Facebook is Right to Ban Lindsay Lohan

Kudos to Facebook on banning Lindsay Lohan for using a fake name. Lohan had been posting as “Lindsay Ronson”, using the surname of her girlfriend Samantha Ronson. Facebook requires users to post with their real names. Lohan is now whining about the ban on the world’s second biggest social network, MySpace. This is brilliant move […]

Facebook is Right to Ban Lindsay Lohan

Like This Post:

Share This Post:
Post to Twitter Tweet This Post
Post to Facebook Share on Facebook
Post to StumbleUpon Stumble This Post
Post to Reddit Post to Reddit

Comments

4 Comments (with 1 Conversation) on “Facebook is Right to Ban Lindsay Lohan”
  1. SG says:

    #1- her pseudonym on facebook was Bella Vita

    #2- the just re-activated her account so it’s back up and running

  2. ANNA says:

    The more I think about this, the more I understand why Lindsey was angry. In the early internet days it was Common Practice to use a nick name/alias for a variety of reasons – i.e. predators. With people like Lohan it should be understood why she feels the need to mask her identity. I have never had any other program try to Force Real Names and I have been on the net for almost 15yrs. Also, what about younger people. The police will even tell kids it is preferable not to use your real name.

    FaceCrap is really starting to piss me off. To have your account closed at any given time (without warning) or verification seems like just random selection/guessing. There is also the issue of FB being able to use your photos/poems/etc while posted. hmmm. Now with that said, what if they randomly shut down your account like they did with Lohan without warning before you get a chance to remove your photos/poems/etc. So, does that mean they get to use them indefinitely whenever they want because you are no longer able to extract them?

    • Mike Abundo says:

      So, does that mean they get to use them indefinitely whenever they want because you are no longer able to extract them?

      Here’s what Facebook’s terms of use say about content you post on their site:

      When you post User Content to the Site, you authorize and direct us to make such copies thereof as we deem necessary in order to facilitate the posting and storage of the User Content on the Site. By posting User Content to any part of the Site, you automatically grant, and you represent and warrant that you have the right to grant, to the Company an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, publicly perform, publicly display, reformat, translate, excerpt (in whole or in part) and distribute such User Content for any purpose, commercial, advertising, or otherwise, on or in connection with the Site or the promotion thereof, to prepare derivative works of, or incorporate into other works, such User Content, and to grant and authorize sublicenses of the foregoing. You may remove your User Content from the Site at any time. If you choose to remove your User Content, the license granted above will automatically expire, however you acknowledge that the Company may retain archived copies of your User Content.

      In other words, yes, they get to use it unless you remove it. That’s why I don’t post anything on Facebook that I don’t feel comfortable with them using.

Post a Comment