Replying here as i think grellas may have the insight as to this bother i see: namely i've read the Ts&Cs on their site, and i really don't think they're acceptable or helpful to any party.

The biggie for me is this:"For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos ("IP content"), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your specific memorial privacy settings you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with 1000Memories ("IP License")."

Now, i realize there's a kind of dependant clause there, citing "memorial privacy settings" but that sounds like a black - hole definition. No mention of living person profiles either, see below para. I'm not even sure the term is sufficiently well constructed as to be enforceable, but it really is not what i would do, to put high value family records at the licensing mercy of any third party. As it stands, i think someone thinks that because FB has lunatic terms, maybe they believe this is okay. But in the photo world, you normally see "grab" clauses like this in iffy photo comps and gutter microstock sites. I think it's wildly incompatible with the spirit of what the site purports to want to do.

Further terms bother me: "Administrator" is not defined. Again it's references to implied terms not real terms.

Then there's this snarly verbeage:

"If you create or administer a Memorial on 1000Memories, you agree that you have reasonable claim to be the administrator of the memorial and that you will not restrict the right of legal next of kin to assume administrative responsibilities."

So, what about families which are divided, say due to divorce? Would my putative step brother be allowed access to private photos of our common parent which were in fact private to my childhood? Also surely you warrant a claim, not agree a claim? I suppose i'd not be restricting the "legal right" of any next of kin if they had no rights, but does this indicate the website might arbitrate independantly?

There's a whole thing here which worries me, about how personal efects become property in trust for the estate, and are not necessarily divided or divisible nor disposable as assets by say an executor, if not disposed of by codicil, nor if they are common property are they controllable by an individual beneficiary. There are definitely times when however, if there is no commercial interest to be distributed, one or more members of a family may have rights to privacy, say for photos of their upbringing, and i wonder what kind of mess you could get into with this. Equally, who of the beneficiaries has any singular right to the moral copyrights and - i'm not sure this concept superannuates death exacty in a linear way - model release.

I actually find this sentence ofputting, in the context of the "grab clause" i've noted above: "We respect other people's rights, and expect you to do the same."

Then there's just something which gets my head hurting because it plain doesn't make any sense:

"You will not provide any false personal information on 1000Memories, or create an account for anyone other than yourself without permission. You will not create more than one personal profile."

Which i simply don't get because i thought the idea is to ceate a profile for your dearly departed. I know this is cleared up by the later bit about creating memorial profiles, but you see i just find it confusing nonetheless.Mentioning this confusion because the Ts&Cs are i believe the single largest block of descriptive text on the site!

Surely none of this takes much fixing. Sure, a website like this needs rights to cover them in providing the service including copyright material, but they don't need open ended broad blanket licenses unrestricted as to use or purpose or intent. That could get fixed in 20 minutes.

I'm trying to reconstruct a comment which hit the bitbucket which addressed some market context i think may be constructively relevant, so i have nicer things to say, but i think there's no excuse to have such a mess of a terms of use page.