StarNow updated T&Cs

 

Tanzila said, 1715956024

I did skim through model management T&C’s, though I didn’t get much time so not sure if I missed anything but I think they could be a safer bet, and similiar to starnow, if anyone uses them?

Al7 said, 1716282851

I did email them through their website and asked if that clause was a mistake, I have since looked through their T&C’s again and I think they’re removed that clause, unless I’m mistaken and looked over it too fast.

If anyone else looks through them again can you confirm if I’m correct in thinking they have removed it!

GDSandy Photography said, 1716282963

Al7 said

I did email them through their website and asked if that clause was a mistake, I have since looked through their T&C’s again and I think they’re removed that clause, unless I’m mistaken and looked over it too fast.

If anyone else looks through them again can you confirm if I’m correct in thinking they have removed it!


I explained why I was leaving and they wrote back saying that they have now removed it.

Unfocussed Mike said, 1716284530

GDSandy Photography said

Al7 said

I did email them through their website and asked if that clause was a mistake, I have since looked through their T&C’s again and I think they’re removed that clause, unless I’m mistaken and looked over it too fast.

If anyone else looks through them again can you confirm if I’m correct in thinking they have removed it!


I explained why I was leaving and they wrote back saying that they have now removed it.

Heh. Though it's worth entertaining the idea that any sale it was going to enable might have already gone through in the three-day period in which the terms were in force.

Edited by Unfocussed Mike

GDSandy Photography said, 1716284601

Unfocussed Mike said

GDSandy Photography said

Al7 said

I did email them through their website and asked if that clause was a mistake, I have since looked through their T&C’s again and I think they’re removed that clause, unless I’m mistaken and looked over it too fast.

If anyone else looks through them again can you confirm if I’m correct in thinking they have removed it!


I explained why I was leaving and they wrote back saying that they have now removed it.

Heh. Though it's worth entertaining the idea that any sale it was going to enable might have already gone through in the three-day period in which the terms were in force.

Edited by Unfocussed Mike


They said not.

"We understand your concerns and have removed the terms in question. This clause was originally intended to allow our platforms to display user-provided content to make the platforms functional for the purpose of job applications and talent discovery. However, we acknowledge that it could be interpreted as granting permissions beyond our intent. We sincerely apologize for any worry this may have caused."

Allesandro B said, 1716284966

they have now removed the clause.

Unfocussed Mike said, 1716285432

GDSandy Photography said

Unfocussed Mike said

GDSandy Photography said

Al7 said

I did email them through their website and asked if that clause was a mistake, I have since looked through their T&C’s again and I think they’re removed that clause, unless I’m mistaken and looked over it too fast.

If anyone else looks through them again can you confirm if I’m correct in thinking they have removed it!


I explained why I was leaving and they wrote back saying that they have now removed it.

Heh. Though it's worth entertaining the idea that any sale it was going to enable might have already gone through in the three-day period in which the terms were in force.

Edited by Unfocussed Mike


They said not.

"We understand your concerns and have removed the terms in question. This clause was originally intended to allow our platforms to display user-provided content to make the platforms functional for the purpose of job applications and talent discovery. However, we acknowledge that it could be interpreted as granting permissions beyond our intent. We sincerely apologize for any worry this may have caused."

This looks a lot like they lied to you. Though it's exactly the lie we'd expect them to tell, right?

They in no way needed the right to sell the content without compensation to do that. They could have sublicensed the work for those specific purposes and enumerated them. 

They granted themselves the maximum possible scope. After all, Instagram functions with much less.



Edited by Unfocussed Mike