> Social media is not a public utility. Using Instagram is not a right. When you begin using these services, you enter a legally binding contact with them, defined in the Terms of Service.<p>I think there may be a difference in audiences here. You have the literal version of US law, which is what this article appears to be based upon, but you also have people's expectations, which is that companies should not abuse their position with respect to the data they hold.<p>From an American point of view, the idea that people can form any contract they like with a company presumably makes sense. From a European point of view, there are public limits on what a company can do with data. The Uk is not alone in having a data protection act that absolutely limits the use of data sell on, for example.<p>This of course brings up the question of which law applies, and companies are very adroit at manipulating this. But it's hardly surprising they aren't so good with public opinion.<p>My own view is that cloud providers should have a European style data protection act, but that's mostly because I like the law and find it to my benefit. However, even where there isn't a law, if I think my data is being abused, I'm more than happy to call a company out on it.<p>My counter argument to the one that says: they're a company, they can form any contract they like<p>is: I'm a free individual, I can protest that.