she gave google the valuable rights to monitor her activity, in exchange for access to some pretty shitty web services which come with no customer support.
it was probably a bad deal for her, but there isn’t a lot of competition, there’s a lot of pressure for people to undervalue the rights they’re paying with, and it’s hard to compare how much of those rights are at stake between different companies without the assistance of a lawyer - so it’s understandable that so she and so many people fall for it.
Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 4 months ago
I think you’re missing the point here, which is that you don’t even own the content you’ve created yourself when you use one of the corporate platforms.
IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world 4 months ago
In what way has Google taken ownership rights?
Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Google has restricted what people can do with their content, i.e. their ownership rights.
IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world 4 months ago
That’s not how that works, and if you can point out what law says that speech may be posted on any platform regardless of terms of service I’d love to see that. Is it your position that if Twitter or a lemmy mod blocks content that this is an infringement of my rights?
yildolw@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Google is forbidding the author from the right to make copies of their own work (aka copy-right)
IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world 3 months ago
No they aren’t. They have access, they can copy into whatever they desire.
qwestjest78@lemmy.ca 4 months ago
IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world 4 months ago
No. She has not. I encourage you to make it beyond the title.