Came across this CBC story today https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7333706 discussing Sony’s lawsuit against SUVA Beauty, a local beauty brand.
Sony alleges that SUVA was not authorized to use music by popular artists as the soundtrack in videos used to promote its brand on social media.
Use of popular music in videos is not a rare occurrence on social media. There does seem to be a line where, on one hand, it is acceptable for someone to use copyrighted material in a personal post, but on the other hand, it is unacceptable when used for commercial purposes.
What do you all think? What is the difference between using copyrighted material for a personal purpose vs. a commercial purpose?
Note also that the article features our very own professor commenting on the lawsuit, pointing out that many people are not aware of the intricacies of copyright law and if they break it will get a lesson on it when powerful companies with deep pockets enforce their legal rights.
Copyright & Social Media
Communications Law
Hi Meghan,
Thank you for bringing this interesting case to our attention.
As I was reading your post, I wondered where the line between personal use and commercial purposes might be in the context of issues regarding influencers/content creators? In an age of social media, is there a certain number of followers one must have in order for that line to be crossed when it comes to copyright issues becoming legally relevant? Or is it just a question of pursuing those with pockets deep enough to be worth the pursuit?
Cheers
That’s interesting, thanks for the comment Eva! From my perspective it wouldn’t be the number of followers that would matter but whether the copyrighted media is being used for a commercial purpose (i.e. the influencer is making money from it). But there would still be the question of when they are using it for personal purposes vs. commercial purposes. For example, if they post a video that’s sponsored, it seems clear to me that it’s commercial. However, if they post a video that’s part of their content in general it seems to be a fuzzier line, especially if the content looks personal (e.g. makeup routine, day in the life etc).
I think your point about the practical side of enforcing copyright rights is interesting too. It seems to go against the moral aspect of copyright if the rights are only enforced against certain users. However, practically that’s probably what’s happening.
That’s interesting, thanks for the comment Eva! From my perspective it wouldn’t be the number of followers that would matter but whether the copyrighted media is being used for a commercial purpose (i.e. the influencer is making money from it). But there would still be the question of when they are using it for personal purposes vs. commercial purposes. For example, if they post a video that’s sponsored, it seems clear to me that it’s commercial. However, if they post a video that’s part of their content in general it seems to be a fuzzier line, especially if the content looks personal (e.g. makeup routine, day in the life etc).
I think your point about the practical side of enforcing copyright rights is interesting too. It seems to go against the moral aspect of copyright if the rights are only enforced against certain users. However, practically that’s probably what’s happening.