Does myspace have any revolutionary potential?

[TeeJay]

MatthewCuffe, sorry but I can't see why many people would sign up to a "MySpace" that was aimed at planning political actions. There are already plenty of places where people can go to do this. Why would they want to stick up photos music and blogs? How would they have discussions - does MYSpace have threads like in a forum, or a news front page for announcements and reports like indymedia?

Really this is a Bolshevik-Menshevik argument.

Sorry mate but this means nothing to me, and probably to many other people as well. If you want to commuinicate with people then why not try to lose the obscure jargon and references to 100 year old Russian politics?

If you want to save the planet whilst avoiding major wars, you need to work in holier-than-thou ghettoes, and radiate out ideas and actions from them.

Do you even understand what "holier-than-thou" means? All it radiates out is smug, self-satidied and detached-from-real-life bullshit, if it radiates out at all, rather than cutting itself off from any mainstream debates.

Of course there is a place for specialist online communities - these already exist. People are always asking how they can reach out to the mainstream, and this thread is specifically about MySpace and if this could be a channel for doing so, so I really don't see why anyone would want to start going in the opposite direction and withdraw from a mainstream channel or community back into a specialist one. They should be emerging from their specialist communities and pushing out *into* MySpace type communities, not withdrawing back from them.

If someone *did* want to set up a not-for-profit equivalent of MySpace then rather than trying to model it around their pet political ideology, they would be *far* better off doing it as a kind of open-source project like Mozilla, Wikipedia, P2P networks and so forth. These things are on the surface politically neutral - a fact that adds vastly to their attractiveness to a large number of users - but they are radical in that a lot of people end up fully buying into the anti-corporate, not-for-profit, voluntary and mutual ethos, and the sheer weight of numbers of younger users helps give them a de facto progressive atmosphere.

Cluncky attempts to preach at people and invoking archaic marxist dogma will fail. Providing a free and ultra-sexy product, service or community will succeed (witness Firefox et al).

 

[Buds and Spawn]

If someone *did* want to set up a not-for-profit equivalent of MySpace then rather than trying to model it around their pet political ideology, they would be *far* better off doing it as a kind of open-source project like Mozilla, Wikipedia, P2P networks and so forth. These things are on the surface politically neutral - a fact that adds vastly to their attractiveness to a large number of users - but they are radical in that a lot of people end up fully buying into the anti-corporate, not-for-profit, voluntary and mutual ethos, and the sheer weight of numbers of younger users helps give them a de facto progressive atmosphere.

Cluncky attempts to preach at people and invoking archaic marxist dogma will fail. Providing a free and ultra-sexy product, service or community will succeed (witness Firefox et al).

You're right re: numbers and getting peeps involved, no doubt about it. But the notion that this creates anything truly radical is questionable. It may appear so - but only in comparison to the corporate alternative. I'd prefer these things to be measured against a 'more real' yardstick - say - what change is needed for an ecological and socially just society (or whatver tickles your fancy). Another way to look at this is to evaluate what practical impact subversion of myspace or adoption of Firefox etc.. has had. I can't see anything concrete here - I'd love to seem some examples though....

Anyway - something interesting on linking up vBulletin and MediaWiki.

 

[Barking_Mad]

It's surely only a matter of time before the some governmental organisation attempts to harness the power of your 'average citizen' to give input to local policy decisions etc.... If you're looking for grass-roots politics and a place to start then an amalgamation of some of the webs more progressive areas (web 2.0, mash-ups etc.) is something to be strongly considered in my view. Granted its a massive task but if you look at the success of Wikipedia it works because it relies on co-operation and participation and people feel engaged in a non-threatening manner. If you look at the problem of modern day politics then these are precisely the issues that put most people off.

The problem will be is who gets there and does this first. Will it be a government sponsored effort or will, like Wikipedia, it grow out of the people and their own efforts?

 

[Buds and Spawn]

It's a great idea - and there's obviously potential - but I think it's a mistake to assume that most people will want to engage with anyone (government or themselves) online, let alone via social software mashups etc..

It's easy to forget that the online community is a minority even in a technologically advanced wealthy nation like the UK, let alone the rest of the (digitally divided) planet.

When the technology is adopted by everyone as a matter of course (i.e. when everyone over the age of 30 is dead - rough guesstimate) then the potential will be realised (for better or worse).

I spend more hours than I'd like staring at a screen, and I'm not one to keep my thoughts to myself, but I've only managed a post count of 0.15 per day on Urban. What level of engagement is that....? (Walks off shaking head and muttering to himself).

 

[TeeJay]

...I'd love to seem some examples though...

Not really what you are asking but ... the two most cited examples of new ways of organising through the internet (and mobilising formally apolitical young people) having a noticable impact on politics are South Korea (the election of Roh Moo-hyun as president) and Howard Dean supporters in the US (less succesful but still made an impression) ...

Arguably neither of these would have been possible if boardband, blogging software, chatrooms and forums didn't exist - and a lot of these things wouldn't exist in the form they did without open-source and free software.

 

[Barking_Mad]

Not really what you are asking but ... the two most cited examples of new ways of organising through the internet (and mobilising formally apolitical young people) having a noticable impact on politics are South Korea (the election of Roh Moo-hyun as president) and Howard Dean supporters in the US (less succesful but still made an impression) ...

Arguably neither of these would have been possible if boardband, blogging software, chatrooms and forums didn't exist - and a lot of these things wouldn't exist in the form they did without open-source and free software.

True, and the alternative is carry on doing what we've done so far, and clearly that's not got us very far. Howard Deans campaign was an interesting one, do you know the name of the book written by the guy who planned his campaign? Apparently its a good read.

edit - ah yeah remembered, written by Joe Trippi his campaign manager.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos...8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl/203-5423626-8339143

 

[TeeJay]

True, and the alternative is carry on doing what we've done so far, and clearly that's not got us very far.

Not sure what you mean by this tho'. How long have web forums and things like indymedia been going? Or do you mean non-internet activity? Ironically there were actually a lot of demos and protests during the 90s but except for the real cutting edge/techhies types I don't think people did much more than get occasional emails and use dial-up to browse a little bit. People weren't really uploading their own content or creating their own 'social networks' etc. They weren't really blogging or instantly reacting to current events and media articles with online discussion. I don't think it is as simple as saying "up till now everything has failed" or saying that 'new media' / 'participatory media' is actually purely a good thing for progressive political campaigners. I'd argue that in some ways people could get fragmented, drawn into small clichés, be less likely to want to express frustrations by going to a protest or sitting in a tree, become more cynical and ironic about everything, spend all their time living in virtual reality and chatting about music online rather than getting involved in their local community. It is possible that things could go either way, not just all in one direction.

 

[Buds and Spawn]

Not sure what you mean by this tho'. How long have web forums and things like indymedia been going? Or do you mean non-internet activity? Ironically there were actually a lot of demos and protests during the 90s but except for the real cutting edge/techhies types I don't think people did much more than get occasional emails and use dial-up to browse a little bit. People weren't really uploading their own content or creating their own 'social networks' etc. They weren't really blogging or instantly reacting to current events and media articles with online discussion. I don't think it is as simple as saying "up till now everything has failed" or saying that 'new media' / 'participatory media' is actually purely a good thing for progressive political campaigners. I'd argue that in some ways people could get fragmented, drawn into small clichés, be less likely to want to express frustrations by going to a protest or sitting in a tree, become more cynical and ironic about everything, spend all their time living in virtual reality and chatting about music online rather than getting involved in their local community. It is possible that things could go either way, not just all in one direction.

I agree.

Email was used a lot for J18 in 99 - but only as one of many means of communication. Indymedia in the UK grew from that, with live webcasts of protest etc...

I think it's wrong to imply that pre-internet or what counts as primitive internet related protest was useless, and now that everyone is sat down in their private cubbyholes tapping away the revolution is just around the corner. History both recent and distant tells us something quite different.

My biggest concern is that the illusion of activity detracts from real activity. Classic recuperation and spectacle really.

 

[MatthewCuffe]

Teejay, there is fire in your belly - good!

Communication on different levels is vital.

Our privatised and deregulated markets have pushed everything in our culture to the lowest common denominator.

As a man, that means the Holy Trinity of acceptable conversation is football, beer, and women-as-sex-objects. I love all three from time to time, but refuse consent to the notion that that is where my statements and thought statements must end.

I do not care a damn for that. I will write how I want - sometimes in an archaic way, sometimes in a contemporary way, as I see fit. If people get something from it, fine. If not, fine. I am not selling anything and therefore I do not care whether people buy.

It is important to be holier-than-thou. Once upon a time we had people in society who stood up, diagnosed the social ills, and railed against them. I personally am not claiming to be perfect. I am saying that I am disgusted with the disease around me - and inside me, too - and want us to collectively work out real remedies.

If you do not like the sermons, don't listen.

But we need them - because this current culture which is so afraid of what others think because it is so busy marketing everything is an absolute disgrace.

On occasion people need to be preached at. I do not exclude myself from that. I have gained greatly from people preaching at me.

We have been far, far too tolerant in a neoliberal sense: it simply means that all our culture, our social interactions, and our planetary interactions descend down the gutter. It does not produce a people's culture, it produces a false demotic which really serves the interests of a tiny elite at the top of what is a social pyramid.

The greatest paradox of the idiot culture is that it purports to be the people's consciousness; it ends up becoming so to an extent by monopolising the means of cultural production; and it serves the interests of a tiny minority of vested interests. Those, incidentally, which the Labour party was set up to attack, as it did aggressively under the finest Labour Prime Minister of all time, Clement Attlee, from 1945-51.

Raging against that pyramid is essential. The only downside of the vocation is that, right now at least, it is unpaid, very few people listen (although those that do truly listen), and you are called 'mad' at every opportunity.

However, I used to be sane, and I was as depressed as everyone else in this society with 3.5 million people on Prozac.

Now I am insane, I am happy.

We have become so docile, so concerned by what others think of us instead of what we think within our own hearts and minds, that we forget what our inner voices tell us, even before we can make them outer voices.

 

[Barking_Mad]

Not sure what you mean by this tho'. How long have web forums and things like indymedia been going? Or do you mean non-internet activity? Ironically there were actually a lot of demos and protests during the 90s but except for the real cutting edge/techhies types I don't think people did much more than get occasional emails and use dial-up to browse a little bit. People weren't really uploading their own content or creating their own 'social networks' etc. They weren't really blogging or instantly reacting to current events and media articles with online discussion. I don't think it is as simple as saying "up till now everything has failed" or saying that 'new media' / 'participatory media' is actually purely a good thing for progressive political campaigners. I'd argue that in some ways people could get fragmented, drawn into small clichés, be less likely to want to express frustrations by going to a protest or sitting in a tree, become more cynical and ironic about everything, spend all their time living in virtual reality and chatting about music online rather than getting involved in their local community. It is possible that things could go either way, not just all in one direction.

Sorry, I wasn't very clear, I seem to have articulation problems this week due to the flu. What I was trying to say is that the traditional methods of getting people involved in local decision making have failed because many feel they aren't listened to and many others don't have the time or will to go visit their MP or go to local meetings. It seems many people want to do something but dont know where to start or feel like its not worth the effort. Although I agree with you that it shouldn't be thought of as a definite solution, the internet can take away some of these obsticles and enable some form of direct participation where before there was none. Maybe im being overly optimistic but I think that if you give people the chance to express themselves on a local level in a way that engages them then maybe they will be motivated more to take part in more face to face poliotical activities. Whether its true or not I dont know but I seem to hear people saying that they DO want more say in local issues but that they feel they arent listened to.

I take your point about people sat around talking about music and chatting rather than being involved but is this necessarily a bad thing? When you look at how fragmented our society has become and how little local interaction there is between people on a local level (compared to years gone by) then maybe anything that brings people together is a good starting point? That's possibly one of the things that U75 has been most successful at, right? What I'm suggesting is a website functioning in a variety of ways that will allow local people to have their say and express themselves on a range of local issues in a variety of ways and to take the decision making power away from politicians. Think of it as a way of collecting all the thoughts people have about their local area and putting them in one place. It seems to me that one of the problems is gathering together our collective knowledge and putting it to use in a new and imaginitive fashion.

If people want more money spent on their local park, let them vote on it. If people want money spent on a community centre, let them vote on it. Only when the people are HEARD en masse will the politicians have no excuses for not listening. At present all those thougths are scattered and not collated. I think we have to find ways of getting things done as we want them to be done and not as we're told they should be done. We live in these places everyday, so who is better placed to know what needs doing? We need to start using some imagination to think of ways round this archaic system. Ways to empower people beyond sticking a cross in a box and watching whilst nothing changes. We need ideas and lots of them. We have the power of harnessing our collective consciousness and putting it to use, lets find ways of doing it. Maybe logging into your local constituency website and seeing how you can contribute with an idea, make a comment or vote on a local issue will become as second nature as checking your e-mail everyday.

 

[Buds and Spawn]

If people want more money spent on their local park, let them vote on it. If people want money spent on a community centre, let them vote on it. Only when the people are HEARD en masse will the politicians have no excuses for not listening. At present all those thougths are scattered and not collated. I think we have to find ways of getting things done as we want them to be done and not as we're told they should be done. We live in these places everyday, so who is better placed to know what needs doing? We need to start using some imagination to think of ways round this archaic system. Ways to empower people beyond sticking a cross in a box and watching whilst nothing changes. We need ideas and lots of them. We have the power of harnessing our collective consciousness and putting it to use, lets find ways of doing it. Maybe logging into your local constituency website and seeing how you can contribute with an idea, make a comment or vote on a local issue will become as second nature as checking your e-mail everyday.

I'm not sure that more voting will solve anything. People are pushed to vote at all. And what about the tyranny of the majority...

I'd prefer direct action within communities myself. If you want a park then get together, talk about it, and if there's consensus get on with it. This actually works - Guerilla / Community gardening in New York for example.

I'd still like to be persuaded that myspace etc.. isn't ultimately alienating.

 

[Barking_Mad]

Teejay, there is fire in your belly - good!

Communication on different levels is vital.

Our privatised and deregulated markets have pushed everything in our culture to the lowest common denominator.

As a man, that means the Holy Trinity of acceptable conversation is football, beer, and women-as-sex-objects. I love all three from time to time, but refuse consent to the notion that that is where my statements and thought statements must end.

I do not care a damn for that. I will write how I want - sometimes in an archaic way, sometimes in a contemporary way, as I see fit. If people get something from it, fine. If not, fine. I am not selling anything and therefore I do not care whether people buy.

It is important to be holier-than-thou. Once upon a time we had people in society who stood up, diagnosed the social ills, and railed against them. I personally am not claiming to be perfect. I am saying that I am disgusted with the disease around me - and inside me, too - and want us to collectively work out real remedies.

If you do not like the sermons, don't listen.

But we need them - because this current culture which is so afraid of what others think because it is so busy marketing everything is an absolute disgrace.

On occasion people need to be preached at. I do not exclude myself from that. I have gained greatly from people preaching at me.

We have been far, far too tolerant in a neoliberal sense: it simply means that all our culture, our social interactions, and our planetary interactions descend down the gutter. It does not produce a people's culture, it produces a false demotic which really serves the interests of a tiny elite at the top of what is a social pyramid.

The greatest paradox of the idiot culture is that it purports to be the people's consciousness; it ends up becoming so to an extent by monopolising the means of cultural production; and it serves the interests of a tiny minority of vested interests. Those, incidentally, which the Labour party was set up to attack, as it did aggressively under the finest Labour Prime Minister of all time, Clement Attlee, from 1945-51.

Raging against that pyramid is essential. The only downside of the vocation is that, right now at least, it is unpaid, very few people listen (although those that do truly listen), and you are called 'mad' at every opportunity.

However, I used to be sane, and I was as depressed as everyone else in this society with 3.5 million people on Prozac.

Now I am insane, I am happy.

We have become so docile, so concerned by what others think of us instead of what we think within our own hearts and minds, that we forget what our inner voices tell us, even before we can make them outer voices.

To borrow a quote,

"The fact that millions of people share the same vices does not make these vices virtues, the fact that they share so many errors does not make the errors to be truths, and the fact that millions of people share the same forms of mental pathology does not make these people sane."

 

[Barking_Mad]

I'm not sure that more voting will solve anything. People are pushed to vote at all. And what about the tyranny of the majority...

I'd prefer direct action within communities myself. If you want a park then get together, talk about it, and if there's consensus get on with it. This actually works - Guerilla / Community gardening in New York for example.

I'd still like to be persuaded that myspace etc.. isn't ultimately alienating.

Im no fan of voting in the traditional sense, im just throwing ideas around. Still, at least people voting on hard and fast issues rather than promises by an representitive individual most people dont even know anything about is a step on from the current shabang.. There's no reason why direct action cant come about by a variety of methods, internet related or otherwise. Surely the important thing is the ability to exchange ideas and act on them from a local level. Think of a method of behaving that is like open source computer programming rather than the traditional method of having a team of programmers following their own set objectives which are all but closed to outside influences.

I dont have much experience of consensus decision making, but I sometimes get the impression (not in the example you gave) that *in certain situations* it can hide weak ideas. More than anything we need to change the systems that control our lives.

re: myspace - I dont have any personal experience of it but as with any idea its important to recognise the good bits and leave the bad bits behind. Too often we 'toss the baby out with the bathwater', if you catch my drift.

 

[imposs1904]

Spaced

Check out an unofficial Socialist Standard page.

Have a good 'yin

- Darren

 

[aurora green]

...massive numbers of otherwise apolitical music-fashion-and-sex-fixated young people and putting yourself back in a ghetto. Doesn't that undermine the whole revolutionary and subversive potential of politicising "normal" young people and spreading radical and progressive ideas mixed together and alongside music, photos, fun and popular culture?

Go wherever the people are and make your ideas sexy and cool, don't slink off to a preachy, over-controlled, holier-than-thou corner, fence yourself off or use stale easy-to-pidgeonhole clichés.

I guess this is what interests me about myspace. We seem to have the most apolitical youth in modern times, and surely this cant continue. Surely, eventually, a new generation, aghast at the state of the planet they are to inherit and already aware of the ultimate futility of rampant consumerism will begin to wake up and fight for change, for a future....
We need to be feeding any tiny glimmer of hope with ideas, and showing that there are alternatives, ideas for another way of living...

It's easy for oldies like me to dismiss something like myspace because we cant relate to it or it seems utterly facile, but if it's the way young people like to relate to each other and communicate what's 'cool' or whatever, then surely it must have potential for connecting with and possibly helping switching on a new generation, which is what we desperately need....

 

[Buds and Spawn]

It's easy for oldies like me to dismiss something like myspace because we cant relate to it or it seems utterly facile, but if it's the way young people like to relate to each other and communicate what's 'cool' or whatever, then surely it must have potential for connecting with and possibly helping switching on a new generation, which is what we desperately need....

In essence I couldn't agree more.

But I worry about the trend where more people communicate more often but say less of any meaning. That's got to have repercusions when it comes to taking action for change. If your means of enagement with other humans and your environment is mediated through a machine then perhaps your action is limited by being similarly mediated through a machine. And while there is a lot of radical stuff that can be done this way, I believe it will always fall short.

I guess I just worry that what appears to be subversive actually isn't - just an image of resistance, and not the real thing. Doesn't the whole thing smell of recuperation to you aurora? Or am I just being too cynical and out-of-touch...

I still believe there's not much that beats a full-on street party for radicalising people and creating a space for realising how things could be.

But then I'm not getting any younger

 

[Kid_Eternity]

I guess this is what interests me about myspace. We seem to have the most apolitical youth in modern times, and surely this cant continue. Surely, eventually, a new generation, aghast at the state of the planet they are to inherit and already aware of the ultimate futility of rampant consumerism will begin to wake up and fight for change, for a future....
We need to be feeding any tiny glimmer of hope with ideas, and showing that there are alternatives, ideas for another way of living...

It's easy for oldies like me to dismiss something like myspace because we cant relate to it or it seems utterly facile, but if it's the way young people like to relate to each other and communicate what's 'cool' or whatever, then surely it must have potential for connecting with and possibly helping switching on a new generation, which is what we desperately need....

Two points, don't agree that young people are apolitical, I think for the most part they dislike party politics. Secondly, I really think you're focusing too much on one application. Take a step back and look at it as a social networking thing (even check out the whole user created/determined content eg Web 2.0 too) to assess potential.

 

[aurora green]

If young people aren't apolitical, what are they doing?
I agree that they dislike party politics, who doesn't really? I mean anyone can see how party politics offers no choice, at all.
But...what are the young political people up to?

I guess I just worry that what appears to be subversive actually isn't - just an image of resistance, and not the real thing. Doesn't the whole thing smell of recuperation to you aurora? Or am I just being too cynical and out-of-touch...
I still believe there's not much that beats a full-on street party for radicalising people and creating a space for realising how things could be.

Of course, I agree, there's nothing like the real thing...
I just think it's the catalysts for that generation that have been recuperated,
and wonder what will spark things off this next time, could it possibly be something that easy to dismiss...But I dont think the internet is the definative answer or anything...

 

[Kid_Eternity]

If young people aren't apolitical, what are they doing?
I agree that they dislike party politics, who doesn't really? I mean anyone can see how party politics offers no choice, at all.
But...what are the young political people up to?

Good question. It depends where you are in the country (and how in touch you are with young people), there's a number of youth led political groups in the Midlands for example. Also the school walk outs in the Iraq war is a good example of youth politics (organised virally via texting and a horizental approach to action).

To be clear I think we're talking at cross purposes. When I say they are not apolitical that doesn't mean they're politically active. Ime they have a keen interest in politics and political issues but not always engaged in anything that gives it direction and impact.

 

[Buds and Spawn]

Secondly, I really think you're focusing too much on one application. Take a step back and look at it as a social networking thing (even check out the whole user created/determined content eg Web 2.0 too) to assess potential.

Good point. The whole Web 2.0 meme and social software, AJAX etc.. is providing the means for peeps to come up with new ways of organising information and new ways of communicating without needing corporate scale resources or over-specialisation. It is having a levelling effect - making the web a more inclusive and more (truly) democratic place. The impact of blogging on reporting is testimony to that. Of course there's a long way to go before the technology overall stops being intrinsically alienating (e.g. the irony of myspace - it's principle function as a meatmarket exists precisely because it's community isn't a community)....

 

[TeeJay]

Sorry but I don't even know what Web 2.0 is.

What percentage of the UK population:

1) uses the internet at all?
2) has a computer at home?
3) has internet access?
4) has broadband?
5) uses the web on a regular (eg daily) basis
6) uses the web as a major soure of information, communication and debate
7) actually has a blog, uses forums, generates content or otherwise maintains a 'presence' or persona online?

In some ways, while the cutting edge is all very sexy, it isn't where the biggest impact will be in the immediate future ... from what I understand usernet was a kind of 'forum' 15 years ago, but now they are very common and used by a lot of people ... the point being that just the stuff that is already avaliable now (blogs, forums, chat channels, rss feeds) will have a big impact for years to come as the percenatge of the pipulation using them on a regular basis increases.

The cutting edge stuff may be the most exciting to us, but it will probably only really have its biggest impacts 5, 10 or 20 years from now as it becomes an established part of how most people communicate and where they go to debate or inform themselves.

 

[Kid_Eternity]

Sorry but I don't even know what Web 2.0 is.

Doesn't anyone use Wikipedia anymore?

 

[Buds and Spawn]

on YouTube.

Made me laugh anyway....

 

[walktome]

I agree that Myspace is a great site for publicity. I think it has potential. I have a couple of good organizations on my friends list.

 

[Kid_Eternity]

This is worth reading before anyone gets too carried away with Myspace...

Myspace/Fox can use ANYTHING of yours you post to your site [music, videos, photographs, art work, etc.]. This means they can alter it, edit it, sell it, etc. WITHOUT giving you credit

This has recently been brought to my attention… You can find the content that is quoted below by clicking “terms” on the myspace homepage and scrolling down a bit. I.e. its taken directly from the terms of use, it’s not some silly paranoid internet scare tactic.

In summation, myspace/fox can use ANYTHING of yours you post to your site [music, videos, photographs, art work, etc.]. This means they can alter it, edit it, sell it, etc. WITHOUT giving you credit, giving you royalties, basically without giving you jack shit. Please be aware of this and use caution when sharing your creative works on myspace. I love being an intermanet whore like the rest of you and I adore seeing everyone’s new work - but I’d hate for it to be violated and taken out from under your control by a Media company that’s much bigger than you.

 

[walktome]

Okay, I found the direct quote from Myspace/the article myself:

Proprietary Rights in Content on MySpace.com.
By displaying or publishing (”posting”) any Content, messages, text, files, images, photos, video, sounds, profiles, works of authorship, or any other materials (collectively, “Content”) on or through the Services, you hereby grant to MySpace.com, a non-exclusive, fully-paid and royalty-free, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense through unlimited levels of sublicensees) to use, copy, modify, adapt, translate, publicly perform, publicly display, store, reproduce, transmit, and distribute such Content on and through the Services. This license will terminate at the time you remove such Content from the Services. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a back-up or residual copy of the Content posted by you may remain on the MySpace.com servers after you have removed the Content from the Services, and MySpace.com retains the rights to those copies. You represent and warrant that: (i) you own the Content posted by you on or through the Services or otherwise have the right to grant the license set forth in this section, and (ii) the posting of your Content on or through the Services does not violate the privacy rights, publicity rights, copyrights, contract rights or any other rights of any person. You agree to pay for all royalties, fees, and any other monies owing any person by reason of any Content posted by you to or through the Services.