You know those photos you just posted from the party the other night which included friends who still aren’t on Facebook? O.K., while most of your friends are on Facebook, not all Europeans have caught on to the trend yet, and it appears that European Regulators are looking to protect those individuals. On the heels of an Italian ruling that “held three Google executives criminally responsible for a user-posted video”, the new investigation questions whether companies should be responsible for user-generated content.
Setting a precedent in which companies are responsible for the content uploaded by their users would make operating a freely open service extremely challenging. The rationale behind such a decision is clear, yet when comparing similar actions to the “offline” world, it doesn’t make much sense. For example, an individual could share a photo from the previous night with all of their friends whether or not they have the consent of all the individuals in the photo.
Whether or not it’s legal is not the question, as it’s clear that in such a situation, the burden of obtaining consent falls with the owner of the photo. Why then would European regulators be interested in modifying the policy for the online world? According to Switzerland’s privacy law, “Facebook could be required to contact people whose information has been posted online and ask them whether they agree to its being stored there”.
Whether or not that’s what the current law says, it doesn’t make much sense to place the burden on the company who enables the user to share that content with their friends. Conversely, perhaps it’s the ease with which users can instantly share damaging photos with their friends that makes the current practice questionable.
According to Facebook there is already “a tool for nonusers to have their data removed”. For now it appears that this is the beginning of a much longer privacy battle between European regulators and American internet companies. Do you think all content you upload should be subjected to filters prior to you sharing it with your friends?
![[Inside Social Apps 2012]](http://www.allfacebook.com/wordpress/wp-content/themes/allfacebook2/images/ISA2012_336x100_F_RegisterNow.gif)
![[AllFacebook Stats: Facebook Analytics for Your Business]](http://www.allfacebook.com/wordpress/wp-content/themes/allfacebook2/images/stpro_allfacebookstats.gif)
![[How can Facebook change your business?]](http://www.allfacebook.com/wordpress/wp-content/themes/allfacebook2/images/FMB_A_MAY2011_336x100_F.gif)
I think it's very strange and discouraging that Facebook has not already created a feature to allow photo tags to be approved. MySpace has had this feature for quite some time now, even though it was Facebook that made photo tagging popular. I see more and more of my friends have chosen to disable sharing any of their tagged photos because of the lack of this feature. There is even a post on the Photos fan page that was created back in November of 2007 with many users complaining about the potential for their privacy to be invaded without more photo tag privacy controls, yet no change or reply has come from Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=2305272732&topic=4750). What gives?
Comment by Xylo — March 24, 2010 @ 7:32 am
Tag approval is something I've wanted for a long time. If I were calling the shots it would look like this. User A tags User B in a photo (note, video, etc). User B is notified and given the option to (a) make tag public, (b) keep tag private, only visible to User A and User B, or (c) remove tag.
Tag approval for status updates and shared links probably won't ever happen (nor should it IMO), but it would be nice to be able to automatically disable such tags from appearing on my wall.
Comment by Andrew Ledwith — March 24, 2010 @ 7:38 am
I do like your suggestions for photo tags, Andrew.
Comment by Facebook User — March 24, 2010 @ 7:42 am
You got it all wrong with the introduction stuff. I'd like to be asked to approve a tagging of me – I got sick and tired of being tagged on some birthday calendars and the like.
Comment by Marfi — March 24, 2010 @ 7:58 am
Andrew is spot on with his recommendations. That is definitely how it should work. I know from personal experience that even legitimate companies are at the very least tempted to use the ability to tag pictures of people as a method of advertising – even when the picture has nothing to do with the one tagged.
Comment by Winkyboy — March 24, 2010 @ 8:10 am
i think this would be a great idea for those who want to monitor what it tagged…i know quite a few people that dont choose to have certain photographs visible to everyone.
@andrew very good suggestion…
@susie i agree as well…
-twitter/hcp520
Comment by twitter.com/hcp520 — March 24, 2010 @ 8:33 am
isn't the real privacy issue around people posting pictures of you without your consent?
I'd think if they were tagging you, they are at least affording you with the courtesy of letting you know about it, No?
Comment by annon — March 24, 2010 @ 8:39 am
Currently, Tagging effectively lets someone put a post on all my friends' walls under my name, with content that I'm not in control of. That is unacceptable.
It should be private to me only until I approve it. Or at least that should be the default option, with the choice to auto-approve all tags.
For being the biggest site on the web, Facebook's implementation of basic features is horrendous. IMO.
Better Facebook – Firefox/Chrome script for enhancing Facebook! Hide stories, Show unfriends, etc!
http://BetterFacebook.net
Comment by Matt Kruse — March 24, 2010 @ 9:05 am
Europe sucks. The best thing we can do is stop modeling America after them before we suck too.
Comment by Corey Popp — March 24, 2010 @ 9:39 am
i hate when people tag me on a stupid photo..
Comment by topo — March 24, 2010 @ 10:37 am
Anything relating to the use or application of and individual's image, name, or identity in facebook should be subject to approval by the subject.
@corey…way, way too late for that.
Comment by Pat — March 24, 2010 @ 10:58 am
According to Facebook there is already “a tool for nonusers to have their data removed”.
Does anyone know where that tool is?
Comment by Anony-mouse — March 24, 2010 @ 6:23 pm
seems like a very complicated issue, although for the most part i think it's overkill, it's just the 1% who choose to do the wrong thing that makes it difficult for the rest of us
Comment by adelaide dancing — March 24, 2010 @ 8:40 pm
I've always wondered why Facebook didn't automatically have this approval option, and also why they don't have the option to approval wall posts. Myspace always has. Regardless, however, if you don't want to REMAIN tagged in someone's photo, simply remove it, and by doing so you cannot be RETAGGED in it (removing your tag once locks out the ability to be retagged in it again.) I bet many people don't realize that.
Comment by Ally — March 25, 2010 @ 5:33 am
If a photographer takes a picture of every attendant at an event, who owns those photos? Regardless of how you feel about it, the photographer owns the photo and controls the rights to its distribution – not the person in the photo.
While some photographers will seek out a release waiver to use your image in promotional material etc, they're not required to. Think tabloid magazine here. However, non-celebrity types don't have to worry about the one or two embarrassing pictures a friend might have. This is because the demand for these photos is too small and your friend's distribution network is also constrained.
Facebook changes this because it greatly widens the distribution channel, effectively creating a mini-tabloid magazine for every single person on Facebook (and even those who aren't). Tagging in general is a great way to aid in content discovery. Leveraging this is a no-brainer.
What's really at question is who owns the tag in a photo. If I use tags to organize my photos in some meaningful way, should the subject of the tag have the right to edit my data? Andrew's solution is interesting because both parties can benefit from the process although the content discovery aspect of tags is lost when millions of tags sit in a pending state.
Comment by Erik Giberti — March 26, 2010 @ 4:39 am
I think the Facebook Member should have the option "not to be tagged in other peoples' photos", or at least to moderate the tagging process. That way at least people cannot browse by user photo to find photos that the FB Member has not approved.
However, all that does is mitigate the effects on those people (Members and non-Members alike) who are featured in photos but not tagged.
Comment by John Duffy — March 26, 2010 @ 5:17 am
Facebook should definitely add this feature to allow people to accept being in a tagged photo. Someone could create and obscene pic and tag you in as thou you are a supporter or worst.
Comment by Freddie @ web presen — March 26, 2010 @ 8:52 am
I currently have an unwanted photo on my page from one of those weird apps that claim to be able to tell the person using it who has "viewed", "stalked", or "followed" their profile, it was put on there by someone that I don't know, is not on my friends list and now acts as if she doesn't know what to do to delete it, so YES I think that getting actually permission should be required to post a tagged photo of someone on their pages… oh and I also never looked at her profile until after it magically appeared on my page and I went looking for the person that posted it to ask that they remove me from it…
Comment by Mary — March 26, 2010 @ 5:16 pm
I think that this is a simple way that FaceBook can lessen the potential for malicious stuff going on. I think that FaceBook might still be a little unaware of their role in society and how much pressure will come on them to perform social requirements.
WHile the picture tagging approval is a great idea, the other area that is a concern is the memorial sites that are now pretty much standard when a young person dies (and increasinly when older people die.)
These are, of course, the cutting edge of a social utility. Family and friends set up one place where everyone can say their kind words about the deceased. I can only imagine how much comfort they would bring to the grieving
But idiots get on these and post horrible messages. While you and i are not doubt amazed that someone would do that, well it is just how society is. It will always happen.
To me, the problem could be easily fixed by people being able to set up memorial pages on FaceBook that include a moderator module.
Indeed, I think that the concept of moderation is one that FaceBook is going to have to face.
Jimi Bostock
PUSH Agency
Brisbane | Canberra | Sydney | Australia
jimi@pushagency.net
Comment by Jimi Bostock — March 27, 2010 @ 3:02 pm
I don't see why FB would resist this to begin with. Is there any advantage to FB when someone is tagged in a pic? For most people, they just don't want photos of them when they don't look their best to be posted. No harm in that.
Comment by David Hall — March 28, 2010 @ 3:15 pm
i agree. I had myself tagged so many times in pictures i didn't want shown… luckily i saw it on time or else… BOOM!
Comment by eee — September 18, 2010 @ 6:08 am
[...] to all users, this would be a massive change to the dynamics of Facebook photos. Earlier this year we suggested that this feature should be rolled out for all photo tags as photo tags can become the source of [...]
Pingback by Facebook Testing Photo Tagging Requests And Approvals — September 22, 2010 @ 10:19 am
Put simply, the owner of the photo has the right to do with the photo as they wish (excluding blackmail, slander, etc). If they want to tag someone in a photo, they have the complete right to do so. However, in this digital age, this photo tagging can cost careers. You hear often of how you should monitor the content on your FB, because companies looking to hire are quite often looking at FB now. An embarrassing photo from last Saturday night could cost you the job to someone who has a 'clean' profile. And you have absolutely no control on if this content gets published. The most you can do is damage control, and remove the tag. However, it still shows up as a post under your name, that all of your friends can see.
The simplest and obvious solution would be to allow users to tag photos as they please, but allow those tagged to decide if it becomes public or not. Combining it with FBs nifty custom privacy settings, you can make sure only the people whom you want to see that you're tagged in that photo, can.
It would be a simple request, "David Davidson tagged you in a photo, do you want this to be public?" With a Confirm or Deny option, the confirm leading to a small popup-like window, like what many aps do when confirming a wall post. At which point there's the option for the custom privacy settings, to the left of the "publish" button.
More or less what Andrew said already.
Comment by MEH — March 2, 2011 @ 4:15 pm
LOL, not really. Despite the photo belonging to the photographer, you still have basic rights over your likeness. Ever heard of a thing called "Personality rights"? It's a real thing and yes, it also exists in the United States. While I agree that the photo can be used as evidence, that woman can still sue whoever uploaded it and Facebook.
By your reasoning, I can take a picture of you, modify it to look completely inappropriate then post it all over the internet right?
What about if I took a picture of you and post it on a porn board? What about if I use it on a book cover? What about if I use it on a movie? I can take pictures of everything in your life and then sell it right? How about if I just gave them away? Perhaps to the FBI or some identity theft firm somewhere in Russia? I mean… I own the photos right?
Or can I?
Think again.
Not everyone wants to be a star. Constrained distribution still means distribution without your approval.
Comment by stupidinternets — June 21, 2011 @ 10:02 pm
Personality Rights.
Look it up on Wikipedia.
Name, image, and likeness, are things you own as your natural rights. Tagging violates this. This is why Google blurs faces in streetview. Facebook is eviler than I thought it would ever be really.
Comment by wargharble — June 21, 2011 @ 10:07 pm