decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Picking at that nit.... | 396 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Google Drive ToS - We own ALL your stuff
Authored by: feldegast on Wednesday, April 25 2012 @ 05:16 AM EDT
License is not ownership
ownership would be joint copyright or an exclusive license

Without the license, Google would not be allowed to provide
the files to you for your own downloading or for sharing with
others when you choose to share it

---
IANAL
My posts are ©2004-2012 and released under the Creative Commons License
Attribution-Noncommercial 2.0
P.J. has permission for commercial use.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Picking at that nit....
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 25 2012 @ 06:29 AM EDT
you give Google and friends a worldwide licence to use, host, store, reproduce,
modify, create derivative works (translations, adaptations or other changes that
we make), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and
distribute such content.


Is indeed a license grant, not an ownership statement

From a qualitative and quantitative point of view though, how do the two differ?

(BTW Not a License Grant and Ownership,
*the* stated license grant and ownership differ how)

What rights does ownership give me that are not given away under this license?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Stuff is not Google's to do anything with. Google needs to change this ASAP.
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 25 2012 @ 10:58 AM EDT
Stuff is not Google's to do anything with. Google needs to change this ASAP,

And, to allow for all to file *all* stuff away fully encrypted.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Google Drive ToS - We own ALL your stuff
Authored by: tknarr on Wednesday, April 25 2012 @ 01:30 PM EDT

This, though: the whole point of Google Drive is to do exactly what the license says they can do. If they don't have a license to host the files, how can they legally host them for you? If they don't have a right to reproduce and publish them, how can they copy them to backup and make them available through the Web interface? If they can't convert between formats, how are they to convert what you upload to their internal storage format and then convert it further into the format most suited to the device you're using to view it?

We've all noted that the Internet is copying in a very fundamental way. Almost everything it does involves making and distributing a copy, either verbatim or transformed into something different. I don't find these terms themselves particularly surprising. The only thing that bothers me is the lack of an explicit statement of the purpose they're doing all this for and that they won't do it for any other purpose.

And no, I won't be using Google Drive even if they add that purpose limitation. Too much of my stuff is covered by either contracts or laws that make it inappropriate to put it on any system I don't have complete and sole administrative control over.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Limitation applied to that quote
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, April 25 2012 @ 02:40 PM EDT

The rights that you grant in this licence are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting and improving our Services, and to develop new ones.
So... the real question of concern is in understanding how any given service is going to use the data you provide.

If Google creates a service for book distribution, and you upload "Larry Trotter And The Seven Suns"... does the "make derivative works" clause have a limitation somewhere that prevents Google from creating "Larry Trotter And The Eight Suns"?

My point is: So long as Google makes use of the license grants in order to provide a service "to me", it's understandable why they have such a clause. But... to proceed to create a derivative book to the novel I authored and sell it without entering additional agreements with me would be unacceptable.

If I was inclined to agree to such wide-encompassing terms as Google presents, it would certainly not be my understanding (whether or not it's explicitly identified) that the license grant extended to activities outside of explicitly providing services to me.

Just to clarify: providing a copy of my book to a third party that I did not authorize would not have been part of the bargain.

So... to answer that concern: does the limitation identified ensure such protections?

RAS

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )