Patton (2019)

From Copyright EVIDENCE

Advertising Architectural Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing Programming and broadcasting Computer programming Computer consultancy Creative, arts and entertainment Cultural education

Film and motion pictures Sound recording and music publishing Photographic activities PR and communication Software publishing (including video games) Specialised design Television programmes Translation and interpretation

1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare 2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)? 3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors) 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) 5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)

A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right) B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction) C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing) D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability) E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts) F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Source Details

Patton (2019)
Title: How to Protect Users' Copyright Rights in the Age of Social Media Platforms and Their Unread Terms of Service
Author(s): Patton, M.
Year: 2019
Citation: Patton, M. (2019). How to Protect Users' Copyright Rights in the Age of Social Media Platforms and Their Unread Terms of Service. USFL Rev., 53, 463.
Link(s): Definitive , Open Access
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by:
About the Data
Data Description:
Data Type:
Secondary Data Sources:
Data Collection Methods:
Data Analysis Methods:
Industry(ies):
Country(ies):
Cross Country Study?: Yes
Comparative Study?: No
Literature review?: No
Government or policy study?: No
Time Period(s) of Collection:
Funder(s):

Abstract

Social media platforms required users to read and agree to a license in terms of service before using the platform and posting content. However, the problem is that social media platforms go beyond the narrow license that is necessary and instead use terms of service to grant itself an extremely broad license to the users' copyright protected content. The author reviews the terms of service of five prominent social media platforms: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, and Pinterest, in the context of copyright law and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"). The author argues that social media platforms grant itself a broad, transferable, and royalty-free sublicensable license to the user's copyright-protected content through their terms of service. This problem is worsened because most users fail to read or understand the platforms' terms of service. And the author also suggests how users can continue to use social media platforms and protect their copyright rights.

Main Results of the Study

After reviewing Twitter's, Instagram's, Facebook's, YouTube's, and Pinterest's terms of service, it's clear that all five of the prominent social media platforms use their terms to grant themselves an extremely broad license to their users' copyright protected content. This license is overly and unnecessarily broad because it allows the platforms to transfer and sub-license the user's work without requiring the user's consent or payment to the user. This issue is compounded by the fact that most users either do not read or understand the terms of service and may also be limited in when and how to bring a lawsuit by arbitration and forum selection clauses. Therefore, the platforms' existing terms of service are designed to unfairly benefit the platform and disadvantage the user.

Policy Implications as Stated By Author

“It is clear that such legislation (editors add: the Copyright Directive) has support and could be an important counter-balance to one-sided social media platform terms.” “A new law (editors add: the Copyright Directive) in the European Union will further help protect users' copyright rights by requiring platforms to scan for infringing work.”



Coverage of Study

Coverage of Fundamental Issues
Issue Included within Study
Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare
Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?
Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)
Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)
Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)
Green-tick.png
Coverage of Evidence Based Policies
Issue Included within Study
Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)
Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)
Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)
Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)
Green-tick.png
Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)
Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Datasets

{{{Dataset}}}