national_geograpic_instagramInstagram is backstroking out of stormy waters after it botched a proposed change to its privacy policy and terms of service.

Users were outraged earlier this week after the photo sharing service – recently acquired by Facebook – gave users a heads up about major changes.

Instagram’s very wordy terms of service seemed like the company could soon sub-license and sell photos, and use the images in advertising.

A senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation told CNet that the new agreement would leave the door open on unspecified future use for a user’s photos.

But since then, Instagram’s co-founder Kevin Systrom wrote a blog post which seems to sort out the contentious changes.

Systrom says the proposed changes made it seem like Instagram was going to sell user photos without any compensation – but that is not true and “it is our mistake that the language is confusing.”

So he goes on to say that Instagram is working on coming up with “updated language” in the terms of service to make sure people get it.

But the Instagram co-founder also goes on to say that Instagram is a business, and they’re going to explore ways to make money.

So while everyone from Tiffani Amber Thiesson to National Geographic was up in arms over the proposed changes, they were all complaining about a service that is free – and ad-free too right now.

It’s hard to whine about a service you don’t pay for, or have to put up with seeing ads to use.

Considering Instagram is owned by Facebook, would you be opposed to seeing ads similar to “Sponsored Posts” in Facebook? Or something like “Your friend John Doe likes Company XYZ’s feed?”