Advocate General Szpunar’s opinion in the Meta-case, C-797/23, is good news, p. 29: …”the Facebook network is not merely a passive place for sharing content between users. By means of sophisticated algorithms, it suggests specific content to users according to their supposed centres of interest, without those users having carried out any search for that content or it being suggested to them by other users. Facebook is, therefore, a truly autonomous content provider, whose specific characteristic is that the content is neither created nor purchased by it: that content is uploaded by users and Facebook is then responsible for offering it to users. Such use cannot, in my view, be attributed to users, but must be regarded as being carried out by the ISSP, namely Meta, and, therefore, in so far as it concerns press publications, as falling within the exclusive rights of publishers.”
LinkedIn, Facebook, YouTube, TikTok etc. benefit from users uploading and sharing. Content drives engagement, enriches data, and powers monetisation. Revenue generated from creators’ work should therefore be fairly shared – also to sustain the production of reliable information and quality content, strengthen democratic discourse, and foster innovation through diverse voices.