[Bad] CouchSurfing copyright license on user data is broader than necessary

Skip to first unread message

Michiel de Jong

Sep 24, 2012, 9:56:50 AM9/24/12
to to...@googlegroups.com
i haven't looked yet (on purpose), but i think this is the line that
people have been making a fuss about. i'm already looking forward to
checking later whether i got it right :) - also a nice sanity check of
my review...

it actually reads like a line from an absurdistic Monty Python sketch :)

"5.3 Member Content License. If you post Member Content to our
Services, you hereby grant us a perpetual, worldwide, irrevocable,
non-exclusive, royalty-free and fully sublicensable license to use,
reproduce, display, perform, adapt, modify, create derivative works
from, distribute, have distributed and promote such Member Content in
any form, in all media now known or hereinafter created and for any
purpose, including without limitation the right to use your name,
likeness, voice or identity."

Michiel de Jong

Sep 24, 2012, 11:10:16 AM9/24/12
to to...@googlegroups.com
yeah i think i got that right, see:
(in German)
(in German)

Nice they actually mention us as a grassroots forum that could help
raise awareness and exert pressure! :)

They say the copyright license is too broad, it would be illegal in
Germany as well as in the EU in general (but that doesn't matter
because they're in the US).

Zeit.de also got a reply from the CEO of CouchSurfing, in which he
says that the clause is necessary to combat fraud.


Oct 20, 2012, 8:42:24 AM10/20/12
to to...@googlegroups.com
The terms have slightly changed. Although there's no improvement, 5.3 has now become 4.3. Can you change this on the site?
"5.3 Member Content License" => "4.3 Member Content License"


Brian Erdelyi

Nov 2, 2012, 12:52:06 PM11/2/12
to to...@googlegroups.com
I agree that the clause appears unncessarily broad, however, what part of it would be illegal in Germany or Europe?
I suspect it's the "irrevoabilty" of the license?
Reply all
Reply to author
0 new messages