- Windows HPC hits top 10 among supercomputers
- Ruby on Rails rolls into the enterprise
- Mobile phone chargers are energy vampires
- 10 IT security companies to watch
- Researchers getting the lead out of electronics
Google will dump a section of the licensing agreement for its new Chrome browser after some Internet users objected to its copyright implications.
Google said Wednesday it would dump one section of the end-user licensing agreement that gave the company "a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through" the new browser.
Several Web users raised copyright and privacy concerns about portions of the licensing agreement shortly after Google launched Chrome Tuesday. Some critics suggested the language would allow Google to use any Web content displayed in Chrome without getting copyright permission.
Google said it borrowed language from other products, "in order to keep things simple for our users," when it inserted the copyright provision in the Chrome license.
"Sometimes, as in the case of Google Chrome, this means that the legal terms for a specific product may include terms that don't apply well to the use of that product," Rebecca Ward, senior product counsel for Chrome, said in a statement. "We are working quickly to remove language from Section 11 of the current Google Chrome terms of service. This change will apply retroactively to all users who have downloaded Google Chrome."
In addition to the perpetual copyright granted to Google in section 11, the license allowed the company to "make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to use such Content in connection with the provision of those services."
That language comes from Google's universal terms of service, the company said.
The wording lead to a copyright debate on Slashdot.org, although one poster noted that Slashdot's parent company, SourceForge, uses similar language in some license agreements. Florida lawyer David Loschiavo dissected the Google licensing agreement in his own blog post.
"In other words, by posting anything (via Chrome) to your blog(s), any forum, video site, myspace, itunes, or any other site that might happen to be supporting you, Google can use your work without paying you a dime," Loschiavo wrote."It applies to everything you pass through Chrome. Google can take your submitted content and edit and reuse it all they want, as long as they do so in connection with Chrome."
| NetworkWorld, Inc. | About Network World, Inc. | Advertise | Careers | Contact us | Terms of Service/Privacy | Reprints and links | Partnerships | Press room | Subscribe to NW |
| IDG, Inc. | CIO | Computerworld | CSO | Demo | GamePro | Games.net | IDGconnect.com | IDG World Expo | Infoworld | JavaWorld.com | LinuxWorld.com | MacUser | Macworld | PC World | Playlistmag.com | The Industry Standard | IDG List Services | IDG TechNetwork |
 The Leader in Network Knowledge© 1994-2008 Network World, Inc. All rights reserved. |
Partner Content
Brilliantly simple security and control solutions for email, web and endpoint
www.sophos.com
Stopping data leakage
Learn how to exploit your current security investment to control the information that flows into, through and out of your network.
Download the white paper.
Why detection rates aren't enough
Evaluating endpoint security products is a time-consuming and daunting task. Learn the six critical questions you need to ask prospective vendors to get the right endpoint solution.
Download the white paper.
Applications: taking back control
Employees installing unauthorized applications is a growing threat to business security and productivity. Cost-effectively reduce this threat by integrating control into your malware protection.
Learn more today.
Comments (3)
TOSBy Anonymous on September 9, 2008, 8:45 amHow many of us read the terms of agreement on most sites/products? Not sure what all I have agreed so far!!!
Reply | Read entire comment
ErmBy Anonymous on September 4, 2008, 2:48 pmWell, Microsft did just that with the terms of service for Hotmail a few years back, and as I recall were widely panned for it.
Reply | Read entire comment
Chrome licenseBy Anonymous on September 4, 2008, 9:05 amWow. Try to even imagine Microsoft claiming rights in documents written using word. In the universe where Spock has a goatee, maybe.
Reply | Read entire comment
View all comments