This verbage is in their new "Terms of Service" Contract. Anyone have any insights here?
"You retain your rights to any Content you submit, post or display on or through the Services. What’s yours is yours — you own your Content (and your incorporated audio, photos and videos are considered part of the Content).
By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through the Services, you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute such Content in any and all media or distribution methods now known or later developed (for clarity, these rights include, for example, curating, transforming, and translating). This license authorizes us to make your Content available to the rest of the world and to let others do the same. You agree that this license includes the right for us to provide, promote, and improve the Services and to make Content submitted to or through the Services available to other companies, organizations or individuals for the syndication, broadcast, distribution, repost, promotion or publication of such Content on other media and services, subject to our terms and conditions for such Content use. Such additional uses by us, or other companies, organizations or individuals, is made with no compensation paid to you with respect to the Content that you submit, post, transmit or otherwise make available through the Services as the use of the Services by you is hereby agreed as being sufficient compensation for the Content and grant of rights herein. "
With the quantity of material posted on X I can't imagine how copyright controls for most of it can even be considered. The whole world sees it. The responsibility to protect one's own material has to be "do I put my material on WW social media and potentially lose control of it and have to sue someone half way around the planet, or not?" Formal registration of a copyright does not really protect either. A very famous person I illustrated a book for used to legally fight infringement. Many times. He finally said fuck it. Too time consuming and expensive. And the infringers know this. And in another instance a copyright-marked artwork of mine I saw being sold in China. Anybody ask me first?? Of course not.
IANAL; however, I don't see anything in that legalese that is problematic, assuming you do not plan on asserting ownership/control over the shitposts you shitpost on X.
If you are posting original content onto X that you wish to monetize, maybe X ain't for you. Go to Substack/Medium/Podcasting.
It’s nothing exciting. It just says you allow X to post your messages, and they won’t pay you compensation for the use of your content. It’s a social media platform, of course you want them to post your messages, that’s the point.
I think depends what your goal is. If you're just trying to communicate and share with others, I don't see how that is a problem. If you are posting things you hope to monetize, then I think there is some danger here. Post a sample of your music? You may very well find some AI has re-sampled you into an adapted work.
Just realize what scary things they might be able to do with what you give them. For example an AI can analyze your writing style and potentially identify you based on things you have put online elsewhere.
Well actually... indeed, there's not many (if any) guardrails in their statement. No bounderies what so ever.
I've been in Twitter Jail for a while. They just allowed me back on... and this agreement popped up.