Google Chrome Browser Lands Yesterday; Stirs User Content Concerns Today

So Yesterday (Tuesday, September 2) Google's entry into the Browser wars, Google Chrome (beta) became available to the masses. It boasts several slick features; a simple user interface, speedy load times, tabs that can be dragged into another window, combining open browser windows, the list goes on. It's obvious this is Google's Gauntlet, thrown down before Windows Internet Explorer, Safari, Opera, Firefox, etc...especially since some of Chrome's coolest features are "inspired" by similar elements of those other browsers. For a rundown on that, take a look at this Gizmodo Post. Seems that Google now has (another) great application in their already impressive arsenal of services. Maybe they are bent on world domination, or maybe they're just trying to offer end users more choices in the world of tech. It's just a question of your viewpoint (potayto, potahto). I don't have any need or desire to try it out myself, since I've already fallen in love with Mozilla Firefox 3 and still have Internet Explorer 7 installed, though rarely used in the last few weeks, mostly as a backup to be used in the event my Firefox has some sort of unthinkable epic fail situation.

Today, however, all is not calm. Some eagle-eyed end user spotted "suspicious" wording in the Google Chrome EULA (End User License Agreement), which, at first glance, raises questions about content ownership. If you want to click over to Gizmodo's news item on the Google Chrome EULA, where I spotted it, you'll see that it certainly throws a shadow on user privacy/content issues. Also, you can see that there is a discussion going on in the comments section of that Gizmodo article. I'm sure there are similar discussions going on wherever this topic has been posted.
I'm not fluent in legalese, but it can hardly be said that Google Chrome is the only place you find such ominous-sounding Terms of Service. After looking at the relevant section on the Chrome EULA posted in the Gizmodo story, and revisiting the terms of service of this very Blogger account, it's very similar.

Here is my understanding of the whole "sordid" issue. There's not a whole lot to worry about in terms of content ownership or intellectual property. In these terms of service, which we can understand as being the same across the range of Google services and applications, Google states that they lay NO claim to content ownership. They DO state that your entry into the agreement allows them to use portions of a user's content FOR PURPOSES OF ADVERTISING GOOGLE SERVICES.
Now, I'm not going to slam Gizmodo (or any other site that is running this news item), but I gotta admit, it seems just a bit alarmist to me. And there is certainly no harm in discussing these issues, since I think it's a good way for we, the users to keep them, the providers "honest." In the end, it comes down to all of us using our common sense and understanding of the give-and-take that is inherent in information technology.

UPDATE: In the spirit of the paragraph directly above, Google has already responded to the concerns being aired in the blogosphere, assuring everyone that the language in the EULA will be changed, and also made retroactive for users who have already downloaded Google Chrome.

Coming Soon: The Entertainment Value of "Fanboy Wars" (like Apple vs. Microsoft), Lots of Love for Paint.Net Freeware, More Smartphone Goodness