Since this backlash, Chief Executive Kevin Systrom has written a blog post admitting that some of the terms need to be modified, so users understand the implications of using the photography application Instagram.
It was believed that the changes to the terms and conditions would mean pictures could be used in advertising, with all profits going to the social media giant, with no consent or recognition to the photographer.
In his blog post declaration titled Thank you and we’re listening, Systrom stated: “The language we proposed also raised questions about whether your photos can be part of an advertisement. We do not have plans for anything like this, and because of that, we’re going to remove the language that raised the question.”
Instagram founders’ moves to attempt to launch innovating advertising ventures, in order for the company to sustain itself, has, it would appear, backfired and caused great anxiety within the Instagram photo-sharing community.
The defence was directed towards the misleading language of the clause, which was misunderstood and sparked outrage amongst users.
“Legal documents are easy to misinterpret,” claimed Systrom and continued to say that when users set their photo settings to private, this won’t be breached under these new terms. He added that it is not Intagram’s incentive to own users’ photos.
The initial changes in terms and conditions were not to be taken immediately but after 30 days, giving ample time for users to raise any concerns and address any clauses that may need to be amended.