Just the paranoid in me, but was anyone else taken aback by Snapfish's Terms and Conditions agreement? This line particularly made me go back and read the whole thing twice: "Accordingly, as a condition to your Membership, you hereby grant Snapfish a perpetual, universal, nonexclusive right to copy, display, modify, transmit, make derivative works of and distribute any Content transmitted or provided to the Service by you, solely for the purpose of providing the Service." What got me in this was the perpetual and universal non-exclusive right to modify or make derivative works of one of my images. The rest I can understand (for showing the images on their site), but the right to modify and make derivative works of it? I could understand MSNBC needing that right (since they'd be putting it in books, on TV, etc.) but Snapfish? The last line is kind of vague too - "solely for the purpose of providing the Service." In my mind, I can easily see someone making the argument that they used my photo in their advertising because without advertising their services, the Service wouldn't be able to survive so therefore, the advertising was needed so we can keep providing the Service. Not saying that's what they'd do, just made me think and gave me a bit to worry about. So, I'll use it for the 24/7 event, but no way I will put my normal stuff on that site. Don't like the sound of it. -=>Donald