Matterport Ecosystem>Deleted Models Deleted?6405
Pages:
1
 WGAN ForumFounder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
    Hi All, In light of the Matterport Ecosystem announcement yesterday (Wednesday, 21 February 2018), I wonder if delete really means delete? For clarification, I just deleted a model via Matterport Cloud Workshop (see above). The warning message I get just before deleting is: "Are you sure you want to delete this Space? This cannot be undone." I then selected Delete. I reasonable person might conclude that the model is deleted: meaning it will never, ever show up again anywhere in any use - ever. That said, in light of the dystopian world created by Matterport in its announcement of its Ecoystem (that does [b]not gives me the option to opt-out nor compensates me[/b]), I wonder if delete means that I can not retrieve the model, but Matterport can and will use it (without my permission). In this Matterport Ecosystem FAQ, Matterport says: --- [Q:] Who owns the copyright for a Matterport Space? [A:] Copyright ownership is not changing. Copyright for any Matterport Space is automatically assigned to the account holder that the Space is uploaded into. Matterport does not hold the copyright to 3D content created by its customers, but it does retain a license to use the data in limited ways, such as for processing and hosting, and for use by approved third-party partners. --- I could imagine that the keywords here are - "Space" and "Data" - and Matterport considers derivative works not "Space" BUT "Matterport" does retain a license to use the [b]data in limited ways, such as for processing and hosting, and for use by approved third-party partners.[/b] Matterport has some explaining to do. Does Delete mean Delete? What are your thoughts? Best, Dan |
||
| Post 1 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Forum Founder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Hi All, I could imagine that many of us have been deleting Matterport Spaces (via Matterport Cloud Workshop) so that we do not go over our hosting limit. I wonder if Matterport has saved all these models, even though we thought we had deleted them. In writing about The Matterport Ecosystem, Matterport CEO Bill Brown writes: --- "Matterport as we’ve recently crossed several key milestones, with over 800,000 spaces captured and more than 330,000,000 visitors to those spaces since we launched our system in June 2014. We couldn’t have reached this point without you, so I wanted to say thank you!" --- Does Delete mean Delete? Or, Zombie-like What are your thoughts? Dan |
||
| Post 2 • IP flag post | ||
|
Crucial_3d private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I would first remove any Matter Tags then wait long enough for the back up servers to pick up those changes before deleting the space, maybe 72 hours just to be sure. Even as an amateur photographer I have been very protective of my intellectual property rights. One has to wonder just how much data they are willing to warehouse. | ||
| Post 3 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Forum Founder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Hi All, From my post a year ago: (see text in bold) ---- And, this ... While I know that Matterport reads every word of the We Get Around Forum, it’s unlikely that they will respond to these three questions: 1. Do you plan to offer an API that uses “our” content without compensation to us? 2. What are you planning to do with “our” content? 3. If we delete a Matterport Space, do you really delete it? Or, do you still keep it? (And, reserving the right to use it? |
||
| Post 4 • IP flag post | ||
|
Dana Point, CA |
RPOceanic private msg quote post Address this user | |
| "Possession is 9/10s of the law." | ||
| Post 5 • IP flag post | ||
Orange, California |
craigsauer private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Something I wrote on a Facebook MOUG thread: Is it really legal for the new TOS to apply to scans that were deleted prior to the announcement of the new TOS? I'm one of those MSPs who deleted almost a hundred scans over the last couple months at Matterport's directive to avoid paying for account overages. (Which was totally fair. They'd been letting me get away with account overages for a long time, but the policy was always clear and fair.) But my reading of the TOS and subsequent clarifications, is that the TOS probably applies retroactively even to scans that were deleted prior to the announcement of the new TOS. (And though it was fair to decide to finally start charging for hosting overages, it is ridiculous that they reversed course a couple months later and decided that residential scans more than 12 months old don't count toward account overages. Only a few clients paid me to keep hosting older scans. Should I refund their money since I won't be charged for hosting their scans anymore? I'm definitely waiting for the dust to die down on the new situation before doing anything, but it's an embarrassing mess that Matterport seems to be throwing out new policies without doing basic due diligence on them.) |
||
| Post 6 • IP flag post | ||
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
Quote:Originally Posted by craigsauer Craig, I know that they can undelete models within a certain time frame -- it's just simply how redundancy works with cloud hosting. As you now have until June 2018 before overages kick in and there's a fuzzy thing that I want clarified (when models start to not count -- is it when they are 12 months old AND in the ecosystem -- or is it when they have been in the ecosystem for 12 months, and if so when does the clock start? Confusing.) Would you want to restore these if they didn't affect your hosting count? Quote: Originally Posted by craigsauer Were you ever really paying for the hosting? I found that every month I utilized the subsidized scans leaving my effective hosting burden as $0.00. |
||
| Post 7 • IP flag post | ||
|
Orange, California |
craigsauer private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @metroplex360 I'm considering asking Matterport to restore the deleted scans, though in all fairness, they weren't serving any great purpose for me, and in light of all the privacy concerns that have come forward, I probably need to create and implement a policy about when to delete or at least "unpublic" older scans. I never felt the need to impose an ongoing hosting fee prior to that announcement, and really only did it as a way to pressure my clients to make a decision about whether to keep or get rid of those older scans. I see what you are saying about the effective hosting fee being $0 as long as you are actively creating new scans every month. But the policy I was reacting to was going to charge me (I think) an extra $20/month for each 50 extra scans over my allowed total. And I was a hundred over, so I was looking for a way to make up $240 extra dollars a year. I asked my clients to pay $50/year for continued hosting, which is definitely high when each model's share of that $240 would have been only $2.40! (But I only got about 4 takers.) Craig |
||
| Post 8 • IP flag post | ||
 WGAN StandardMember Las Vegas |
VTLV private msg quote post Address this user | |
| I believe their tally of 800,000 scans would need to include deleted scans backed up somewhere. | ||
| Post 9 • IP flag post | ||
|
Frisco, Texas |
Metroplex360 private msg quote post Address this user | |
| @craigsauer - It might be a good idea to contact them to see if they can restore them in the case that the revised version of the ecosystem might be a win-win for you and them with these models. https://www.wegetaroundnetwork.com/topic/6479/announcement-terms-of-service-rollback/ |
||
| Post 10 • IP flag post | ||
|
WGAN Forum Founder & WGAN-TV Podcast Host Atlanta, Georgia |
DanSmigrod private msg quote post Address this user | |
| Hi All, A related WGAN Forum discussion: ✓ Dear Matterport: About Your Pricing Plans Best, Dan |
||
| Post 11 • IP flag post | ||
Pages:
1This topic is archived. Start new topic?