on in old backup tapes. Now imagine you don't carve out such leeway, and nuisance lawsuits are brought against you because say, you only destroy your oldest backups every N months for practical reasons. Or perhaps an HTTP caching proxy ends up with a non-accessible copy lingering on its disk. There's two ways you can think about such policies, cynicism or optimism. The cynic can assume the worst, and they want to keep your photos even after you leave, because machine learning algorithms predicted you'd be the best model for a new TV commercial campaign. The optimist will see it as part of providing a reliable, fault tolerant, cloud service, and that the data is actually used for what they say it is: to improve services. If you want to be cynical and paranoid, at least be consistent. Run your own Cloud servers, don't upload unencrypted data to other people's cloud, that includes Apple, don't trust anyone, because they can always change their mind, management, policies, later. But if you are willing to trust, then stake your trust on what ills have actually been done or not done. A lot of claims are continually put forward about harm, but IMHO, the only one that really hold any water are the ones that involve the government getting access to your cloud data, and that'll apply equally to all vendors in the jurisdiction, which goes back to the former point about cynicism and paranoia. If you're paranoid enough, you should avoid cloud services altogether. BTW, Google is blocked in China, Apple isn't. What do you think Apple is doing differently in China that allows their services not to get blocked by the government?

Shooti 11y ago

We also use personal information to help us create, develop, operate, deliver, and improve our products, services, content and advertising, and for loss prevention and anti-fraud purposes. We may also use personal information for internal purposes such as auditing, data analysis, and research to improve Apple’s products, services, and customer communications. https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/ https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/ No time limit specified = No time limit

danieldk 11y ago
You have to read the iCloud terms: Upon termination of your Account you will lose all access to the Service and any portions thereof, including, but not limited to, your Account, Apple ID, email account, and Content. In addition, after a period of time, Apple will delete information and data stored in or as a part of your account(s). https://www.apple.com/legal/internet-services/icloud/en/terms.html https://www.apple.com/legal/internet-services/icloud/en/term...
- cromwellian 11y ago
  This is basically the same as the Google terms, which appears to be, eventually it'll be deleted but no guarantees will made. Any Cloud provider worth their salt will have multiple datacenter copies as well as tape storage. It's not easy to go back and surgically delete data on tapes, so you've got to expect this will happen slowly, at unspecified times, for example, when old tapes or harddisk clusters are wiped and destroyed. I mean, if you want to be pedantic, Apple doesn't say how they delete the data. What secure procedures do they use to ensure a clean wipe?

cromwellian 11y ago

I'm not a lawyer, and this is strictly my own guessing, but I think often times these privacy policies exist to prevent being sued for regular app behavior. For example, ability to create derivative works, publish, or distribute content could cover things like transcoding, proxying, caching, and redisplay. So for example, if you don't claim the right to create derivative works, then transcoding an image, sending it from a different CDN domain, etc could get you in trouble. Trying to read worst case scenarios by reading between the lines I think amounts to FUD because the policies are authored for the judicial system, not the consumers. Lawyers try to stake out as much leeway as they can. These companies will be judged on what they say they will and will not do and that doesn't just mean the legalese. For example, if Google Photos says they will not do X or Y with your photos, they will be judged on whether or not they ever do that, whether or not that particular restriction is part of the general blanket policy for all services. My general opinion is to attack people for actually what they do, not what they could theoretically do. Really, do you think Google Photos is going to people's private photos and use them without permission in promotional materials without permission? You've taken a particular example (a public business listing) and applied it to a case like Photos. If you link here: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/ http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/ You find this: "Because of this, after you delete information from our services, we may not immediately delete residual copies from our active servers and may not remove information from our backup systems." Which seems to suggest that if you delete data, it will eventually be removed, but might linger on in old backup tapes. Now imagine you don't carve out such leeway, and nuisance lawsuits are brought against you because say, you only destroy your oldest backups every N months for practical reasons. Or perhaps an HTTP caching proxy ends up with a non-accessible copy lingering on its disk. There's two ways you can think about such policies, cynicism or optimism. The cynic can assume the worst, and they want to keep your photos even after you leave, because machine learning algorithms predicted you'd be the best model for a new TV commercial campaign. The optimist will see it as part of providing a reliable, fault tolerant, cloud service, and that the data is actually used for what they say it is: to improve services. If you want to be cynical and paranoid, at least be consistent. Run your own Cloud servers, don't upload unencrypted data to other people's cloud, that includes Apple, don't trust anyone, because they can always change their mind, management, policies, later. But if you are willing to trust, then stake your trust on what ills have actually been done or not done. A lot of claims are continually put forward about harm, but IMHO, the only one that really hold any water are the ones that involve the government getting access to your cloud data, and that'll apply equally to all vendors in the jurisdiction, which goes back to the former point about cynicism and paranoia. If you're paranoid enough, you should avoid cloud services altogether. BTW, Google is blocked in China, Apple isn't. What do you think Apple is doing differently in China that allows their services not to get blocked by the government?