Free 1Tb online storage

No affiliation and no experience but looks interesting:

http://www.oosah.com/

Yes but anything you post you give them exclusive rights too, meaning they can do what they like with your photos, its in the terms and conditions (link at bottom of the page)

crafty

You dont get nothing for nothing now days, always a catch somewhere.

Encrypt everything before you upload it.

Well if true that would certainly be both absurd and shocking, but it is patently not the case.

Here is what the ToS says:

“Ownership of Content: You retain all ownership rights in your Content. However, by posting Content to Oosah, you automatically grant, and you represent and warrant that you have the right to grant, to Oosah (and its successors) an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, assignable, royalty free, worldwide license to use, copy, perform, display, distribute and to prepare derivative works of such Content in connection with the Site and any current and future services offered by Oosah, and to grant and authorize sublicenses of the foregoing.”

http://www.oosah.com/terms.php?ref=&pos=

You can read that with varying shades of paranoia but your claim of granting them an exclusive license to the content is explicitly false.

"An irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, assignable, royalty free, worldwide license..."
That's a pretty large license. I'm not paranoid, but that means I would be "buying" the storage space in return for image rights. By my calculations, that's a good deal for Oosah which ever way you look at it

I definitely wouldn't use them
I have cheaper alternatives.

Matt

You are quite correct that you have not given them EXCLUSIVE rights, but you HAVE given them the right to take all of your images and sell them wherever they want. Not QUITE as bad as exclusive, but pretty terrible nonetheless.

So get off your high horse. This is a crooked and dreadful deal, and only a complete nincompoop would sign up to it.

G

Alas George that is again a statement which does not correspond with the facts; in other words it is a lie.

1. You grant them a royalty free license for the use of the content *specifically* on their site or related sites/services. This is most likely for as innocent a purpose as being able to copy the content between physical disks, distribute it via the internet, etc.

2. You grant them the right to sub-license on the same terms. This is likely for something as innocent as enabling moving the business to a different holding company, or a merger, acquisition or other combination of the business. In any case it specifically precludes selling of the content to third parties since all sub-licences must be granted on the same terms ie royalty free. This is regardless of well established licensing law that would preclude a licensee from selling on intellectual property rights so acquired.

Matt is, however, right; if you believe you are sitting on a goldmine of stock photos then you should probably find another solution. On the other hand if you are looking for convenient off site backup at a price that’s right then in my view it looks a reasonable proposition.

The terms "could" very likely be innocent enough...
But they are non-revocable and perpetual. You have no idea what their future intent is, and you have no control over what they do now or in the future.

Although it is pretty darned clear to me what their intentions are when they state up front the granting of royalty-free rights to; display, create derivative works, and to distribute...

If the rights are simply being given for internal support of day to day or emergency business operations, much of that can be spelled out.
Not sure why a backup, restore, or transfer of data would ever require the display of derivative works, but if anyone is comfortable with that.. go for it.

Quite apart from the fact that to categorise all statements that are not in accordance with the facts, as lies, is a complete disgrace, you clearly have not read the terms of service.

It does not say "specifically on their site", or indeed "related services", as you misquote.

The relevant section is this:

[quote="Oosah"]of such Content in connection with the Site and any current and future services offered by Oosah, and to grant and authorize sublicenses of the foregoing[/quote]
"In connection with" is a very loose definition, as is "Any current and future service".

For someone to interpret this as being limited to innocent purposes only seems to stretch credulity, to me.

"No affiliation"... your heated defence makes me wonder and as ChrisA rightly point out, statements not in accordance with the facts are not necessarily lies.

no idea why the above post isn't displaying properly - I've given up trying to sort it

This discussion is rapidly descending into farce as typified by the above statement, which is an example of what the Americans refer to as a straw man argument. Here’s the definition of that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

Here are the facts.
1. “You retain all ownership rights in your Content”. (source: ToS)
2. You grant them a license to your content with potentially wide scope except for one thing; they or anyone else they assign the license to are unable to sell any content on.

Here is the question: under what specific circumstances could they do anything with your content that would harm your interests?

Somebody posted some nonsense. George posted some more nonsense. I don't have all day to respond to nonsense.