Also mollified was Noah Kalina, who took wedding photographs earlier this year for Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook. In a widely circulated post on Twitter, Mr. Kalina said the new terms of service were “a contract no professional or nonprofessional should ever sign.” His advice: “Walk away.”

On Friday, the photographer said he had walked back. “It’s nice to know they listened.”

Kim Kardashian, the most followed person on Instagram, said on Tuesday that she “really loved” the service — note the past tense — and that the new rules were not “fair.” She had yet to update her 17 million Twitter followers on Friday, but since she is pushing her True Reflection fragrance it is a safe bet that she has forgiven and forgotten.

Andy Benson, a creative director at a Philadelphia advertising service, was less conciliatory. He said it was not the fact that Instagram needed to monetize the service that bothered him, but the way it had done so.

“Instagram was a social, creative tool,” he said. “But now that Facebook is involved, it felt reckless to suggest that they could sell user-created content for their own financial gain.”

Mr. Benson added: “The best advertising in the social media realm is a conversation — it’s not a monologue to the consumer. And that is what this felt like. ‘Oh, we’re going to let you use this tool, then take everything and sell it.’ ”

Mr. Cox had similar feelings. As the guardian for his 4- and 8-year-old nephews, he said he used the service to upload pictures of the boys and enjoyed the feedback of the “likes” he got through the service.

“But the idea that a year from now a Disney ad could pop up on my friend’s Facebook page featuring a picture of my nephew feels like a bad TNT daytime movie,” he said. “I want to be able to control what is out there.”