For me this isn’t about Dropbox. It’s about whether I want confidential information available in easily readable form on any kind of cloud service. Systems go wrong (as they did with DB very recently). They also get hacked. I’m no longer prepared to take that risk. I will only use cloud services if they allow me to store confidential information in an encrypted state that only I can unlock.
Thinking about it I can’t quite believe I allowed it in the first place. But the ease of DB and its newness were very tempting. But if others feel differently that’s their prerogative. It’s a personal choice.
Given that you’ve already expressed your views in detail in another thread, is there a reason why you’re posting this again? In a thread that’s been quiescent for five years?
There’s no evidence of data-mining by DropBox. In my years of internet experience, I’ve never heard a valid accusation of such. Google, Facebook, MS? Yes, and they do so admittedly & unashamedly; but not so with DB. If there is any substantiated evidence to the contrary, I’d love to see it. As for DB internal access to user files stored on DB, that’s a LEGAL requirement by the United States government. Anyone with a bone to pick in that area (which I do) should yell, scream, and curse at their elected representatives in that funny farm we call the US Congress to change US snooping laws to respect citizen privacy. Don’t hold your breath, however. Asphyxiation will outpace any move by US lawmakers (who, incidentally, fail to enforce the few laws & regulations concerning NSA, CIA, DIA, DHS & FBI intrusions into citizen online communications.)
So don’t scream at DB or L&L for the failings of our own government. It’s no secret that US privacy protections are virtually non-existent; consider the responses of the EU community decrying the abuse of privacy rights by the US. But also, see how other nations are following (or leading) the stampede to monitor their citizens. Check out the UK/GCHQ mess, or the “Five Eyes” consortium. All that makes the DB compliance with possible FISA court-ordered security letters look quite innocuous.
Or wear a tinfoil hat. They’re back in fashion thanks to the current election season.
It’s been a couple of years now, but I was just wondering if there was an update on this question?
I know that my work is copyrighted as soon as I create it. And that it’s ok to show a text to an editor or agent before I publish it because there’s no incentive for them to steal. (I’m getting my info from this post). I’m assuming that the same would apply to Dropbox, but it would be nice to know if everyone’s thinking on this has changed since this topic was first posted.
Putting your work on Dropbox has zero implications for your rights as author. Under their Terms of Service, you do not give them permission to “publish” anything by merely placing it on their server.
The one exception would be if you publish the work using Dropbox as the venue, for example by distributing a link to a public Dropbox folder. But that would be an action explicitly authorized by you.
(As a practical matter, I also suspect that access to encryption keys by Dropbox employees is very tightly controlled, and that using those keys to go randomly snooping through user files is a firing offense.)