( CNN ) -- The combination of Google 's new storage service , Google Drive , and the company 's recently unified terms of service and privacy policy , have riled the Internet into demanding to know why Google seemed to be claiming ownership of their customers ' files . As it turns out , the company claims no ownership -- it says so right in the terms of service . And a comparison between Google Drive 's terms and that of other storage services turns up few material differences , except for a couple of questionable terms that may land your content in Google 's promotional materials . In a comparison piece , The Verge noted that the terms of service from four major cloud storage services -- Dropbox , iCloud , Microsoft SkyDrive , and Google Drive -- all claim no ownership of the files you give them . Several publishing outfits raised the alarm about a clause in Google 's terms of service that states Google reserves the right to `` use , host , store , reproduce , modify , create derivative works ( such as those resulting from translations , adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services ) , communicate , publish , publicly perform , publicly display and distribute '' content uploaded to their services . But as The Verge pointed out , other services have similarly expansive , and sometimes more expansive , terms , and those services mean only to use them in service of , well , the services . When we spoke to the Electronic Frontier Foundation about Google Drive 's terms of service , the EFF found little about them that was more suspicious than in any other similar cloud service . But Rebecca Jeschke , EFF 's media relations director and digital rights analyst , paused over one phrase : `` The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating , promoting , and improving our Services , and to develop new ones . '' Promoting ? Google 's unified privacy policy states that it wo n't use your material to do anything other than `` provide , maintain , protect and improve [ its services ] , [ and ] to develop new ones , '' and will ask for consent before lending your material to any other uses . But if a file is set as publicly available , that is considered consent for use to promote Google 's services . If a user uploads a photo and sets it as publicly viewable , that picture could end up in an ad for Google . The good news here is that Google is n't going to be strewing your personal files all over the Internet as banner ads , as the terms of service alone might suggest , provided the files have some privacy settings , as they do by default -- viewable only to friends , for instance . But a public file on any of Google 's services could , in theory , end up in promotional materials . It makes some sense that public content could be used by others , but it 's easy to forget how public `` Public '' on an Internet service is . It gives us flashbacks to the family photo posted on a blog that wound up in a Czech ad . Jeschke went on to point out that users should be more concerned with who Google might be forced to give their files to , than what Google itself might do with their files . `` In light of Megaupload , it 's possible that users are worried about the wrong thing , '' she said . Files stored in the cloud can still be easily lost or subpoenaed without the users ' knowledge , Jeschke noted , an issue that 's often overlooked . COPYRIGHT 2011 ARSTECHNICA.COM .
Users want to know why Google Drive seemed to be claiming ownership of customers ' files . As it turns out , the company claims no ownership -- it says so right in the terms of service . But a public file on any of Google 's services could , in theory , end up in promotional materials .