I guess for some reason I don't mind the kind of monetization that is making guesses at what might be relevant to me based on what I am writing/reading vs. taking my content, repackaging it at selling it.
To be clear I understand that wasn't Instagram's 'intent' but the ToS sounded a lot like that's exactly what they were doing.
The equivalent thing for gmail ads would be somehow lifting text directly from my email and using it as copy in an advertisement.
If google tried to do that then yes, the internet would be up in arms over it.
So I'm glad Instagram wasn't trying to use pictures I took as photo's in their advertisements but I read the associated bit of the ToS like 10x and I came to the conclusion that that must be what they were trying to do.
'Poorly worded' ToS indeed.
If the internet didn't have an uproar about this, then wouldn't the big company that's first concern is to make money, just go ahead and do that kind of thing? I mean if no one was saying 'hey, we have a problem with what this says' then doesn't any big company just take the path to the most money with the least resistance?
His point about knee jerk 'quitting' services is very valid. Seems like someone is quitting something every other day on the internet.
But I'm glad that this ToS change became a big deal, and I'm glad Instagram responded to it, and I'm glad it's been clarified that they wont' be using my pictures of cats and dogs and cocktails in advertisements without my permission or without compensation :D
sorry for the tl;dr