The scandal about Facebook changing its privacy terms ended up in mystery. The social network attempted to modify the contract it had with its millions of users, but none of them seemed to have truly been affected by the decision. In spite of all the protests and threatening toward Facebook, no user closed his accounts.
Facebook announced at the beginning of February 2009 that it’s changing the section on the site which establishes the legal agreement between the Web site and its users. None of the users had received a personal e-mail or message letting them know about this.
This practice is likely to be used on many Web sites, where also contracts are agreed by a simple mouse click. In addition, the sites adopt the contracts that contain a clause which specifies that you must accept the changes unless you want to have your account suspended.
These kinds of contracts aren’t the ones you know they make inside the Parliament. The laws that the state has to approve pass through a lot of difficult time until they are legalized. At first, these laws have to be properly chosen for the ones affected, but the contracts circulating over the Internet database can be changed with no consideration and no proper notice.
Facebook’s issue was that the new contract somehow clarified what happens to the things you upload on the site. Things like photographs, videos, links or simply the messages you share with others were specified in the new terms of service. What really made the users angry was the part where they had read that all those things above are being kept by Facebook even if a user closes his account. The users felt aggressed by the contract as the social network specified other things, like "prohibited conduct", "gift credits" and "user disputes.”
In spite of the legalese language used in the terms of agreement, the users quickly started to understand and translate it so that everybody could see what it all about. Facebook’s intensions were obviously the ones that it can anything with any kind of information you post, even if you try to delete your account. In addition, it didn’t mention anything about not using that certain information against you whenever they need.
Facebook’s legal team spent a lot of time trying to assure the people that the kind of information the site refers to and the material that belongs to other people is safe and completely legal from being brought up in court. Thus, there is no sign of claimed ownership of any of the materials, even if these remain on the server.
Mark Zuckerberg, the founder and owner of Facebook, posted an explanation on its blog, through which he had tried to calm down all the angry users. He wrote that when a person sends something, like a message, to another person, there are two copies of the same message instantly created, one in your outbox and one in the friend’s inbox. He further explained that who could really use the information against you is exactly the friend you had sent the message to, even if you delete your account.
