PDA

View Full Version : PayPal taking over creative rights?



Davewriter
04-27-2015, 07:05 PM
I always start off with a grain of salt with items like this.
Doesn't seem as if it would ever hold up against court challenges.
But then I'm not a Digital Rights lawyer.
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/bitcoin-future-paypal-changes-terms-service-take-content/

04-28-2015, 04:20 AM
If you host your own space, this doesn't apply. It's when you use their services to show and then sell that this all kicks in.
On their space, I would think they have such broad rights. I mean, if you put a bunch of stuff on their harddrives, don't they have some kind of ownership, anyway?

I see this as being about free services and those who wish to take advantage of such free services to make a serious dollar.

Seems a valid statement of fact than something more ominous.

Ryan Roye
04-28-2015, 05:28 AM
I wasn't even aware you could even do anything other than banking-related stuff on PayPal...

Davewriter
04-28-2015, 08:51 AM
From the way I was reading, it seemed that if you used PayPal to allow buyers to access and purchase from your website, that you were also allowing PayPal the eternal use of your Creative Properties.
But then I'm usually heavily medicated :)

Amurrell
04-28-2015, 09:11 AM
Plus the term "non-exclusive" was used, which means that PayPal does not have exclusive rights, plus they can exercise any of your rights attached to the works against others, but you can't do the same to them if you are using their services. And by agreeing to the terms, you basically are saying that using PayPal's services, and having them function in this way, is not an infringement on your intellectual property. It's kind of double sided.

spherical
04-29-2015, 03:07 AM
The key word to pay attention to in the clause is "exercise". They are not "taking your content", as the writer of that article so inflammatorily postulates. In order for PayPal, or any other entity (Facebook, Google+, Instagram, [insert content distributor here]) to be able to distribute content, they must be granted rights to do so. This is "exercising" on behalf of the individual providing the content for them to distribute. There was a suit some time back, where an individual tried to collect cash on the grounds of infringement, when they had knowingly provided the content in question on a public site. This clause, and ones like it, serve to close that door, so that the distribution entity can do what is asked, without having to fend off frivolous claims.