You’ve seen it pop up numerous times in your Facebook feed: A status implying that the social networking site is using photos without consent. The status update is supposed to revoke Facebook’s permission to do so.
According to ABC News, it’s something like:
In response to the new Facebook guidelines, I hereby declare that my copyright is attached to all of my personal details, illustrations, comics, paintings, professional photos and videos, etc. (as a result of the Berner Convention). For commercial use of the above my written consent is needed at all times!
WFSB notes a different but similar version:
I do not give Facebook or any entities associated with Facebook permission to use my pictures, information, or posts, both past and future. By this statement, I give notice to Facebook that it is strictly forbidden to disclose, copy, distribute or take any other action against me based on this profile and/or its contents…The violation of privacy can be punished by law (UCC 1-308-1 1 308-103 and the Rome Statute).
Regardless of their exact content, viral statuses like these have been around for years despite the fact that Facebook doesn’t own user photos. You control how your content is shared through privacy settings. In this case, the “Berner Convention” is non-existent, and UCC 1-308-1 1 308-103 and the Rome Statute are unrelated to social networking and privacy.
The most frustrating part of these posts, is that a status update can’t negate a privacy agreement anyway. When you create an account you agree to certain terms of service. So if you worry about Facebook’s access to your information, the best thing to do would be to quit Facebook altogether (although some rights you may never get back).
I hereby announce that all comments I post at TPM are copyright me and TPM must pay me $500 per post because I said so. The Fluffernutter Protocols of 1637 state that writing Fluffernutter three times in a unilateral contract ratifies it and makes it binding on all parties.
Fluffernutter.
Are you sure they’re not simply misspelling the Berne Convention, which does in fact exist and covers copyrights of one’s works? (and Fair Use of works)
This is just another example of “magical thinking” - if I just regurgitate these magic phrases, I can bend reality to suit me.
It’s like the tax protesters who think that if they write some legal nonsense on their empty 1040’s, the IRS will be struck powerless, and they’ll never have to pay taxes. Or the sovereign citizens who think that if they spell their names with a full colon, they’re going to be able to extract millions from the government.
It’s an attitude that’s born out of a sense of powerlessness, coupled with the notion that some people, those who have mastered the incantations, have figured out how to get better treatment from life.
I think they mean the Burner convention.
What’s Facebook?
Is that where, instead of palming your own face, you throw a book at the face of the person who made you want to face palm?