Slashdot Mirror
Dropbox Releases Revised TOS
vanstinator writes "Today Dropbox has released a revised Terms of Service agreement due to the controversy caused by their recent update. This new version clarifies their position on data ownership and makes it very clear that you, and only you, have a right to your data. This is welcome news to any serious Dropbox user."
On the downside, though, NorbMan writes that a company called FilesAnywhere.com is "suing Dropbox, Inc. for trademark infringement. The complaint alleges that FilesAnywhere has been using the term 'DROPBOX' since 2004 as part of its service, and that Dropbox, Inc. has also closely duplicated one of its logo designs."
Dropbox is a generic term which predates either of those companies and I've frequently heard network shares named or referred to as "dropbox" or "drop box."
Oh please, we had "dropboxes" on an Appletalk network around 1990.
On a Mac SE/30 server each user had public folders and folders labelled "$USERS's Dropbox". They were effectively write-only for all but the owner. The 'dropbox' term is something I adopted from an employer before that and I'm sure we weren't the only places to use the term.
Trolling is a art,
"FilesAnywhere has been using the term 'DROPBOX' since 2004 as part of its service"
"A dropbox is a secure container in a building's wall where items can be deposited."
Wow, I wonder where they got the idea to name it like that from. Using an existing word as a metaphor to your service should not be grounds for a lawsuit.
I don't care about their TOS, they can do whatever they want with my truecrypt volumes.
well .. i have never heard of filesanywhere until now.
dropbox.com has been growing by leaps and bounds even with the limited controversy over the TOS.
plus.. that stupid box they have doesn't look at all like the dropbox logo.
honestly .. i doubt the people at dropbox ever heard of this company either.
just jumping on the troll wagon like everyone else.
For being so clear in their TOS. The only legalize I saw ("your stuff" qualifier) actually made me chuckle a little bit. I wish more companies would take this route in drafting their legal copy.
I'm still using it. If somebody wishes to steal my programming homework or my course notes on statistical mechanics, go right ahead. My valuable stuff is either not on Dropbox or it's in a Truecrypt volume - good luck breaking into that.
All this goes to show is that common sense once more comes out the victor: assuming that any such FREE service is secure and full of goodwill is foolish. They might be, but would you really want to take the risk? Start by assuming anybody can peek at your data and go from there.
To be clear, aside from the rare exceptions we identify in our Privacy Policy, no matter how the Services change, we won’t share your content with others, including law enforcement, for any purpose unless you direct us to.
however their privacy agreement still says they will gladly decrypt and give your data to law enforcement
Compliance with Laws and Law Enforcement Requests; Protection of Dropbox's Rights. We may disclose to parties outside Dropbox files stored in your Dropbox and information about you that we collect when we have a good faith belief that disclosure is reasonably necessary to (a) comply with a law, regulation or compulsory legal request; (b) protect the safety of any person from death or serious bodily injury; (c) prevent fraud or abuse of Dropbox or its users; or (d) to protect Dropbox’s property rights. If we provide your Dropbox files to a law enforcement agency as set forth above, we will remove Dropbox’s encryption from the files before providing them to law enforcement. However, Dropbox will not be able to decrypt any files that you encrypted prior to storing them on Dropbox.
Security issues are minor unless you're stupid enough to store sensitive data unencrypted (in which case you deserve to have it comp[romised).
The TOS was never a problem with anyone who actually read it and has some semblance of an understanding of what it meant.
Troll harder next time.
Is there a legal reason that SOME PORTIONS OF A TOS/EULA/FINEPRINT ARE IN ALL CAPS? Like, are there laws that require them to make those portions all caps? Or is it just the lawyers screwing with us?
You're missing the important lesson: bitching works!
Let's bitch, bitch, BITCH until we change the whole bitchin' world!
Despite claiming to have used the term Dropbox since August 4th 2004, Officeware didn't file for a trademark until April 12, 2010, some seven months *after* Dropbox filed for their trademark, and nearly 20 months after Dropbox first launched their service. Heck, Dropbox even owned the dropbox.com domain six months before Officeware bothered to file for the trademark. Seems to me that if, even once you own it, you still have to proactively protect your trademark to be allowed to keep it, the law's not likely to look favorably on a company that hadn't even bothered to attempt to get a trademark in the first place.
IANAL, but it doesn't look to me like they have a leg to stand on.
Maybe I've been under the yoke of HIPAA too long but if you have sensitive information why are you trusting a third party with it?
I find being offended by me offensive.
If it is used to identify a company or product, it's a trademark.
Unless its a generic term. Then you might still also use it as part of your company or product name, but don't come back whining if some other entity use it too.
Example: App. "App" has been used as an abbreviation for "Application" since ages. The word "Store" has been used to describe stores for ages. Apple is free to call their app store "App Store", but they shouldn't be whining when other people call applications "Apps" too. (See the recent controversy mentioned here)
GP is saying that "dropbox" is in the same way a generic term in the storage world. It's simply a generic term to describe a secured storage.
- Therefore FilesAnywhere can't claim trademark on it (in exactly the same way they can't claim a trademark over the word "File" neither).
- Therefore Dropbox can call themselves that way, but they shouldn't get surprised if anyone else get to call their own product "Dropbox" too.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
The privacy concerns might not be addressed to everyone's satisfaction, but the usage-rights problems have been addressed, at least to mine.
There are some very substantial and specific changes in this "patch" to their recent TOS update. The original version essentially claimed publishing rights, to be used at their discretion. Not that they actually intended to do that; it was just really badly written. I pointed out some of the legal problems in e-mails to them, and they appear to have fixed the worst of them.
This new version removes the overly broad rights-claims, and adds a key limitation to their copying and publishing rights: "unless you direct us to", a phrase I suggested was necessary to making the TOS acceptable to me as a continuing customer. Essentially, this was customers (including one with only a self-educated understanding of the law) proofreading the work of not-terribly-insightful professionals.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
They aren't hiding their terms, and the terms aren't unreasonable. If you want something stored safely and privately... store it safely and privately. Drive space is cheap. If you want convenience in the public space, put a lock on your stuff if it's important.
To me this is like complaining that your bicycle isn't safe when you leave it on your front lawn. If you want it truly safe, keep it in your garage. If you want it to stay outside, put a lock on it.
Personally, I really don't think some nefarious hacker is out to blackmail me by sifting through pictures of my dog in my free dropbox account.
that and the fact that the domain name was created in '95...
Domain Name: DROPBOX.COM
Created on: 27-Jun-95
I just wish all these *trolls would die in a horrific way such as getting "lemon"-ed to death. (aka...instead of using stones as in stoning...use lemons)
eggs might work too
I use dropbox quite a lot, and have built up the free account to over 6 gb. I use it as "safe" storage for all my important smallish files.
All this hoo-ha is unsettling, so I looked for alternatives. Sugarsync starts you off with 5 GB free and also has referrals. They are slightly different than DB but you can use it the same way. I'm not affiliated with them, but they seem worth a look... You can sign up here:
https://www.sugarsync.com/referral?rf=edddx6ednsb88
Yeah, that's a referral link, lol. Seriously, if DB is making you nervous I think sugar sync might be the next best thing, if not better.
Flappinbooger isn't my real name
You mean like Apple Corps v Apple?
The market where it happens is important. In the Apples' case, back when it started they were different companies operating in separate markets using names which have nothing directly to do with what they are.
An apple is a dictionary word, but it's a *fruit*.
Apple Corps has always been selling music. (Nothing to do with the fruit, they could the name for their company).
Back then Apple Computer was selling computers, i.e.: a completely different market, and could not get confused with Apple Corps (you couldn't accuse them of trying to ride the "Apple" hype).
Of course, now that *both* companies are selling music, it starts to get complicated. "I bought a song from Apple" is not unambiguous anymore.
Notice, however that their name contains an element - "Computer" - which is simply a description of their activity. They can't claim trademark on this part. If some other computer shop decide to name themselves "Strawberry Computer", Apple can't sue them complaining that both look too much alike because of the "Computer" part : It's just a generic term describing what they do.
I don't think there's any specific restriction against using "generic" words in a trademark to identify your company, else every company would have to have made-up words as their names. (that said, IANAL)
You can use whatever word you want for your company. *BUT* you have to make sure that the name is specifically recognizable to be able to enforce the trademark. If you simply use a description of what you do as a name, that's not enforceable. You can't sue other persons using the same words, these words are just the accepted dictionary words to describe your work.
That's also why a company must prevent the words from becoming generic, they are obliged to avoid diluting the brand name. Otherwise the word ends up being considered generic. It's "Fight for it or lose it".
Also, pure number aren't trademarkable neither. That's why Intel started naming their processor "Pentium". Up until then they used numbers (like Intel 486) and nothing prevents other company calling their product with same numbers (AMD and Cyrix called their compatible clones with the same numbers as Intel).
Regarding the current subjet : If you sell services for renting a (virtual) dropbox, you can call it "DROPBOX" if you want, but don't come crying if other companies call their dropboxes "Dropbox" too.
The only exception in this situation is that words like "dropbox", "locker", "safe" and all the other words that describe such services, normally are names for *physical* storages. FilesAnywhere might argue that, at the time they started using this name, the words were for physical storage and the trademark is original because it metaphorically applies to a different concept (*virtual* storage). But even then, due to the "fight for it or lose it" nature of trademarks, they should have actively worked to prevent "dropbox" being used for virtual dropboxes too. (as a counter-example: see how Google is trying to prevent "to google" to become a generic verb for "searching on-line". FilesAnywhere should have done the same)
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
This, exactly.
I don't have much important ("secret") data anywhere, at all, and that which I do have is reasonably well-encrypted on Dropbox. It's just fine there.
I worry more about losing my wallet than losing my stuff on Dropbox and I'm not losing any sleep over that possibility, either.
Everything else? Meh. If you want to read the results of my own little personal research projects, or awe at my collection of strange Windows and MS-DOS tools that I find indispensable (but which accomplish things that I find unnecessary under *nix), or my collection of PDF hardware manuals, or my shopping list, or my miniscule collection of self-recorded MP3s, go for it.
I just don't care. For my purposes, I strongly prefer this data to be widely available wherever I am, using whatever device I happen to have available, instead of hidden behind the specifics and complexities of a Truecrypt volume.
Meanwhile, Dropbox is not free, except as an advertising pitch (see, for example, my own .sig). Their goal is to produce actual sales of large(ish) quantities of online storage, and "giving away" small amounts of storage to anyone who asks is nothing but a marketing tactic to increase visibility.
To be clear, I'm perfectly OK with the concept. But let's call a spade a space, shall we?
Kid-proof tablet..
I don't trust DropBox with my sensitive documents anymore, therefor I've started using BoxCryptor AES256 to encrypt. I'm sure they have previous copies due to their versioning system, but hopefully over time the unencrypted versions will fade. It would be nice to see two factor authentication or some type of key authentication system like SSH. I scan everything into my DropBox and Evernote... and them breaking their own authentication scheme for over 4 hours was the straw that broke the camels back.
Glad they kept things in nice simple words for hysterical paranoid slashdotters and the like.