2) they think that what they type into an IM client will pop out on the other end unchanged
3) they believe that their relationship with the facilitator of their communications media should not be subject to relationships that provider has with other commercial parties.
Where does it end? Being unable to share the link of your favourite restaurant because it hurts the interests of your communications provider?
The amount of modification of any messages by two parties that trust each other enough to engage in one-on-one communications should be set to '0' by default, unless they request otherwise.
That gives me an idea for the most evil chat system ever: modify links to hotels, restaurants etc based on the size of kickbacks from competing establishments.
More seriously, chat should work so that the client signs and encrypts each message, hiding it from the provider and anyone other than the intended recipient.
You've released your chat media out into the world. As far as I can tell that makes them fair game for everyone to look at and download and alter and remix as they desire.
1) they consider their communications private
2) they think that what they type into an IM client will pop out on the other end unchanged
3) they believe that their relationship with the facilitator of their communications media should not be subject to relationships that provider has with other commercial parties.
Where does it end? Being unable to share the link of your favourite restaurant because it hurts the interests of your communications provider?
The amount of modification of any messages by two parties that trust each other enough to engage in one-on-one communications should be set to '0' by default, unless they request otherwise.