Viral Facebook Message Brings Issue Of Ad Endorsements Into Spotlight

This morning I’ve received numerous messages from people about the viral message going around the site about how to opt-out of Facebook advertisements. Following a misinformed article by Download Squad from last week, users are now going crazy about their images using in Facebook advertisements. While your image may be used, most users aren’t educated about how they are being displayed.

For many months now, Facebook has been using our friends’ images in advertisements about groups, Facebook Pages, and applications. When it was initially launched, the blogosphere was debating whether or not Facebook’s decision to make consent a default setting was the right way to go. One University of Minissota professor and former Harvard Berkman Center fellow, suggested the ads were illegal. That was in reference to Beacon and what was then called “Social Ads”.

“Social Ads” have now become Facebook ads but the same endorsement feature exists. Over a year and a half later, the masses appear to understand a small amount of what’s going on and it’s being spread throughout Facebook via the following note:

Facebook has agreed to let 3rd party advertisers use your photos in their ads without your permission (and so presumably, forever). TO OPT OUT: Click on ‘Settings’ (in top nav bar, next to logout); Drop down to ‘Privacy Settings’; select ‘News Feed and Wall’; Select tab for ‘Facebook Ads’ and ‘No one’ in the drop down. Save changes and PASS THIS ON.

The Download Squad article was clearly the initial impetus behind this message. While Facebook assumes that the user consents to share this information, that’s not the main issue. Facebook continues to let third party ad networks use your photos as well, and making the privacy setting changes outlined in this viral message will not remove your photos from third party ad networks.

That third parties can use your image without your consent is the primary issue at hand and now that the issue has been brought to the masses, Facebook will need to publicly announce a policy decision. If Facebook decides to prevent third-party ad networks from inserting user images, the effects could be disastrous for third-party display advertisers on the platform and could cost a lot of money for many developers.

It will be interesting to see how things play out over the coming days. What do you think Facebook’s policy should be on third-party ad networks use of user images? Also, should Facebook assume consent by default for using your images in their ads?

NOTE
Facebook has posted an udpate regarding their policy.

-Implicit Ad Endorsement Screenshot-

Inside Social Apps 2012 is Less Than Two Weeks Away

Mediabistro Event

Inside Social Apps, held on February 8-9 in San Francisco, is less than two weeks away. This is the third conference on the future of monetization on social and mobile platforms. Leaders from the industry will share their views on today's most formidable challenges affecting social and mobile apps and games in 2012. Inside Social Apps conferences sell out in advance, so take advantage of early registration pricing. Early bird rates end on February 1, so register today.

688146 Comments2009-07-24+16%3A34%3A40Nick+O%27Neill »

I agree Kathryn. I think Facebook will be smart about this and do right by its users (i.e. no assumed default or try to sneak anything by them because they saw what happened last time).

The big question going forward is how will 3rd party advertisers respond to this development? How are they going to reach Facebook users and incentivize them to participate?

Brendan

Comment by Brendan — July 24, 2009 @ 9:08 am
My photos are my own, and that's that. I don't remember seeing a paragraph that says "By using this service you agree to facebook sharing your information (images, etc) with third parties". I might be wrong though, and it is all in small print that nobody reads.

Comment by Mike London — July 24, 2009 @ 11:29 am
I suggest facebook create an opt-in or opt-out setting for third party advertisers, like the facebook ads option.

I also think it should be an option that facebook specifically puts in front of you — no assumed default, you have to choose when you sign up and send a request to all users to make a choice. Maybe there could be an incentive on the part of facebook to choose yes –

Comment by Kathryn Gorges — July 24, 2009 @ 12:48 pm
I don’t want anyone BUT ME using my photographs.

Comment by L Glover — July 24, 2009 @ 1:01 pm
I’ve been hearing this all morning too. I was hoping someone could illustrate the different ways Facebook and 3rd parties are allowed (and not allowed) to use your photos.

Comment by Jennifer — July 24, 2009 @ 1:07 pm
“If Facebook decides to prevent third-party ad networks from inserting user images, the effects could be disastrous for third-party display advertisers on the platform and could cost a lot of money for many developers.”

If what its going to do is prevent ads like that lame Death Race example, I’d hardly call it “disastrous” for anyone…

And it’s common sense that they shouldn’t be using people’s photos for ads. The rules from real life that you can’t just slap someone’s photo on a billboard should apply just as strongly here…. it’s one of those common-sense things that shouldn’t be able to be circumvented just by burying it in a giant ToS.

Comment by thingy — July 24, 2009 @ 1:07 pm
Thanx for shedding some light on this. I hate viral messages. I also hate backhanded grabs at private data. I like FaceBook.

Comment by David Farrow — July 24, 2009 @ 1:14 pm
I agree with Kathryn that if it has to be an option give us the option.
I personally don’t like my photos which I tend to copyright most of the time, because I’m a photographer, being used without my permission or without some compensation.

Comment by Melissa Maenle — July 24, 2009 @ 1:22 pm
Kenyon,

The question isn't whether people want privacy, is whether they want a say in how their original content is manipulated. Do I want my picture put up on a political ad, perhaps for something I completely don't agree with? Do I want to be featured in an ad for a crappy band that I don't like?

I don't care who sees my photos–I care about the context in which they see them. I don't my beliefs rightfully or wrongfully contextualized by an advertiser who knows nothing about me.

Facebook by offering a free service to host photos and then offering these photos as a perk for advertiser in engaging in an ugly kind of arbitrage here and I definitely am against it.

Comment by Jack — July 24, 2009 @ 1:30 pm
You need my permission to use my photos for advertising purposes. The easiest way is to have an opt in – opt out setting for such permission.

Comment by Gerrit Marshall — July 24, 2009 @ 2:09 pm
Is there something besides Facebook that would make an uncommercialized alternative that people have had experience with?

Comment by Matthew Englund — July 24, 2009 @ 2:14 pm
So even if you “opt-out” 3rd parties can still use the photos? (they just aren’t used for ads to “friends”?)

Is there something else I can read about this?

Comment by lin — July 24, 2009 @ 2:14 pm
If they want to use my image they need to pay me for it.

Comment by Melody — July 24, 2009 @ 2:15 pm
Did any of you actually read the article. It specifically says that it is an option and how to change it on facebook in the article. Mine was defaultly set to only my friends will see ads with me in it. And I left it that way… I don’t care and assume that my friends are intelligent enough to notice that “oh there is an add with Justin’s picture on it. Funny it is the exact same picture he uses for his profile picture, oh I bet the ad just pulls some random photo of one of my friends and puts it in the add”

“I don’t want anyone BUT ME using my photographs.” – L Glover
L Glover, Then you shouldn’t upload any photos to the internet, especially facebook.

Excerpt from facebook policies: “you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (“IP License”). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account (except to the extent your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it). “

Comment by Justin — July 24, 2009 @ 2:26 pm
I really couldn’t care less that “this could be disastrous for third-party display advertisers on the platform and could cost a lot of money for many developers.”

They should NOT be using our images to make money.
And if they are, technically we should be getting a cut of whatever they ate making.

My Images are MY images to share with whom ever I chose.

Comment by Eleonora Barna — July 24, 2009 @ 2:29 pm
I’m the law professor you linked to (though actually I am at the University of Minnesota; as a former fellow of Harvard’s Berkman Center I write for a blog hosted there, which is where the confusion came from).

The programs I was talking about at that time (November 2007) were the original (now long-gone) Beacon and its companion, then called “Social Ads.” My conclusion then was that the law requires genuine consent to feature your photo (or for that matter your name) in an advertisement

“Ads” that are no more than notifications that your friend “became a fan” of something are fine by that standard; we should all realize that Facebook will tell our friends about our activities within Facebook, and I think that qualifies as implicit consent. The problems today arise when third-party advertisers don’t secure that kind of genuine consent for the particular use in question — as appears to be the case here. Then, I think the ads likely violate certain state statutes and also tort law, as I explained in my post.

The original blog post evolved into a whole law journal article, which is available on SSRN.com at http://tinyurl.com/bqz7xu.

Comment by William McGeveran — July 24, 2009 @ 2:35 pm
If you’re not going to explain in your post why the linked article by the Download Squad is “misinformed” or why “making the privacy setting changes outlined in this viral message will not remove your photos from third party ad networks” can you at least link to something that does?
Thanks.

Comment by Margaret Kim — July 24, 2009 @ 3:12 pm
Doesn’t FB’s TOS allow them to use whatever photos you have posted on the site any way? I was sure I recalled reading something in there along those lines.

Comment by Ryan — July 24, 2009 @ 3:15 pm
Sorry – I just clicked on the hyperlink… and now I see that the link is not the orignal Download Squad article, but I’m still confused about what exactly is Facebook’s role in 3rd party ad networks using user photos. How are the 3rd party ad networks getting the photos in the first place?

Comment by Margaret Kim — July 24, 2009 @ 3:21 pm
I think we should be given the opt out option and , if we opt in, should be paid for the use of our images, or at the very least be given approval rights before we are used in an ad.

Comment by John Paul Diaz — July 24, 2009 @ 3:22 pm
Nick,

Do you think part of the problem is that every time we take a quiz, join a game, or otherwise grant access to an application, we don’t realize what we’re giving away?

@helenmosher

Comment by Helen Mosher — July 24, 2009 @ 3:23 pm
I don’t think they should be able to use ANY photo unless they are given Permission by the USER!

Comment by Lisa — July 24, 2009 @ 3:32 pm
Really? Let’s see folk’s. You are putting your photo’s out there for the whole world to see. Want privacy? DON’T USE FACEBOOK OR AT LEAST DON’T PUT PICTURE YOU DON’T WANT THE WORLD TO SEE AND USE.

Comment by Kenyon — July 24, 2009 @ 4:27 pm
I’m very confused by this, but it does seem wrong that a third party can use someone’s photos for gain with no recompense, or explicit assent required. Many people post up pictures of their families, including children and would not want these associated with certain material. Obviously using a site such as fb puts stuff in the public domain in a major way but shouldn’t remove all rights!

Could fb give us a clear statement regading this issue – in understandable language with no ‘small print’ clauses?

Comment by Jean Pearson — July 24, 2009 @ 4:34 pm
I agree with Kenyon, I’d prefer to have my pictures be used in some ads so that the facebook service (and all its apps) remain free. “There is no free lunch” and somebody has to pay for the massive cost of FB.

Comment by Everyman — July 24, 2009 @ 4:41 pm
In response to people talking about the notion that if you don’t want advertisers using your photos then don’t post them. That statement fails to be genuine in every respect.

If you are the legal copyright holder of your photo regardless of where you post it, you have rights regarding how that photo is allowed to be used. An advertising company in most cases is required to not only notify you but also required to get your permission. Especially when your photo is used to generate profits for that advertising company.

There are several fair use laws out there but most of them don’t apply to an advertising company stealing your work. It’s your work, don’t let someone steal it. (Keep this in mind next time all of you who steal music when you decided to complain about someone using your photos without consent)

Comment by Peter F — July 24, 2009 @ 4:44 pm
They should have an opt-out, opt-in policy. No one should be able to use my photo for advertising without my permission. I may not even agree with what is being advertised and in fact may be morally against it. My image belongs to me.

Comment by Christa — July 24, 2009 @ 4:48 pm
In a perfect world, any photo a person posted could only legally be used by anyone else with direct consent.

In a perfect world, FB and 3rd party advertisers would be honest and honor privacy and original ownership.

It’d be a much better if everyone tried to strive for that perfect world. I own my photos, hands off, Facebook, etc!

Comment by Jill — July 24, 2009 @ 5:14 pm
What is the point in being able to ‘restrict’ your privacy settings to ‘friends only’ or ‘only’ select friends; if the images can be used in another way without you knowing. Is that not a complete contradiction. I understood the terms and conditions that facebook operate; but also felt I had some control over what was being published, when it appears that advertisers can use my information although I have infact withdrawn my consent by selecting specific privacy settings?? this is very confusing!

Comment by Paula — July 24, 2009 @ 6:05 pm
Maybe placing a watermark of some sort on/over the photo will discourage an advertiser from using our photos.

Comment by Tamiko — July 24, 2009 @ 9:40 pm
Not that i want a third party to see any of my info/photos or to get at any of my friends but we all know that putting any photo and information on the Net makes an opportunity for everyone to see. It can always get into the wrong hands and spread like wild fire. I know it’s a privacy issue and what you think is classified as private or public. I know myself, i feel that what i post on line is safe and don’t think twice about it and thankfully i lead a very boring life and no one would be interested in my life or photos. We all know, deep down, that others can see and get at anything we put on a computer. Heck, they can retrieve things out of ancient computers and patch them together to see what was on them. Police can track anything you type or post….nothing put onto the computer by others or yourself is safe and secure. Ever.
No one wants third party ads but if it keeps us from having to pay to use the internet, why not. They’ve been doing it for years and we just never knew about it.

Comment by Carole — July 24, 2009 @ 9:42 pm
My pictures are for my friends and family to view since I don’t see them very often. Two’s Company – Three’s a crowd. Butt out 3rd party…..

Comment by T — July 24, 2009 @ 9:45 pm
So lets say that an advertiser grabs your profile picture and uses it to push a product that you would vehemently oppose, such as a religion, or alternative lifestyle, or maybe even a treatment for a sexually transmitted disease. And once the third party has the photo in their database, what makes you think that they will limit it’s usage to just your friends? Or how about your child’s photo being used to campaign against child abuse? This and many more could all be yours if you allow use without consent/approval.

Comment by Glenn Virgin — July 24, 2009 @ 10:31 pm
If you are used in an advertisement,where someone makes money off you, then you should be paid. You should absolutely be asked for your consent and you should be paid. Is it that difficult to come up with add ideas, do they really need to “use” us. How could not using people,with or without consent create a hardship for some advertiser. I am not stupid and I know they don’t actually need to do this. Did I have to say this. Is there really someone out there that is so out of it that this ever had to be a topic of discussion, that has to be figured out!!!!!! I am blown away by the lack of creativity on such a moronic level.

Comment by Joel Ford — July 24, 2009 @ 11:11 pm
To whom it may concern,
You do not have the right to use any of my pictures without my written consent.

Comment by Scott — July 24, 2009 @ 11:21 pm
I post pictures of my children, to share with my friends and family who do not live nearby. One of my children is not yet legally adopted. If that child's pics were to appear in advertisements, that child would be taken from our home and the only family they know. This issue goes beyond breaking laws, it will also break up families with similar dynamics. I will have no choice but to close my beloved fb account, and ask my family members to do the same, since they also have pics of said child on their pages. I can only hope that fb will do right by their users, and continue to ask for consent before my pics are used for advertising purposes.

Comment by schutzafam — July 25, 2009 @ 9:35 am
To the "we need to be compensated" crowd: You get to use Facebook for free. You add all this extra load to their servers without a second thought.

To the "I own the photos" crowd. They're just being shown to your friends, right? Isn't that what you uploaded them for? Is is true that your friend Bob is using Death Race? If so, then may we show you a picture of your friend Bob to illustrate who is using this application?

No strangers are seeing your pictures. The pictures never get delivered to the 3rd party advertiser. This is like walking up to someone and saying, "Think of your favorite uncle. Don't tell me his name… but when I say "UNCLE" I want you to think of his name. Ok, ready? You know who loves Acme Ketchup? UNCLE. Oh yes, UNCLE just loves the rich creamy taste."

I made you think of his name in context of selling ketchup. What a terrible thing for me to do. In trade for that, you can use Facebook for free.

Comment by Eric Tully — July 25, 2009 @ 9:48 am
Perhaps none of us read the fine print. But, watch out Facebook. I want control over my personal photos. Fix to my satisfaction this or I (and a lot of users, I bet) will delete our accounts.

Comment by Dan — July 25, 2009 @ 9:51 am
To me the issue is not only using my photos in ads without my permission, and many people will be ok with this because FB says the ads only go to your Friends, the other issue is not who the ads are going to but what are mu images being used to advertise? The content of the ad is just as important and maybe more so than the audience. There should be a CLEARLY avaialble opt-in / opt-out screen for any action of this type.

Comment by Greg — July 25, 2009 @ 9:51 am
I agree with Kathryn, opt in or opt out should be a standard across services such as these.

Just my opinion, no one else’s.
Vince

Comment by Vince Golubic — July 25, 2009 @ 1:21 pm
You always have to assume the worst when you upload your personal content onto someone else's server – BUT facebook has had a long standing policy of 'we try to do no evil, but when we do, we grovel and make up for it'. Basically, I've always felt pretty good about their policies, enough to where I'm in the process of migrating the pictures I have on myspace over to facebook.

However, if they make a choice to allow people to use my images without my direct consent, I'll be removing everything and posting a link to a flickr account, or even better, a gallery on my personal domain.

If it comes down to no tagging of friends or the free use of my content to advertisers who are making money (and not sharing) – i'll go with the loss of tagging. I sincerely hope they do the 'right' thing here.

Comment by Andrew — July 25, 2009 @ 3:19 pm
I WILL PUT NO MORE PICS ON MY FACEBOOK.

Comment by spe45 — July 25, 2009 @ 4:22 pm
Just cant stop my self to comment on your blog. Good post.

Comment by Munir — July 26, 2009 @ 1:05 am
Cut this gratic socialcash off for GOOD!

Comment by role — July 27, 2009 @ 5:42 am
it is fine as an opt in/out, but the default should be set to opt out.

Comment by cindy — July 27, 2009 @ 12:04 pm
The way I found out about this was thus: Back in March I began seeing banners that said that my friends X and Y (with their pictures) had challenged me to some quiz. I happened to be visiting them at the time. They said they had never taken this quiz themselves and had definitely not challenged me to take the quiz. I began searching in the settings and found where I could stop them from using my friends pics in such items.

Comment by Dennis — July 27, 2009 @ 12:46 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

I agree Kathryn. I think Facebook will be smart about this and do right by its users (i.e. no assumed default or try to sneak anything by them because they saw what happened last time).

The big question going forward is how will 3rd party advertisers respond to this development? How are they going to reach Facebook users and incentivize them to participate?

Brendan

Comment by Brendan — July 24, 2009 @ 9:08 am

My photos are my own, and that's that. I don't remember seeing a paragraph that says "By using this service you agree to facebook sharing your information (images, etc) with third parties". I might be wrong though, and it is all in small print that nobody reads.

Comment by Mike London — July 24, 2009 @ 11:29 am

I suggest facebook create an opt-in or opt-out setting for third party advertisers, like the facebook ads option.

I also think it should be an option that facebook specifically puts in front of you — no assumed default, you have to choose when you sign up and send a request to all users to make a choice. Maybe there could be an incentive on the part of facebook to choose yes –

Comment by Kathryn Gorges — July 24, 2009 @ 12:48 pm

I don’t want anyone BUT ME using my photographs.

Comment by L Glover — July 24, 2009 @ 1:01 pm

I’ve been hearing this all morning too. I was hoping someone could illustrate the different ways Facebook and 3rd parties are allowed (and not allowed) to use your photos.

Comment by Jennifer — July 24, 2009 @ 1:07 pm

“If Facebook decides to prevent third-party ad networks from inserting user images, the effects could be disastrous for third-party display advertisers on the platform and could cost a lot of money for many developers.”

If what its going to do is prevent ads like that lame Death Race example, I’d hardly call it “disastrous” for anyone…

And it’s common sense that they shouldn’t be using people’s photos for ads. The rules from real life that you can’t just slap someone’s photo on a billboard should apply just as strongly here…. it’s one of those common-sense things that shouldn’t be able to be circumvented just by burying it in a giant ToS.

Comment by thingy — July 24, 2009 @ 1:07 pm

Thanx for shedding some light on this. I hate viral messages. I also hate backhanded grabs at private data. I like FaceBook.

Comment by David Farrow — July 24, 2009 @ 1:14 pm

I agree with Kathryn that if it has to be an option give us the option.
I personally don’t like my photos which I tend to copyright most of the time, because I’m a photographer, being used without my permission or without some compensation.

Comment by Melissa Maenle — July 24, 2009 @ 1:22 pm

Kenyon,

The question isn't whether people want privacy, is whether they want a say in how their original content is manipulated. Do I want my picture put up on a political ad, perhaps for something I completely don't agree with? Do I want to be featured in an ad for a crappy band that I don't like?

I don't care who sees my photos–I care about the context in which they see them. I don't my beliefs rightfully or wrongfully contextualized by an advertiser who knows nothing about me.

Facebook by offering a free service to host photos and then offering these photos as a perk for advertiser in engaging in an ugly kind of arbitrage here and I definitely am against it.

Comment by Jack — July 24, 2009 @ 1:30 pm

You need my permission to use my photos for advertising purposes. The easiest way is to have an opt in – opt out setting for such permission.

Comment by Gerrit Marshall — July 24, 2009 @ 2:09 pm

Is there something besides Facebook that would make an uncommercialized alternative that people have had experience with?

Comment by Matthew Englund — July 24, 2009 @ 2:14 pm

So even if you “opt-out” 3rd parties can still use the photos? (they just aren’t used for ads to “friends”?)

Is there something else I can read about this?

Comment by lin — July 24, 2009 @ 2:14 pm

If they want to use my image they need to pay me for it.

Comment by Melody — July 24, 2009 @ 2:15 pm

Did any of you actually read the article. It specifically says that it is an option and how to change it on facebook in the article. Mine was defaultly set to only my friends will see ads with me in it. And I left it that way… I don’t care and assume that my friends are intelligent enough to notice that “oh there is an add with Justin’s picture on it. Funny it is the exact same picture he uses for his profile picture, oh I bet the ad just pulls some random photo of one of my friends and puts it in the add”

“I don’t want anyone BUT ME using my photographs.” – L Glover
L Glover, Then you shouldn’t upload any photos to the internet, especially facebook.

Excerpt from facebook policies: “you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (“IP License”). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account (except to the extent your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it). “

Comment by Justin — July 24, 2009 @ 2:26 pm

I really couldn’t care less that “this could be disastrous for third-party display advertisers on the platform and could cost a lot of money for many developers.”

They should NOT be using our images to make money.
And if they are, technically we should be getting a cut of whatever they ate making.

My Images are MY images to share with whom ever I chose.

Comment by Eleonora Barna — July 24, 2009 @ 2:29 pm

I’m the law professor you linked to (though actually I am at the University of Minnesota; as a former fellow of Harvard’s Berkman Center I write for a blog hosted there, which is where the confusion came from).

The programs I was talking about at that time (November 2007) were the original (now long-gone) Beacon and its companion, then called “Social Ads.” My conclusion then was that the law requires genuine consent to feature your photo (or for that matter your name) in an advertisement

“Ads” that are no more than notifications that your friend “became a fan” of something are fine by that standard; we should all realize that Facebook will tell our friends about our activities within Facebook, and I think that qualifies as implicit consent. The problems today arise when third-party advertisers don’t secure that kind of genuine consent for the particular use in question — as appears to be the case here. Then, I think the ads likely violate certain state statutes and also tort law, as I explained in my post.

The original blog post evolved into a whole law journal article, which is available on SSRN.com at http://tinyurl.com/bqz7xu.

Comment by William McGeveran — July 24, 2009 @ 2:35 pm

If you’re not going to explain in your post why the linked article by the Download Squad is “misinformed” or why “making the privacy setting changes outlined in this viral message will not remove your photos from third party ad networks” can you at least link to something that does?
Thanks.

Comment by Margaret Kim — July 24, 2009 @ 3:12 pm

Doesn’t FB’s TOS allow them to use whatever photos you have posted on the site any way? I was sure I recalled reading something in there along those lines.

Comment by Ryan — July 24, 2009 @ 3:15 pm

Sorry – I just clicked on the hyperlink… and now I see that the link is not the orignal Download Squad article, but I’m still confused about what exactly is Facebook’s role in 3rd party ad networks using user photos. How are the 3rd party ad networks getting the photos in the first place?

Comment by Margaret Kim — July 24, 2009 @ 3:21 pm

I think we should be given the opt out option and , if we opt in, should be paid for the use of our images, or at the very least be given approval rights before we are used in an ad.

Comment by John Paul Diaz — July 24, 2009 @ 3:22 pm

Nick,

Do you think part of the problem is that every time we take a quiz, join a game, or otherwise grant access to an application, we don’t realize what we’re giving away?

@helenmosher

Comment by Helen Mosher — July 24, 2009 @ 3:23 pm

I don’t think they should be able to use ANY photo unless they are given Permission by the USER!

Comment by Lisa — July 24, 2009 @ 3:32 pm

Really? Let’s see folk’s. You are putting your photo’s out there for the whole world to see. Want privacy? DON’T USE FACEBOOK OR AT LEAST DON’T PUT PICTURE YOU DON’T WANT THE WORLD TO SEE AND USE.

Comment by Kenyon — July 24, 2009 @ 4:27 pm

I’m very confused by this, but it does seem wrong that a third party can use someone’s photos for gain with no recompense, or explicit assent required. Many people post up pictures of their families, including children and would not want these associated with certain material. Obviously using a site such as fb puts stuff in the public domain in a major way but shouldn’t remove all rights!

Could fb give us a clear statement regading this issue – in understandable language with no ‘small print’ clauses?

Comment by Jean Pearson — July 24, 2009 @ 4:34 pm

I agree with Kenyon, I’d prefer to have my pictures be used in some ads so that the facebook service (and all its apps) remain free. “There is no free lunch” and somebody has to pay for the massive cost of FB.

Comment by Everyman — July 24, 2009 @ 4:41 pm

In response to people talking about the notion that if you don’t want advertisers using your photos then don’t post them. That statement fails to be genuine in every respect.

If you are the legal copyright holder of your photo regardless of where you post it, you have rights regarding how that photo is allowed to be used. An advertising company in most cases is required to not only notify you but also required to get your permission. Especially when your photo is used to generate profits for that advertising company.

There are several fair use laws out there but most of them don’t apply to an advertising company stealing your work. It’s your work, don’t let someone steal it. (Keep this in mind next time all of you who steal music when you decided to complain about someone using your photos without consent)

Comment by Peter F — July 24, 2009 @ 4:44 pm

They should have an opt-out, opt-in policy. No one should be able to use my photo for advertising without my permission. I may not even agree with what is being advertised and in fact may be morally against it. My image belongs to me.

Comment by Christa — July 24, 2009 @ 4:48 pm

In a perfect world, any photo a person posted could only legally be used by anyone else with direct consent.

In a perfect world, FB and 3rd party advertisers would be honest and honor privacy and original ownership.

It’d be a much better if everyone tried to strive for that perfect world. I own my photos, hands off, Facebook, etc!

Comment by Jill — July 24, 2009 @ 5:14 pm

What is the point in being able to ‘restrict’ your privacy settings to ‘friends only’ or ‘only’ select friends; if the images can be used in another way without you knowing. Is that not a complete contradiction. I understood the terms and conditions that facebook operate; but also felt I had some control over what was being published, when it appears that advertisers can use my information although I have infact withdrawn my consent by selecting specific privacy settings?? this is very confusing!

Comment by Paula — July 24, 2009 @ 6:05 pm

Maybe placing a watermark of some sort on/over the photo will discourage an advertiser from using our photos.

Comment by Tamiko — July 24, 2009 @ 9:40 pm

Not that i want a third party to see any of my info/photos or to get at any of my friends but we all know that putting any photo and information on the Net makes an opportunity for everyone to see. It can always get into the wrong hands and spread like wild fire. I know it’s a privacy issue and what you think is classified as private or public. I know myself, i feel that what i post on line is safe and don’t think twice about it and thankfully i lead a very boring life and no one would be interested in my life or photos. We all know, deep down, that others can see and get at anything we put on a computer. Heck, they can retrieve things out of ancient computers and patch them together to see what was on them. Police can track anything you type or post….nothing put onto the computer by others or yourself is safe and secure. Ever.
No one wants third party ads but if it keeps us from having to pay to use the internet, why not. They’ve been doing it for years and we just never knew about it.

Comment by Carole — July 24, 2009 @ 9:42 pm

My pictures are for my friends and family to view since I don’t see them very often. Two’s Company – Three’s a crowd. Butt out 3rd party…..

Comment by T — July 24, 2009 @ 9:45 pm

So lets say that an advertiser grabs your profile picture and uses it to push a product that you would vehemently oppose, such as a religion, or alternative lifestyle, or maybe even a treatment for a sexually transmitted disease. And once the third party has the photo in their database, what makes you think that they will limit it’s usage to just your friends? Or how about your child’s photo being used to campaign against child abuse? This and many more could all be yours if you allow use without consent/approval.

Comment by Glenn Virgin — July 24, 2009 @ 10:31 pm

If you are used in an advertisement,where someone makes money off you, then you should be paid. You should absolutely be asked for your consent and you should be paid. Is it that difficult to come up with add ideas, do they really need to “use” us. How could not using people,with or without consent create a hardship for some advertiser. I am not stupid and I know they don’t actually need to do this. Did I have to say this. Is there really someone out there that is so out of it that this ever had to be a topic of discussion, that has to be figured out!!!!!! I am blown away by the lack of creativity on such a moronic level.

Comment by Joel Ford — July 24, 2009 @ 11:11 pm

To whom it may concern,
You do not have the right to use any of my pictures without my written consent.

Comment by Scott — July 24, 2009 @ 11:21 pm

I post pictures of my children, to share with my friends and family who do not live nearby. One of my children is not yet legally adopted. If that child's pics were to appear in advertisements, that child would be taken from our home and the only family they know. This issue goes beyond breaking laws, it will also break up families with similar dynamics. I will have no choice but to close my beloved fb account, and ask my family members to do the same, since they also have pics of said child on their pages. I can only hope that fb will do right by their users, and continue to ask for consent before my pics are used for advertising purposes.

Comment by schutzafam — July 25, 2009 @ 9:35 am

To the "we need to be compensated" crowd: You get to use Facebook for free. You add all this extra load to their servers without a second thought.

To the "I own the photos" crowd. They're just being shown to your friends, right? Isn't that what you uploaded them for? Is is true that your friend Bob is using Death Race? If so, then may we show you a picture of your friend Bob to illustrate who is using this application?

No strangers are seeing your pictures. The pictures never get delivered to the 3rd party advertiser. This is like walking up to someone and saying, "Think of your favorite uncle. Don't tell me his name… but when I say "UNCLE" I want you to think of his name. Ok, ready? You know who loves Acme Ketchup? UNCLE. Oh yes, UNCLE just loves the rich creamy taste."

I made you think of his name in context of selling ketchup. What a terrible thing for me to do. In trade for that, you can use Facebook for free.

Comment by Eric Tully — July 25, 2009 @ 9:48 am

Perhaps none of us read the fine print. But, watch out Facebook. I want control over my personal photos. Fix to my satisfaction this or I (and a lot of users, I bet) will delete our accounts.

Comment by Dan — July 25, 2009 @ 9:51 am

To me the issue is not only using my photos in ads without my permission, and many people will be ok with this because FB says the ads only go to your Friends, the other issue is not who the ads are going to but what are mu images being used to advertise? The content of the ad is just as important and maybe more so than the audience. There should be a CLEARLY avaialble opt-in / opt-out screen for any action of this type.

Comment by Greg — July 25, 2009 @ 9:51 am

I agree with Kathryn, opt in or opt out should be a standard across services such as these.

Just my opinion, no one else’s.
Vince

Comment by Vince Golubic — July 25, 2009 @ 1:21 pm

You always have to assume the worst when you upload your personal content onto someone else's server – BUT facebook has had a long standing policy of 'we try to do no evil, but when we do, we grovel and make up for it'. Basically, I've always felt pretty good about their policies, enough to where I'm in the process of migrating the pictures I have on myspace over to facebook.

However, if they make a choice to allow people to use my images without my direct consent, I'll be removing everything and posting a link to a flickr account, or even better, a gallery on my personal domain.

If it comes down to no tagging of friends or the free use of my content to advertisers who are making money (and not sharing) – i'll go with the loss of tagging. I sincerely hope they do the 'right' thing here.

Comment by Andrew — July 25, 2009 @ 3:19 pm

I WILL PUT NO MORE PICS ON MY FACEBOOK.

Comment by spe45 — July 25, 2009 @ 4:22 pm

Just cant stop my self to comment on your blog. Good post.

Comment by Munir — July 26, 2009 @ 1:05 am

Cut this gratic socialcash off for GOOD!

Comment by role — July 27, 2009 @ 5:42 am

it is fine as an opt in/out, but the default should be set to opt out.

Comment by cindy — July 27, 2009 @ 12:04 pm

The way I found out about this was thus: Back in March I began seeing banners that said that my friends X and Y (with their pictures) had challenged me to some quiz. I happened to be visiting them at the time. They said they had never taken this quiz themselves and had definitely not challenged me to take the quiz. I began searching in the settings and found where I could stop them from using my friends pics in such items.

Comment by Dennis — July 27, 2009 @ 12:46 pm

Viral Facebook Message Brings Issue Of Ad Endorsements Into Spotlight

Recommended Articles

Inside Social Apps 2012 is Less Than Two Weeks Away

688146 Comments2009-07-24+16%3A34%3A40Nick+O%27Neill »

Leave a comment

Follow AllFacebook

Send us a Tip

Social Media Jobs

Let your next job find you!

Featured Company

Jobs of the Day

Digital Strategist

Digital/Social Media Manager - Entertainment

Social Media Coordinator

See all jobs

Upcoming Events

Viral Facebook Message Brings Issue Of Ad Endorsements Into Spotlight

Recommended Articles

Inside Social Apps 2012 is Less Than Two Weeks Away

688146 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.allfacebook.com%2Ffacebook-ad-endorsements-2009-07Viral+Facebook+Message+Brings+Issue+Of+Ad+Endorsements+Into+Spotlight2009-07-24+16%3A34%3A40Nick+O%27Neillhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.allfacebook.com%2F%3Fp%3D6881 »

Leave a comment

Follow AllFacebook

Send us a Tip

Social Media Jobs

Let your next job find you!

Featured Company

Jobs of the Day

Digital Strategist

Digital/Social Media Manager - Entertainment

Social Media Coordinator

See all jobs

Upcoming Events

688146 Comments2009-07-24+16%3A34%3A40Nick+O%27Neill »