As a parent, there is perhaps nothing more frightening than to have your child’s well-being threatened, and when that threat comes from a device meant to help safeguard children (and relieve parental anxiety), the impact can have far-reaching implications. Proving that some hackers out there have no grasp of human decency or compassion, there have been at least two separate known incidents of network-enabled baby monitors being hacked and then used to audibly taunt and yell at the toddlers devices were monitoring. In both cases, the devices weren’t hacked in the true sense of the word, but were exploited through a weakness that is common across the internet: easy-to-find default passwords. The parents, not knowing that the passwords should be changed, left the devices configured as they came out of the box, and the baby-screamers used that opening to perpetrate their irredeemable acts.
What this means for you:
In comparison to the above, getting hacked as an adult seems almost laughable, but when you think about it, it’s just as scary. In case you missed my blog about “ratting” and you aren’t feeling insecure enough about your security and privacy, you should have a read. The lesson hard-learnt here is this: make every attempt to understand all the devices you use, especially the ones that may be safeguarding the security, privacy and happiness of your family. Read the instructions that come in the box, and if they are incomprehensible, get on the internet and ask questions, or grab your nearest tech geek to have them review the device for potential security issues. Don’t take for granted that a device manufacturer (or website publisher, or software programmer) has your security and privacy top of mind when they are making and marketing their product. The lure of profit encourages even the most trusted brands to cut corners on occasion, which can lead to scary situations like the above.
Responding to a maelstrom of criticism, Instagram announced today that they plan to withdraw the proposed Terms of Use changes that sparked outrage across the internet yesterday. According to co-founder Kevin Systrom, Instagram never had any intent to monetize user photos without fairly compensating the photographer, and they are working to revise the TOU wording in a manner that is less confusing and less likely to start a another protest/boycott. Ironically, other sources have pointed out that the outrage was ill-informed at the start, and as things are wont to do on the Internet, spun out of control, perhaps unfairly so for Instagram.
It would seem that Instagram has always had the right (according to their current TOU) to monetize your content, and that the withdrawn change actually narrowed the rather broad terms users agreed to previously. I’d publish a full mea culpa on this, but the point of my previous article was more to point out the icky terms governing the use of photos that contain minors, as well as the very vague terms that assume minors are using Instagram with implicit parental consent. I understand it’s hard to police the use of free apps, especially when parents are noticeably absent with respect to knowing what their kids are doing on their personal media devices, but that seems like a cop out.
What this means for you:
My stance on the exploitation of minors for profit still stands: It’s icky. If you are a company like Instagram that is bound to feature content containing images of minors, you need to be much more careful how you glad-handle parents. As for jumping on the rage bandwagon yesterday:
Dear Instagram,
I’m sorry for assuming you suddenly became evil. You aren’t evil, but maybe you were too cavalier with your current Terms of Use, and you let too much of your Facebook allegiance shine through in your proposed changes. Please don’t be icky, and please don’t treat your users like a prize crop, even though they may act exactly as that. I’m sorry I didn’t take the time to read your lengthy and lawyered-up TOU to find out the truth that you had us by the throat from the get go, and I’m even more sorry that we willingly (through our own ignorance/apathy) let you.
The eagle-eyed internet has caught another dotcom company looking to cash in on its popularity (and recent integration with Facebook): starting on Jan 16, 2013, Instagram will be using a new Terms of Service agreement that allows it to use any content posted publicly to its service for marketing purposes.
“To help us deliver interesting paid or sponsored content or promotions, you agree that a business or other entity may pay us to display your username, likeness, photos (along with any associated metadata) and/or actions you take, in connection with paid or sponsored content or promotions, without any compensation to you.”
Also important: this not only applies to users who have an account with Instagram, but also anyone’s likeness that appears in a user’s publicly posted photos can also be used as such. Wait, we’re not done: if you are a minor and you’ve accepted the new TOU, you acknowledge that your parent/guardian is aware of the TOU and tacitly accepts the above.
What this means for you:
If you aren’t in the business of making money off your likeness, or your subjects aren’t celebrities, or if you don’t care that Instagram/Facebook might make some money off your own likeness, then carry on. However, if you happen to care how your children’s likeness may be exploited, you may want to ask any snap-happy smartphone users to not post pictures of your children onto Instagram, or at minimum, make them aware of these TOU changes. You may be surprised at how many people aren’t aware of Instagram’s control over the content they think they own, and doubly surprised at the number of people who don’t care that they may be providing profit for company’s that provide free services.