A reader asked me:
Who owns user-generated content under Dutch law? Many social platforms have guidelines and rules that usually state that the owners of the social networks own all information distributed by users of that network. Sometimes you can buy your way out of this. But is that actually legally possible?
Many social platforms do indeed claim to become the owner of everything you post or upload to the platform. Or at least, they often did in the past, because nowadays users are more vigilant about this and such provisions lead to fierce protests. For instance, there was a minor controversy in October regarding Twitter and what the service was allowed to do with your tweets.
From a formal-legal perspective, “ownership” of content is a difficult question. The closest thing to “ownership” is “possessing copyright”. The copyright holder of all content is the user*, not the platform.
Copyright can only be transferred by means of a deed, a written document with a signature. Nowadays, these deeds may also be electronic. The general terms and conditions of an internet service are really not sufficient for this.
In today's practice, therefore, you primarily see clauses where the service provider requires a broad license: a right of use but not ownership. And reputable sites also state that this license lapses if you remove the content, plus that the license is no broader than necessary for the delivery of the service itself.
Anyone who wants to know more about what social platforms require should read the Accept or Decline crowd study by Bright magazine. And oh yes, my company is participating in analyzing the terms of use.
Arnoud
Yeah, yeah, a lot of crap gets uploaded too that someone else holds the copyright to. That's something for another discussion.