• Hi everyone!

    (Sorry, my French is super rusty so this is just less painful for everyone I'm sure).

    Does anyone know who designed the CS Lyon logo (the really cool one with the lion on the couch)? I'd like to get in touch with them.

    Thank you!

    Hi Manu,

    That's fine. We wanted to show the logo to Ambassadors to talk about how awesome local logos are, but we don't need to feature it if your group prefers that we not do so.

    Hi Manu,

    Yes, I know that it's just an email to Ambassadors. I'm not sure, I'd have to ask our lawyers if that would be something we could technically do without permission (I think it would depend on whether legally the email is considered "promotional" or part of our services).

    Regardless, I don't need to get lawyers involved, because my team (community/outreach) always asks for permission before using people's photos or anything else they create. It's our internal policy. We're writers and photographers and designers ourselves, and I know I'd be upset if someone used my work without asking me, even just in a small email. We also like to make sure that if someone wants us to link to their portfolio or website, that we do that as well, so that we can give them a little traffic.

    In any event, if anyone who made the logo is cool with me using it, send me a message to let me know. Also, no worries if you'd prefer not.

    Like I said, it's fine if you don't want me to use the Lyon logo. I simply wanted to clarify that we would not use it without permission. So I won't include it in this email that I'm sending, out of respect for your concerns. I left it that the designer could contact me if they wanted to, but I really don't want to force the issue if it makes people uncomfortable. It's a cool piece of work, and we're currently working on a project to make it easier for people to customize the logo if they want to use it for their groups or events, so I thought it would be a good example of how local logos can really be personal and unique. But I have no desire to cause a problem here, so let's just let it go.

    Well, you got guts...

    Take the god-damned logo, you know pretty-well that it belongs already to you, as all our pictures/texts/etc...

    ...but at least don't take us for idiots asking for permission.

    You've destroyed the whole thing. Check out our Lyon group: it was a very lively group, with lot of offers for private parties, cultural events, meetings, excursions... A message posted in here the morning was ending up pages 3 the same evening because people were offering so much.

    Nowadays, the same message would stay on page 1 for two weeks!

    People don't propose anything anymore, because you've destroyed their trust. Some Ambs organized a nice Quizz last Sunday: they have been obliged to cancel it, because the only people registered were... the organizers!

    So, please let it go, don't try to show that you care about people's opinion: YOU DON'T CARE!!!

    If you would really care, you would have listened to our voices when we told you that your abusive "Terms of Use" were unacceptable.

    What's the point to impose by force such abusive ToU then ask permission to the people to use their work/pictures/words? Isn't there some kind of contradiction in here?

    You're not that subtile, you know... people can be naïve, but at some point they can't put their head in the sand anymore!

    You've imposed these ToU stating that anything we post/produce are yours... so be fair with yourself and use this right to take our work you've imposed to the members without asking anything.


    It must be terrible to work for Couch$urfing, I had my share of military contracts and i'm fine with it, but working for C$ would seem unethical for me !
    Ah ah ah, c'est ce qui s'appelle "manger une volée de bois vert"... ;-p

    Pauvre Mère Edith, elle ne savait pas encore que Lyon était un repère de Marxiste-Léninistes matiné de Trostkystes anarchisants!

    To answer with just a few words, I'd like to quote this great French philosopher from the XXth century, Alain Chabat:

    "One can trick a one person a thousand times. One can trick a thousand persons one time. But one can NOT trick a thousand persons a thousand times!!!"

    I believe you'll get easily the meaning...

    But... Hum hum, Meredith, although this sentence is from now on hosted by your servers through this forum, I would highly recommand you NOT to steal it like you will do with the rest of our material, as I believe there is a pre-existing copyright on it: it has been written for a movie "La Cité de la Peur", © Les Nuls, 1994.

    And to end on another quote from another famous French philosopher (you might ignore it, but we have plenty of them around here...):

    "Tant va la cruche à l'eau qu'à la fin elle se brise".

    Hum hum... Once again, ask your lawyers first before stealing it... there might be a copyright as well... something like ©Jean de la Fontaine, 1670!

    A bon entendeur...
    Ouh ouh... Good news for you Meredith: Jean de La Fontaine just wrote me... he has nothing to do with my second quote!!!

    It looks like you can steal this second quote without any legal danger!!!

    It has been first use in the "Roman de Renard" in the XIIth Century, and nobody knows exactly who was the writter!!! Hallelujah! You're not likely to be prosecuted for using it!

    P.S.: you're a terrible community manager.

    Your way to communicate is naive and is only accurate on weak and reflexion-less minds.

    In my opinion you would be more likely to professionaly succeed working for Mc Donalds in a red-neck area. They would love you!

    Unfortunately, as you have certainly discovered the last month, CS is full of lawyers, analysts, consultants, experts, ingeneers...- and EVEN ARTISTS, believe it or not ;-p!!! - who are NOT blind! But not at all...

    So please keep your PR tricks for the Mc Donalds customers. We would be greatful for that.

    To end up on a last amazing quote, from a Belge philosopher this time - maybe the greatest of all in my opinion -, Jean-Claude Van Damme:

    "Don't f**k with us... because we are AWARE!!!".
    If CS would ALWAYS use this "best practice"... hum... well, this wouldn't be just a "best practice", it would rather be... the "Terms of Use" (that's how one calls some "best practice systematically used")

    je ne juge personne. Mais peut-être ne t'ais tu pas investie autant que d'autres personnes pour bâtir et faire vivre ce qui a été - once upon a time - une "communauté".

    Et peut-être est-ce déplacé de ta part de juger des personnes qui ont beaucoup donné par pure générosité et qui sont aujourd'hui très en colère parce qu'on se moque d'eux.

    La question de ce logo est très sensible, parce qu'elle représente précisément le problème actuel: beaucoup de gens ont donné leur temps et leur argent - certains beaucoup, notamment en Grèce... - pour une communauté à but non-lucratif.

    Les logos des groupes en sont un bonne exemple: dans chaque ville des infographistes ont pris des journées entières sur leur temps libre pour créer des logos.

    Gratuitement, pensant qu'ils faisaient un don à la communauté.

    Que la représentante de CS vienne aujourd'hui, après avoir menti et après que CS ait abusé de la générosité de chacun d'entre nous - et particulièrement de celle des volontaires qui ont donné leur temps - pour demander à utiliser ce logo, well... je trouve ça fort de café!!! Un sacré culot!

    En conséquence de quoi je trouve ça normal qu'elle reçoivent en retour "une bonne volée de bois vert". Puisque CS est devenu une corporation, puisque CS fonctionne comme un business, puisque CS possède tout ce qu'on a pu écrire ou poster depuis toujours sur ce site...

    ...eh bien ils pourraient peut-être payer quelqu'un pour concevoir ce fameux logo plutôt que d'essayer d'embobiner encore une fois le(s) gars qui l'a(ont) conçu...

    Et je ne parle pas spécifiquement de Lyon.

    Je parle de tout ce qui a été produit (dont les logos des groupes) gratuitement par des volontaires depuis 2006 et qui est aujourd'hui utilisé par un site Internet contraire aux valeurs de la plupart de ces généreux volontaires.
    Why does everybody avoid the real question??? (which has been pointed out by several persons, amongst which Mila, who's living in Greece and who therefore knows what it means to be fooled out).

    To remind you the question:
    "Merédith, why your Terms of Use is different from your internal policy?"

    To rephrase in other words:

    # Why to impose to all CS members some abusive and ridiculous Terms of Use - only one month ago -, and then come one month later on the local groups to state - through such threads - "oh, don't worry, we don't apply these rules!"?

    If you don't apply these rules, why did you take the decision to piss people off that much by implementing them?

    Since you've fooled everybody by implementing these rules - against the opinion of ANY single member I've met -, what's the whole point to come now and ask for "permission" to use something you've already manage to owe?

    Am I the only person who is annoyed by this contradiction ? (well, apparently no, since other people got... hum, "puzzled" let's say).

    Considering the position of Mérédith (Community Manager and Public Relation of CS), she has been highly involved in the writing of these abusive Terms of Use implemented one month ago... that's the job of a Community Manager: to manage lawyers to build up the frame of a community, including the legal frame - that's to say the Terms of Use.

    Considering that, we can state that Mérédith agreed with - if not asked for - these new Terms of Use.

    So why does she say now that her "team" has a different approach?

    Since she was already in charge when the ToU were written, since she personally received and dealt with all the complains from members, since these ToU were criticized even by European Union officials, well...

    # Why didn't she asked - or imposed, according to her position - such "different approach" to the lawyers?

    I can answer this last question: she didn't ask or impose any other "approach" because the abusive way the ToU have been written is the most convenient way for CS to steal members material.

    Then comes another question:
    # Why does Mérédith come today in such a "nice courteous way" - to quote Flure - to ask permission to use a simple logo?

    I can also answer this question: because Mérédith is not only "Community Manager", she is also "Public Relation" for CS, and consequently she has to make members feel happy and make them believe that "yes, CS is listening to the local members", "yes, CS cares for the local members, for their privacy, for their intellectual belongings"...

    ...even if this is in TOTAL CONTRADICTION with the position she was holding on this subject - not listening to any complains - ONLY ONE MONTH AGO.

    Et ça me fait rigoler que vous critiquiez tous les hommes politiques qui disent blanc un jour et noir le lendemain, mais que ça ne vous gêne pas que le responsable d'un site que vous utilisez quotidiennement fasse la même chose!!! (là je m'adresse à ceux qui prétendent qu'il n'y a rien de choquant dans le message de Mérédith).


    "The fiercest troll can feel some touch of pity. I feel none, therefore am no troll".
    Richard III, W. Shakespeare.

    P.S.: if you are among these people who don't see anything shocking in Meredith's message... could you please at least answer the two questions above?
    It's true, I'm not longer in a CS spirit (not because the terms of that website turned into a corporation but for some personal reasons) and I pretty don't know what has been going on these last few months on forums about privacy violations and such, but in my concern, logos are into copyrights, no? If people want to use them for some commercial use or simply show to people, they have to ask for permission. I have to admit, at first, I didn't see anything wrong on Meredith's message because she wanted to ask permission or to be in contact with Guillaume before negociating with him to show it or not on her mediastuff but after few messages, she kind of tried to "impose" herself such as "I don't want to force anyone, blabla...". That is forcing! As long as Guillaume hasn't replied to you personally, Meredith, why keeping on trying to show us you don't want to interfere!

    To answer Cedric about a point "Some Ambs organized a nice Quizz last Sunday: they have been obliged to cancel it, because the only people registered were... the organizers!" We cancelled the quizz just because there weren't enough people to make it and we probably post it a little bit late, is that Meredith's fault? If so, Cedric, please prove me how she could have made it? Tell me on mp!

    @Bertrand: the lack of participants for the Quizz (the second time in a raw if I'm not wrong) is indeed the - indirect - responsability of Meredith.

    As she is the Community Manager of CS, she's the main responsible person for the design and implementation of these new Terms of Use which have pissed-off everybody in Europe (after a lot of disappointment last year already, when people discovered the secret sale of the website to investment funds).

    Meredith is the person who refused to listen to Europe-round complains about these Terms of Use (there was not a single group in Europe where people were not complaining loud about this ABUSIVE change about our rights and intellectual property).

    As the Community Manager, Meredith is the person who imposed these abusive Terms of Use without any dialogue.

    So YES, she is responsible of the current situation and negative climate in CS.

    And YES, I find it shocking that she comes on this group to ask "permission" to use the group logo, "PRETENDING" to care about our intellectual rights and property...

    ...because JUST ONE MONTH AGO, SHE DENIED THESE SAME RIGHTS, refusing any dialogue about these Terms of Use which were giving CS all rights on anything posted in here for 7 years.

    I find this behavior a lack of respect, because when you do such a thing, you take people for idiots. That's insulting - at least according to my own values... I don't like to be taken for a fool, and I am still able to remember what happened one month ago... and I hope you do as well!

    I know that people have often very short memory - specially when it deals with politics -, but guys, this was only ONE MONTH AGO!

    Now, is there still somebody who doesn't understand why people are upset in this thread?


    To answer Apolline, the slow death of CS groups and CS events is a general phenomenon and has nothing to do specifically with the group of Lyon... - you should follow some other local groups to have an idea.

    To take a few examples of events taking place AFTER THE CHANGE OF THE ToU (that's means from the beginning of September):

    - CzechSurfing in Prague: this year, half of last year's participants.
    - Six with Mi in Milan: this year, half of last year's participants.
    - last weeks Monday meetings in Lyon: two times less people than before the summer.
    - last week movie 48h Film Festival shooting in Lyon and Paris - where a friend had a CS team as well: 1 person registered in Lyon, 2 in Paris - they didn't even register a team there in the end. The previous 4 years we had at least 20 people registered each time, whether it was in Athens, Rome, Lyon...

    The reason people disengage themselves from CS has nothing to do with a particular group:

    It is the consequence of the deficient communication and community management of CS, which turned most of the members against the very same website they had created all together.

    For one only reason: they don't recognize themselves anymore in this website. So why would they organize or participate in events or activities within this website?

    For example, in the end we shot the god-damned 48h movie in Lyon, and mainly with CSers (about 20 people like the previous years...). The only difference? This year we just organized the whole thing outside of CS, through Facebook and sms. And that's just a simple example.
    Petit rappel pour les personnes intéressées:

    peu avant l'entrée en vigueur des suscités nouveaux "Terms of Use" - "ToU", Conditions d'Utilisation en français -, une partie des Ambassadeurs de CS étaient inquiets des violations évidentes de plusieurs lois européennes protégeant la vie privée par les dits "nouveaux ToU de CS".
    Un responsable de CS - Bill Loudy - répond alors à ces Ambassadeurs inquiets que "pas de soucis, on va récrire les ToU pour qu'ils respectent la législation européenne".

    Vous pouvez lire cet échange ICI:


    Le soucis, c'est que ces nouvelles "Conditions d'Utilisation" étaient acceptées "par défaut" par n'importe quel "utilisateur" par le simple fait de se connecter à CS à partir du 21/09.

    Notez-le, c'est important pour la suite.

    La suite?

    Jusqu'au 21/09 - donc jusqu'à la dead-line pour accepter ou refuser les fameux ToU -, malgré les nombreuses demandes des Ambassadeurs... aucune réponse de CS.

    Finalement, une réponse arrive enfin... le 21/09!!!

    Problème: pour lire cette réponse clarifiant ce à quoi vous vous engagez en acceptant les ToU, il vous faut vous connecter à CS...
    ...or le fait de vous connecter le 21/09 revient à accepter les ToU - le serpent se mord la queue... on ne vous laisse aucun choix -.

    Et là, une fois qu'on a DE FAIT accepté les nouveaux ToU en se connectant et qu'on découvre ENFIN la réponse de CS, qu'est-ce qu'on lit???

    OUI, CS a enfin accepté d'adapter ses ToU pour qu'elles respectent le droit européen concernant la protection des données privées (C'ETAIT TEMPS!)...

    Hallelujah!!! Ils nous ont compris!!!

    Tout est dit ICI par Mérédith, Community Manager et Public Relation de CS, et initiatrice de ce thread...


    ...mis à part que quand vous RE-lisiez les ToU, surprise...


    On vous dit une chose, alors que la réalité, qui est là, sous vos yeux, accessible par un simple click sur les ToU, vous dit exactement le contraire!!!

    Vous savez ce que ça m'a rappelé???

    "1984", de George Orwell.

    Pour ceux qui ne le connaissent pas, dans ce roman d'anticipation (pas tant que ça finalement... :-p), on montre 4 doigts d'une main au "héros" et on lui assure qu'il y a 5 doigts en face de ses yeux, ce qu'il refuse logiquement de reconnaître dans un premier temps... Mais bon, après quelques semaines de lavage de cerveau mâtiné d'un peu de torture contrôlée, tout va "bien", le héros finit par accepter cette incohérence pourtant contraire à son esprit logique...

    Les ToU actuels étaient les 4 doigts REELS d'une main.

    La communication "rassurante" de Mérédith étaient les 5 doigts FICTIONNELS qu'on essaie de nous faire accepter.

    Rien n'avaient été changé dans les ToU entrés en application le 21/09 par rapport à la formule initialement révélée fin août - malgré tous les beaux discours de CS sur le sujet -.

    Alors, entre nous, que Mérédith passe un coup de vaseline de mauvaise qualité ne change rien à l'affaire...

    Finalement, après des plaintes répétées, des aménagement ont effectivement été effectués...

    ...le 10 octobre!!! - soit 19 jour après l'entrée en application des ToU initiaux.


    Ce qui veut dire qu'on a fait un chèque en blanc lors de notre acceptation des nouveaux ToU, sans savoir ce qu'ils contiendraient - et ils ne sont toujours pas acceptables!.


    A la rigueur, que quelqu'un décide de rompre tous les "engagements éthiques" qu'il a formulé pendant des années pour de l'argent, je peux l'accepter... c'est l'appât du gain, c'est (malheureusement) humain.

    Par contre, qu'on nous prenne pour des demeurés qui avalent n'importe quelle communication "de crise" disant le contraire exact de la réalité qui est pourtant là, juste sous nos yeux... je suis désolé, je trouve ça juste HALLUCINANT!!!

    P.S.: si vous parlez anglais, je vous encourage à parcourir DE VOUS-MEME les deux threads dont j'ai donné les liens. Je n'aime pas parler dans le vide, lisez ces threads et vous pourrez vous faire UNE IDEE PAR VOUS-MEME du mode de communication actuel de CS mis en place par Mérédith. Et vous pourrez en même temps peut-être mieux évaluer le sens de CE thread à propos du logo de Lyon...
    Flo, je ne suis pas juriste non plus, par contre on trouve sur les différents forums un grand nombre de juristes qui confirme que la clause en question:

    "you hereby grant us a perpetual, worldwide, irrevocable, non-exclusive, royalty-free and fully sublicensable license to use, reproduce, display, perform, adapt, modify, create derivative works from, distribute, have distributed and promote such Member Content in any form, in all media now known or hereinafter created and for any purpose, including without limitation the right to use your name, likeness, voice or identity."

    veut dire que CS peut utiliser, reproduire, adapter, modifier, distribuer - ça inclue la vente - n'importe lequel des "contents" - contenus, donc photo, texte, messages privés, etc... - qui ont été posté par un membre sur CS.

    Ca veut aussi dire qu'ils peuvent prendre n'importe laquelle de tes photos où tu apparais et la vendre à une agence de pub, qui peut ensuite y rajouter ton nom et un slogan "j'aime les yahourts Bifactus", puis ils peuvent afficher la photo en question - sortie de son contexte - sur tous les murs de la ville pour faire la pub d'une marque de yahourts.

    Et même en effaçant les photos ou textes en question, tu ne règle pas la question, puisque tu les as autorisé à utiliser ce matériel de façon "perpétuelle" et "irrevocable": même si tu efface tout et si tu quittes CS, ils auront toujours ce droit d'utiliser tes photos ou textes ou messages privés, y compris ceux postés cinq ans plus tôt, quand CS était non-lucratif.

    Peut-être que tu n'as pas de problème avec ça, mais moi ça me pose un problème sérieux.

    Et apparemment, vu les réactions, ça pose un problème à beaucoup d'autres personnes que moi, au-delà du fait que ça a cassé complètement la confiance des membres dans le site... avec les conséquences énumérées dans mes posts précédents.

    P.S.: pour un court-métrage, tu sais dès le départ, au moment où tu signes la décharge, quelle va être l'utilisation des images où tu apparais: diffusion dans les festivals et/ou vente du film en question à une chaîne de TV. Ca me semble honnête à partir du moment où quand tu signes la décharge, tu sais clairement à quoi tu t'engages. Et ce n'est que pour une période de dix ans... pas "perpétuelle".

    Il n'y a pas de tromperie, et ça ne concerne que ce que la performance fournie dans un cadre précis (pendant un tournage qui commence un jour et fini tel autre jour). Et ça n'est pas rétro-actif sur d'autres films antérieurs (même avec le même metteur en scène).
    Cedric: I understand what you are saying about event participation. In London, I remember seeing 120 people at the weekly meet up. Now it's more like 50 people. This could be just my perception. However, I also know personally of 1 event organiser who now does free hugs London through facebook instead of CS. It's clear he doesn't want to help CS any more after the move to become owned by a corporation.
    With couchsurfing it's personal. A lot of people feel like CS cheated on them.

    Facebook is not personal, and they didn't cheat on us. We've known the reality of facebook much longer, and we never gave our time to that believing it was something it's not. Facebook make money, but they allow you to make money too. Couchsurfing make money from my free hospitality, but they don't allow me to make money. And they give me no say in how the site is run, and they give me no say in decisions that affect me.
    ah ah, c'est cool quand Manu écrit ce que je pense, ça me fait gagner du temps... Je vais pouvoir m'occuper un peu de BeWelcome...

    Btw Meredith didn't show up in here again! What happened? Feeling afraid to have nothing clear to answer?
    Qqn a pensé a avertir la cnil au fait?
    elel saisie Facebook en justice pour moins que ca.

    la on parle de l tuilisations de nos données personnellesz, ss la posisbilité CLAIRE de les bloquées
    Ca a déjà été fait (notamment par Manu et moi à Lyon...), avec une réponse négative de la CNIL: CS n'a pas de raison sociale en France, donc leur conditions d'utilisation ne regardent pas la CNIL.

    Il va y avoir dans un futur obscur une loi d'harmonisation européenne qui permettra d'attaquer un site sans qu'il ait de présence en Europe...

    ...mais aucun détail pour les dates.

    La différence avec Facebook, c'est que Facebook a des bureaux en Irlande (si je me souviens bien de la réponse...).

    It looks like you're posting an email address or phone number. To protect your privacy, don't post any personal contact information here.

  • It looks like you're posting an email address or phone number. To protect your privacy, don't post any personal contact information here.