The MSN Spaces team tries to clarify their content-ownership policy.

Per Michael Connolly:

"You own the content you post.  Period.

I’m not a lawyer, but we have one of those guys down the hall.  He says that the wording in the TOU is all about granting us the right to post your content and share it out on MSN.  Since you own it, we need that right to actually draw it on the screen. "

Of course Mr. Connolly might be falling into the trap of reading a contract wearing rose-colored glasses. Not a good idea when dealing with lawyers.

"For materials you post or otherwise provide to Microsoft related to the MSN Web Sites (a "Submission"), you grant Microsoft permission to (1) use, copy, distribute, transmit, publicly display, publicly perform, reproduce, edit, modify, translate and reformat your Submission, each in connection with the MSN Web Sites, and (2) sublicense these rights, to the maximum extent permitted by applicable law. Microsoft will not pay you for your Submission."

The question isn't what the team meant to say. The question is, given the language in the agreement, what could MSN possibly do with content I post to MSN Spaces. The term "sublicense" is left entirely open. Given this language, I believe that MSN could use something I created in a national ad campaign for Coors beer without compensating me. If MSN really wanted its customers to hold all rights regarding their content, the would have put this specific language in the contract. At the very least, they would have put specific language limiting Microsoft's use of its customer's content.

This is not the case with the MSN Spaces agreement. It is pretty wide open. Reserving these rights, though, are not uncommon among similar sites.

Compare this to Ofoto's terms of service regarding photographs:

"Ofoto does not claim ownership rights in any image contained in your account. For the sole purpose of enabling us to display your images through the Service and fulfilling any orders for you or those you have shared your images with, you grant to Ofoto a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use, copy, distribute, and display those images. Please note that when you share images, you allow the recipients to share and make photographic prints from those images."

Not entirely iron clad, but the agreement is framed by the use of "displaying your images through the Service and fulfilling any orders." That is a little better, and certainly more clear.

Take a look at Snapfish's terms in this area:

"...as a condition to your Membership, you hereby grant Snapfish a perpetual, universal, nonexclusive right to copy, display, modify, transmit, make derivative works of and distribute any Content transmitted or provided to the Service by you, solely for the purpose of providing the Service. You remain the owner of all Content that you submit to the Service and as a condition to Membership, you represent and warrant to Snapfish that you are the owner of the copyright to Content you submit to the Service or that you have written permission from the copyright owner to submit such Content."

Also not 100 clear, but the emphasis is on what rights the customer reserves, and the reason for granting Snapfish license.

So MSN's terms are not unusual, but they also imply that MSN requires its customers to grant a more liberal license to the company than some others.