Google Drive

[BalkanWarrior]

Originally Posted by Silent Remorse

Are you kidding? Google has a reach Dropbox would kill for, and they already have millions of accounts, many of which with active Google Wallets ready and waiting for storage subscriptions.

Additionally, Google has always focused on web interfaces, not app functionality, and Drive is no different - I expect they will improve on the traditional Docs interface over time.

Did I talk about reach? No. I was talking about the functionality of their product. Right now Dropbox is better than Google Drive. I don't understand how you could miss that point, seeing as it was the only one I made.

[Silent Remorse]

Originally Posted by BalkanWarrior

Did I talk about reach? No. I was talking about the functionality of their product. Right now Dropbox is better than Google Drive. I don't understand how you could miss that point, seeing as it was the only one I made.

Your point was ambiguous, it could have been taken in a variety of ways.

I also mentioned client/web functionality in the same post, don't get so defensive.

[mtma]

Originally Posted by ewok85

Which part specifically? Google famously changed to a single "Terms of Service" in March and it hasn't changed for Drive.

It is fairly simple:



In order to index and make your stuff searchable, and to be able to host it and move it around (ie. if you add photos to picasa make them available in plus or accessible from Gmail) they need this:



Remember the first part - you retain ownership of any IP rights. All of the rest is just covering their arse because of the way they work by using content to improve services.

I was just going over this again, and it seems that this line of thinking is optimistic.

Your retain ownership rights to your data HOWEVER:

by uploading data to Google or one of its services, you have granted to google a perpetual, royalty free, non-terminating licence to manipulate and redistribute your submitted property in the capacity equivalent to your IP rights; with the exception of the right to transfer title of the content.

The line about ownership is the candy to get you into the van, it's inside the van where it gets nasty.

In this sense the current policies of Dropbox and Skydrive are favourable in comparison as (a) the rights terminate with your termination of the service; and (b) the rights are granted for the explicitly limited purpose of providing the service.

[ewok85]

I'm getting rather sick of the TOS debate - lets break it down:

First off they have a single TOS for all services in all countries, so the language used has to cover all of the features in all of their existing services - adsense, adwords, docs, youtube, plus, talk, voice, picasa, gmail, play, maps, news, translate, goggles, blogger, wallet and of course, search.

That is alot of very different products to have under one TOS.

http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/terms/

Last modified: March 1, 2012

First off, the TOS has not changed since March 2012 - no special changes, additions or subtractions were made for Drive. You can see their previous TOS from 2007 here: http://www.google.com/intl/en/polici...hive/20070416/

Some of our Services allow you to submit content. You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours.

Fairly simple - you retain ownership of content.

Using our Services does not give you ownership of any intellectual property rights in our Services or the content you access. You may not use content from our Services unless you obtain permission from its owner or are otherwise permitted by law.

This is very important although the wording is backwards but clear - access to content is only done with the permission of the content owner.

When you upload or otherwise submit content to our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This license continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing you have added to Google Maps). Some Services may offer you ways to access and remove content that has been provided to that Service. Also, in some of our Services, there are terms or settings that narrow the scope of our use of the content submitted in those Services. Make sure you have the necessary rights to grant us this license for any content that you submit to our Services.

And then this part. Many of the terms here apply to Google Drive -

use, host, store, reproduce - basics to store it on their servers, move it over their networks, etc

modify, create derivative works - depending on your settings, Google Drive will modify files like documents to convert them to Google Docs formats, or change videos so they can be viewed in the web interface

communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute - Much of this can apply to the sharing settings of Google Drive when you choose to have a file shared as "Public".

None of that is particularly insidious, and it isn't surprising that such wording isn't available with Dropbox or SkyDrive because the TOS for both don't need to cover anywhere near the same range of services and features. Last I checked Dropbox does not have a way to display a file on their web interface - yes, you can access things, but it isn't like Google where if you access a PDF Google Docs provides the entire engine to display that PDF.

If you can show me even one case of Google abusing the IP rights of user content where the user has not permitted Google use of that IP I would be impressed. Remember that not in all cases do you have any actual right or control over the content you submit to Google - their example of a business listing in Google Maps is a good one.

[Darmok]

Has anyone been able to get Dropbox/SkyDrive/GDrive to all point to the same local folder?

I want to sync them all together, and watch them battle it out!

RB

[scorpydude]

No proxy support, how retarded.

[newgen]

Originally Posted by ewok85

I'm getting rather sick of the TOS debate - lets break it down:

Getting sick of what? Of people being cautious and trying to understand the legal mumbo jumbo before they use the service? They have every right to be concerned and cautious.. Google have overstepped the line a couple of times in the past (that we know of), who knows what they do with our personal data that we're not aware of?

Just because you're easily pleased with those vague lines covering content use etc.. doesn't mean everyone else will be. To be honest I don't think any IT bod in their right mind would use this for business use with the lack of info there, I'm cautious of it even for personal use.

[ewok85]

Originally Posted by scorpydude

No proxy support, how retarded.

Haven't tested it, but would it go through the proxy settings set in IE?

Originally Posted by newgen

Getting sick of what? Of people being cautious and trying to understand the legal mumbo jumbo before they use the service?

You mean the exact same TOS they have had for 2 months now, which were highly advertised well in advance of becoming active and not all that different to their previous TOS?

Google have overstepped the line a couple of times in the past (that we know of)

When?

[scorpydude]

Originally Posted by ewok85

Haven't tested it, but would it go through the proxy settings set in IE?

You would think so eh, but no. Apparently proxy routing is too difficult for google to manage on product beta-launch.

[newgen]

Originally Posted by ewok85

You mean the exact same TOS they have had for 2 months now, which were highly advertised well in advance of becoming active and not all that different to their previous TOS?

When?

You're assuming that everyone looking at Drive uses Google's apps already and have read and are familiar with their TOS.

When? Google Buzz ring a bell? How about the data they gathered with their Google vans? Tracking in the Safari browser on iPhones...?

A search for Google Lawsuits returns 32.7 million results.. go get some popcorn. You're talking about a company that makes a shitload of money from user data.. the sheer amount of lawsuits filed against them (whether they're guilty or not) should act as a slight deterent for anyone concerned over privacy.

[ewok85]

Originally Posted by newgen

You're assuming that everyone looking at Drive uses Google's apps already and have read and are familiar with their TOS.

Uh, anyone who wants to use Drive is asked to read and agree to the TOS, any new users are told to read and agree to the TOS, and existing users were told repeatedly when they logged into Google services the TOS was changing.

What more do you want? If people are too lazy to read the TOS, and hit agree anyway, they are still agreeing.

When? Google Buzz ring a bell? How about the data they gathered with their Google vans? Tracking in the Safari browser on iPhones...?

The problem with Google Buzz was that the default privacy options showed your recent contacts - stupid as a default setting, but the option to change this was there.

The legality of the Google streetview vans is different per country, but its legal in Australia.

And if you think the safari tracking was over the line you are really grasping for reasons.

A search for Google Lawsuits returns 32.7 million results.. go get some popcorn. You're talking about a company that makes a shitload of money from user data.. the sheer amount of lawsuits filed against them (whether they're guilty or not) should act as a slight deterent for anyone concerned over privacy.

Have you even looked at half of the lawsuits? A vast, vast majority are suits against google by people who feel Google's index and search results bring up content that puts them in a bad light, or it is IP owners who are unhappy that you can Google search details to get their IP without payment. Bing/Yahoo have the exact same lawsuits.

[newgen]

Originally Posted by ewok85

Uh, anyone who wants to use Drive is asked to read and agree to the TOS, any new users are told to read and agree to the TOS, and existing users were told repeatedly when they logged into Google services the TOS was changing.

What more do you want? If people are too lazy to read the TOS, and hit agree anyway, they are still agreeing.

I think you're missing the point here. My point was that people are allowed to question the TOS and be cautious about it, which they should be. At the end of the day it is very vaguely worded, isn't very detailed at all, and gives them the right to use YOUR data in whatever way fits in their vague TOS covering content usage, and use it free of charge.

If you were the decision maker for a large enterprise looking for a tool like Drive would the TOS concern you? Or if you were a creative person, would you store your works on Drive?

[ewok85]

Originally Posted by newgen

If you were the decision maker for a large enterprise looking for a tool like Drive would the TOS concern you? Or if you were a creative person, would you store your works on Drive?

I'd have no issue at all and I do infact have a significant amount of personal and company data on Google Drive right now - the TOS clearly states that they require my permission to use the content - simply having it on one of their services does not give them permission.

[newgen]

Originally Posted by ewok85

I'd have no issue at all and I do infact have a significant amount of personal and company data on Google Drive right now - the TOS clearly states that they require my permission to use the content - simply having it on one of their services does not give them permission.

That's where I think you're wrong..

"When you upload or otherwise submit content to our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones."

Translates to... as soon as your data hits Drive they can use it, and with the purposes they've listed, I don't think they're too limited on what they can use it for.

[ewok85]

Originally Posted by newgen

I don't think they're too limited on what they can use it for.

The fact that I retain all IP rights means that I still have full control on who has permission to access and view my content. If I set the sharing permissions for my content so that no one but myself is allowed to view it, then by the TOS no one else will be able to view it (the only way to access the content would be by logging in with my own account), and Google's access to that content will only be that as needed to provide the service (which includes a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works, communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute).

Relevant sections of the TOS listed in my post above.