Not signed in (Sign In)
    • CommentAuthorradian
    • CommentTimeJul 11th 2011
     (9984.201)
    Here's mine btw.
    Invite option still appearing if anyone's still on the outside?
    •  
      CommentAuthorDmitri
    • CommentTimeJul 11th 2011
     (9984.202)
    ...and here's me. God, I hope this thing puts Facebook in its grave. That said, once they integrate things like Google Calendar (shared events? Oh yes, please!) and such, this will utterly rock.
  1.  (9984.203)
    Although there have been numerous blog postings along the lines of "OMG Google is stealing my stuff" (see last week's "OMG Dropbox is stealing my stuff" drama) but they usually miss out the preceding lines ToS which say that all copyright remains with the creators of the content.


    And yet it still says they can use your stuff any way they see fit. Which means the preceding clause about you keeping your copyrights is irrelevant.

    The wording need to be improved if their goal is to seek permission to redistribute your work for you. Only a fool trusts a corporation to have your best interests at heart. And right now, the TOS gives them too much liberty to anything you host with them.

    And yet they're still a hundred times better than FaceBook in this regard.
  2.  (9984.204)
    And yet it still says they can use your stuff any way they see fit.
    And the clause immediately after that says that they can only use your hosted work for promotion of the Services. It's not about seeking permission to redistribute your work for you, it's about being able to show off screenshots/videos/whathaveyou of the interface that may or may not contain your work without them having to individually ask everyone for permission in the first place.

    The only thing that it effects is the ability to sell a 100% exclusive license on a work that has been hosted on Google's services. I'm not a professional photographer/artist by any means, so I don't know how often a sale of a work is contingent on that sort of exclusivity, but it would seem to me that an exclusive license like that on a digital work is basically impossible anyway.

    Also: The photo hosting is all via Picasa, and right in Picasa's Privacy Policy: 'We will not use any of your content for any purpose except to provide you with the Service.'
    • CommentAuthorRenThing
    • CommentTimeJul 11th 2011
     (9984.205)
    Here's me.

    Let me know you're from WC?
  3.  (9984.206)
    And the clause immediately after that says that they can only use your hosted work for promotion of the Services


    We call that "advertising" where I come from. You will be providing advertising material for their services. For free. Professional photographers have every reason to find the whole TOS unacceptable. And it does not protect the rights holder from any future less-than-benevolent actions they may take in the future.

    You may trust them to do the right thing with your work. But I know how true The Scorpion and the Frog is in regards to corporations. You shouldn't.
    •  
      CommentAuthorBeamish
    • CommentTimeJul 11th 2011
     (9984.207)
    I enjoy having a new place for general bullshittery, away from the condemning eyes of Facebook and Twitter.
    •  
      CommentAuthorglukkake
    • CommentTimeJul 11th 2011
     (9984.208)
    Shortlink: gplus.to/glukkake
    And unless there's another glukkake running around G+ you should all be able to find me easy.
    •  
      CommentAuthorCameron C.
    • CommentTimeJul 11th 2011
     (9984.209)
    It was mentioned on G+ earlier the thought of using Hangouts to play tabletop games/RPGs.

    hhhmmmmmmm...... B)
    •  
      CommentAuthorYskaya
    • CommentTimeJul 11th 2011
     (9984.210)
    so I don't know how often a sale of a work is contingent on that sort of exclusivity


    Frequently, or at least the rights to first publish and have a decent ttl.

    Ofcourse any and all images go feral when put on the internet. They go everywhere and dance with every one. :D
    • CommentAuthorWood
    • CommentTimeJul 12th 2011
     (9984.211)
    I'm there too, but I might not stay since Google announced they would not allow profiles with fake names.
    •  
      CommentAuthorMorac
    • CommentTimeJul 12th 2011
     (9984.212)
    I would really love for Google to allow for some sort of useful (ie. not the current useless nickname thing) secondary name feature.
  4.  (9984.213)
    Ofcourse any and all images go feral when put on the internet. They go everywhere and dance with every one. :D


    I completely agree with this. For myself, the TOS doesn't fit with my choice of CC license, so I won't be using it as an image host. As Beamish said: A place for general bullshittery.
    • CommentAuthorEmperor
    • CommentTimeJul 12th 2011 edited
     (9984.214)
    I'm there too, but I might not stay since Google announced they would not allow profiles with fake names.


    This is going to be an important issue and I don't think it is set in stone, yet. It is all being discussed here with the lady in charge of profiles at Google, so if anyone has any thoughts or ideas then drop them in (it also includes debate on whether you should be forced to have a picture of yourself in the profile), it is best to get this sorted out before it goes live and offering strong arguments and solutions may help sway things (as that article says, and I think I say in the thread, Google could steal a move on Facebook by scooping up a lot of people who avoid Facebook for just this reason):

    https://plus.google.com/106792630639449031994/posts/4v29vbteeG5

    From that article you link to it does sound like some of the folks lower down the ladder are a bit confused by the system and there do seem to be users reporting anyone using an alias, which then gets the confused minions blocking accounts when the policy is not yet set in stone (you get the same thing over on Facebook, where anything that even contains a Nazi gets reported, banned and then reinstated once a fuss is made - see Iron Sky and quite a few other examples).

    Ofcourse any and all images go feral when put on the internet. They go everywhere and dance with every one. :D


    This is key, if you are going to flog something to a publisher than you might want to think carefully before putting it online, any where. I had one publisher interested in printing my 3 page submission to CLiNT but it all went awfully quiet when they were told it had appeared in a thread on Mark Millar's forum (even thought it'd be easy enough to remove the online images as they never spread any further). Someone else was interested in publishing it (and it should be out soon) but it is something to bear in mind. Of course, it might be getting it out there could help scoop up someone interested in reprinting it too, so you never know.

    For myself, the TOS doesn't fit with my choice of CC license, so I won't be using it as an image host.


    Someone has said that Picassa have CC licenses and don't the Google+ images go into there? I'm not sure of the logistics of it all though but there might be a solution to this.
  5.  (9984.215)
    Got smacked in the head with two invites today. So I'm there under William Couper. Gimme a shout.


    Will
    •  
      CommentAuthorAzabith
    • CommentTimeJul 12th 2011
     (9984.216)
    I expect the Whitechapel hangouts to be interesting.
    easier to manage than Skype sessions
    •  
      CommentAuthorOsmosis
    • CommentTimeJul 12th 2011
     (9984.217)
    Hello all.

    Here be me. I've thrown a few people in a Whitechapel circle already - apologies if this freaks you out.

    I appear to have invites up for grabs - anyone still need a hookup?
    •  
      CommentAuthorSeantaclaus
    • CommentTimeJul 12th 2011 edited
     (9984.218)
    I'll be posting it there as well, but for the curious here, Google+ will be implementing a number of changes this week based on user feedback. Hopefully much of it will be geared towards better integration with other Google services, based on the top 20 changes people want.

    Edit: As pointed out by a friend, Google hasn't actually stated any specific issues that it would address in the post. The 20 below appear to be the ones people want the most, so hopefully we will see some/most of them. My apologies for any confusion with the initial post.

    Here's bare-bones snippet of the article, showing the top 20 changes people want:

    -Ability to modify circles a post is shared with after posting it
    -Reading sparks and +1 comments in the Android app
    -Lifting of the 5000 circle cap (really?)
    -The ability to overlap circles
    -Option of a circle that doesn’t show up in your stream
    -Menu follows you down the stream as you scroll
    -Easy private messaging option including to person who starts a thread
    -Google+ app for other platforms (WP7)
    -Blocking working 100% of the time
    -Easy way to merge circles
    -Sharing and refresh updates in the Android app
    -Link to hide all comments again after you’ve clicked to show all
    -Better integration of Google Chat with Google+
    -Fix issues with instant upload for photos
    -Ability to share with all circles, but with an “except” option
    -Ability to share Google Docs and Calendar with circles
    -Revamp Google Reader to make sharing easier
    -File-sharing integration
    -Nested comments
    -Addition of hashtags to aid searching
    •  
      CommentAuthorMorac
    • CommentTimeJul 12th 2011
     (9984.219)
    Good stuff all around.
    •  
      CommentAuthorscs
    • CommentTimeJul 12th 2011 edited
     (9984.220)
    C'est moi.

    -Ability to share with all circles, but with an “except” option


    Oh baby, I've wanted that since about two seconds after getting my account. Now I want to make two new circles that are "all but family" and "all but co-workers." But that'll probably require having inclusive and exclusive circles within circles.