We're sorry and we will not sell your pictures says Instagram

Feeling sorry for using language that was not clear, photo-sharing site Instagram apologized over the phrasing of its new Terms of Service. Certain phrases in the revised ToS led many to believe that Instagram was planning on selling user's pictures to corporations and organizations for use on advertisements and would keep all of the compensation. Instead, co-founder and CEO Kevin Systrom said that the intent of the changes was to tell users that the site was planning on experimenting with innovative forms of advertising. Systrom made it clear that Instagram is not planning on selling any of the photographs on its site to third parties without compensation.

The site is owned by Facebook, which purchased Instagram in a deal originally valued at $1 billion. As a public company that is beholden to stockholders, Facebook is under some pressure to monetize Instagram to get some return on its investment. Systrom released a statement late Tuesday in which he spoke of his vision for the future, one where certain brands can advertise on Instagram and be featured. To the extent that an Instagram user might follow the brand, the user's photo could end up on the advertiser's page. Systrom reiterated his dislike of advertising banners for the site. He also said that members own the rights to their photos and that the photo-sharing site holds no interest in them.

Instagram said it is working on a easier to interpret ToS which will replace the one that caused the ruckus on Tuesday.

"Instagram users own their content and Instagram does not claim any ownership rights over your photos. Nothing about this has changed. We respect that there are creative artists and hobbyists alike that pour their heart into creating beautiful photos, and we respect that your photos are your photos. Period."

"Our intention in updating the terms was to communicate that we’d like to experiment with innovative advertising that feels appropriate on Instagram. Instead it was interpreted by many that we were going to sell your photos to others without any compensation. This is not true and it is our mistake that this language is confusing. To be clear: it is not our intention to sell your photos. We are working on updated language in the terms to make sure this is clear."

"Nothing has changed about the control you have over who can see your photos. If you set your photos to private, Instagram only shares your photos with the people you’ve approved to follow you. We hope that this simple control makes it easy for everyone to decide what level of privacy makes sense."-Kevin Systrom, co-founder and CEO, Instagram

source: Instagram via IntoMobile

21 Comments

Options

Close Follow ›

posted on 19 Dec 2012, 01:45 13

1. D.Aceveda (Posts: 396; Member since: 30 Jun 2012)

I've never understood the point of Instagram. Photos? Facebook does that. Twitter and status updates? Facebook does that.

Whats next? A new website that lets users private message only? I'm sure that'll be the next big thing.

posted on 19 Dec 2012, 04:52

8. tigermcm (Posts: 860; Member since: 02 Sep 2009)

I'm STILL trying to get the point of them when facebook does each. heck I see ppls status on facebook attached to twitter so whats the point???

posted on 19 Dec 2012, 07:42 1

11. Valdomero (Posts: 286; Member since: 13 Nov 2012)

@tigermcm #you #can't #argue #facebook

I even felt bad for writing that, that's just plain dumb.

I still don't get the point of this.

posted on 19 Dec 2012, 20:45

20. metalpoet (unregistered)

After myspace turned weird in 2009 I stopped caring about social networking websites like facebook and twitter. but then again maybe I was just aging and maturing lol. someday the rest of the world will catch up to us :)

posted on 19 Dec 2012, 11:18 1

15. jmoita2 (Posts: 930; Member since: 23 Dec 2011)

I know; redundancy seems to be the new hot trend these days...

posted on 19 Dec 2012, 19:33

18. MC1123 (Posts: 1256; Member since: 12 Nov 2012)

well, to my observation instagram concentrates on pictures more! and with those filters etc etc.... facebook is general... and twitter is microblogging..but will also make something that is instagram-ish and tumblr-ish!

posted on 19 Dec 2012, 20:02 1

19. D.Aceveda (Posts: 396; Member since: 30 Jun 2012)

filters? LOL! Facebook could have added that. Mostly all smartphones have sets of filters already inside the stock photo editor. Instagram is useless and only stupid people find use in it. Same with Twitter.

posted on 19 Dec 2012, 21:19

21. MC1123 (Posts: 1256; Member since: 12 Nov 2012)

well instagram and twitter are made for celeb (but more on twitter) coz atleast their fans know what they are doing! and its easy to follow than to send a friend request!

posted on 19 Dec 2012, 02:01 5

2. darkskoliro (Posts: 1090; Member since: 07 May 2012)

Still leaves a bad taste in my mouth, wont look at them the same again.

posted on 19 Dec 2012, 02:39 5

5. MeoCao (unregistered)

And people accuse Google for selling users data.

Google sells the data without users' identities, and here FB tried to sell users identities, that's huge difference.

posted on 19 Dec 2012, 03:40 1

7. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)

I think it was just a huge overreach on the ToS. Nothing like an about-face. I wonder how many users remain on Instagram? Power to the people.

posted on 19 Dec 2012, 11:12

14. gwuhua1984 (Posts: 1237; Member since: 06 Mar 2012)

I'm just glad I never used Instagram... Won't have to worry about their ToS BS.

posted on 19 Dec 2012, 02:25 4

3. goflet (Posts: 50; Member since: 31 Oct 2011)

i dont think anybody misunderstood or instagram made mistake in the explaniton.they said they would sell the users photos without any compensation.period.After this they got a huge reaction from users and had to step back.end of story.

posted on 19 Dec 2012, 07:47 2

12. Valdomero (Posts: 286; Member since: 13 Nov 2012)

they thought they could get away with that

posted on 19 Dec 2012, 15:40

16. XPERIA-KNIGHT (unregistered)

hahaha yea thats pretty much what happened :( but dont hold it against them too much cuz they did the right thing and humbled themselves, thats the least they could do...........at least they're not ashamed to apologize unlike some companies out there who are "shameless" at doing their dirt...

posted on 19 Dec 2012, 02:37 1

4. BattleBrat (Posts: 1476; Member since: 26 Oct 2011)

it was a way for people on iOS to post pics to facebook, twitter, etc, seeing as iOS didnt let you do that at the time, all that integration was already a part of Android, so instagram wasnt as needed. Same goes with that YouTube uploader app for iOS that Android users were whining about, YOU DONT NEED IT Android already has it built in! iOS is a locked down Nazi box (and i CURRENTLY have a iPhone 4s AND a RAZR,)and needs apps to do basic things us Android users take for granted. pardon my errors, I'm learning DVORAK

posted on 19 Dec 2012, 02:40 1

6. XPERIA-KNIGHT (unregistered)

wow so i wonder if what i was saying earlier sounds dumb now.....whatever glad that they handled this in a mature and "honest" way..............Cuz remeber if you lose ur users, you will certainly LOSE you company!

posted on 19 Dec 2012, 05:08 2

9. ryq24 (Posts: 771; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)

nice try. if no one protest about this rule then they would be making lots of money at other people's expense.

posted on 19 Dec 2012, 07:03 1

10. ibap (Posts: 780; Member since: 09 Sep 2009)

Another case of saying what you intended and SURPRISE! being caught out at it. Like Romney during the election and kind of like the NRA's statement -

The National Rifle Association has broken its silence on the mass school shooting in Newtown, Conn., saying it is ready to “offer meaningful contributions” to the effort to make sure there are no more incidents like the one in which 20-year-old Adam Lanza used an assault rifle to kill 27 people before killing himself.

Their solution is probably to arm everyone. And we all know people who shouldn't have a gun when they're sober, let alone under-the-influence.