The Copyright Alliance, whose members include the RIAA, the NMPA, and Universal Music Group, has called Meta’s proposed updates to its business terms of service “unconscionable.”
The updates are currently scheduled to apply to commercial accounts across Facebook, Instagram, Messenger, Threads, and WhatsApp from November 20.
One day after the Copyright Alliance issued its statement, Meta said that date could be pushed back again, pending “a full consultation with industry groups and leaders.”
The statement from the Copyright Alliance, issued on Tuesday (October 27), said the changes “appear to authorize Meta to scrape and use websites and other content from commercial account holders for Meta’s business products, including to train and ground Meta’s AI products.”
The Washington, DC-based organization added that there is no opt-out option available to Meta’s business partners.
“The new terms of service that Meta intends to put into practice are unconscionable,” said Keith Kupferschmid, CEO of the Copyright Alliance. “They could allow Meta to scrape any business user’s content and use that scraped content, much of which is protected by copyright, in Meta’s own business products, including for advertising, and to train and ground the company’s AI products.
“They could allow Meta to scrape any business user’s content and use that scraped content, much of which is protected by copyright, in Meta’s own business products, including for advertising, and to train and ground the company’s AI products.”
Keith Kupferschmid, Copyright Alliance
“While Meta did make additional changes to its terms in response to justified objections, those changes do not ameliorate our concerns. The revised terms continue to allow for broad scraping of websites and unjustified exploitation of content for generative AI purposes.
“They also allow Meta to ignore or circumvent protocols like robots.txt used to indicate a request to disallow scraping.
“This is not just a news media issue. Virtually every organization in the creative industry (and most other industries) has a business account with Meta to enable them to manage Facebook pages, Threads accounts, Instagram profiles, and WhatsApp channels.
“The negative impact of Meta’s updated commercial terms would be so far-reaching that all businesses and creators with online content, such as photographers, newspapers, artists, you name it, would be adversely affected.
“Further, because there is no ability to opt out of these terms, Meta’s updated terms would force business account holders to either accept these terms or individually terminate essential commercial accounts, which is extremely difficult given Meta’s market power.
“This approach to doing business is wholly unacceptable. We strongly urge Meta to withdraw the changes to the TOS and to address the significant concerns voiced by the Copyright Alliance and many others.”
Meta’s statement came on Wednesday (October 28), via a post on X from Andy Stone, the company’s VP of Communications.
“We’ve heard publishers’ feedback on our proposed ads and business terms update,” said Stone. “We care deeply about our partners and do not plan to make policy changes without a full consultation with industry groups and leaders.
“We’re committed to getting this right, and as we expect this consultation could extend beyond November 20, in which case we’d delay implementation of the updated terms. Until then our existing terms remain in place.”
Reuters, which also carried the statement, reported that Meta was delaying the rollout indefinitely.
That would be the second time Meta has postponed the change.
On October 23, the company moved the effective date from October 30 to November 20.
That first delay followed complaints from publishers and digital advertisers to antitrust authorities in the EU and the UK, according to Reuters.
The complainants argued that the terms would hand Meta unlimited rights to use their content in its AI services, a claim the company has rejected.
On Wednesday, the same day as Stone’s post, a court in Oslo temporarily barred Meta from implementing the new terms, according to AFP, after a challenge from ten Norwegian media groups, including public broadcaster NRK and Schibsted.
The court issued its order on an emergency basis, without hearing from Meta, pending a final ruling on whether the terms are lawful.
Meta had already revised the wording of the terms once after pushback from publishers.
An earlier draft stated that Meta “may use any content from such domains, web pages, or URLs to provide, develop, improve, research, train, and maintain the integrity of” its products, services, and features, according to Nieman Lab, which first reported on the terms on October 15.
The current version, which still lists November 20 as its effective date, drops the word “train.”
Instead, it permits Meta to use automated tools such as web scrapers and crawlers “in order to provide, develop, improve, research, and maintain advertising and business products.”
US Senator Marsha Blackburn, a Tennessee Republican, has also called on Meta, in an October 23 letter, to withdraw the updated terms.
“Meta must withdraw the updated Commercial Terms and come to the table to protect the content of creators and publishers across the country,” said Blackburn, according to Reuters. “American creators and small businesses are not a free source of content for Meta to exploit.”
Asked about the letter, Meta told Reuters that “content owners will still be able to use robots.txt to signal preferences” and that “these updates don’t give us new rights to supersede such preferences and this isn’t about scraping news sites.”
Blackburn isn’t the only senator to object. On Saturday (October 24), Democratic Senator Adam Schiff of California wrote to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg urging the company not to implement the terms, noting that they make no reference to robots.txt.
The Copyright Alliance’s organizational members also include A2IM, ASCAP, BMI, SESAC, SoundExchange, and the Recording Academy, according to its website.
The organization says it represents the copyright interests of more than two million individual creators and more than 15,000 organizations in the US.
Universal Music Group, one of those members, renewed its licensing deal with Meta in August 2024.
As part of that agreement, UMG and Meta said they would work together “to address, among other things, unauthorized AI-generated content that could affect artists and songwriters.”
Meta’s relationship with other music rightsholders is being tested in court.
Wixen Music Publishing, which sued Meta in January, alleges that the company’s “reason for slashing payments to songwriters is to replace human-generated, royalty-bearing music with royalty-free AI-generated music.”
A federal judge threw out Wixen’s copyright claims in September, while giving the publisher the opportunity to file a second amended complaint, which it did on September 18.
That ruling turned on whether Wixen had standing to sue, not on whether Meta had infringed.
Platform terms of service are also central to an AI training lawsuit involving Google.
In June, Google moved to dismiss a lawsuit brought by independent musicians over its Lyria 3 AI music model.
The company argued that the artists had licensed their music when they accepted YouTube’s terms of service.
The musicians allege that Google trained Lyria 3 on copyrighted recordings pulled from YouTube without permission or payment.Music Business Worldwide
The Copyright Alliance, an organization comprising members such as the RIAA, NMPA, and Universal Music Group, has voiced strong opposition to Meta’s proposed updates to its business terms of service, labeling them as “unconscionable.” These updates, set to take effect on November 20, would impact commercial accounts across Meta’s platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, Messenger, Threads, and WhatsApp. However, following the Copyright Alliance’s statement, Meta indicated that the implementation date might be postponed to allow for further consultations with industry stakeholders.
The Copyright Alliance’s statement raised significant concerns regarding the implications of the new terms, which appear to authorize Meta to scrape content from commercial account holders’ websites for its own business purposes. This includes using content for advertising and to train AI products. The organization criticized the lack of an opt-out option for business partners, emphasizing that the changes would permit extensive scraping of content, much of which is protected by copyright.
Keith Kupferschmid, the CEO of the Copyright Alliance, articulated that the terms would enable Meta to exploit the content of businesses and creators across various industries, including photography, journalism, and the arts. He described the situation as severely damaging, as many organizations rely on Meta’s platforms for managing their online presence. The inability to opt out of the new terms effectively coerces businesses into either accepting the terms or facing the daunting task of terminating their accounts.
In response to the backlash, Meta acknowledged the concerns raised by publishers and stated that it values its partnerships. Andy Stone, Meta’s VP of Communications, confirmed that the company does not intend to implement policy changes without thorough consultation and indicated that the consultation process could lead to further delays in rolling out the updated terms. Until any changes are finalized, the existing terms will remain in effect.
This situation marked the second delay in the rollout of these terms; the original effective date was pushed from October 30 to November 20 following complaints from publishers and advertisers to antitrust authorities in the EU and the UK. These complaints emphasized that the terms would grant Meta unlimited rights to utilize their content in its AI services, a claim that the company has denied.
On the same day as Stone’s statement, a Norwegian court issued a temporary order preventing Meta from implementing the new terms after a challenge from ten Norwegian media groups. This emergency order was made without hearing from Meta and is pending a final ruling on the legality of the terms.
Meta has revised its terms once already in light of pushback from publishers. An earlier draft included broad language that would have allowed Meta to use content from domains, web pages, or URLs for various purposes, including training its products. The current version, while still set for a November 20 effective date, has changed the wording to allow for automated tools to be used for developing and maintaining advertising and business products but still raises concerns about scraping practices.
Amidst this controversy, U.S. Senator Marsha Blackburn and other lawmakers have called for Meta to withdraw the updated terms, asserting that these changes would exploit the content of creators and publishers. Blackburn emphasized that American creators should not serve as a free resource for Meta’s commercial interests. Similarly, Senator Adam Schiff has urged Meta to reconsider its approach, highlighting the lack of reference to existing protocols like robots.txt in the terms.
The Copyright Alliance represents the interests of over two million creators and more than 15,000 organizations in the U.S. Its members include prominent entities such as A2IM, ASCAP, BMI, SESAC, SoundExchange, and the Recording Academy. Universal Music Group, a member of the organization, renewed its licensing agreement with Meta in August 2024, stating that they would collaborate to address issues related to unauthorized AI-generated content that could impact artists and songwriters.
Meta’s relationships with music rights holders are currently under scrutiny, with ongoing legal challenges. For instance, Wixen Music Publishing has sued Meta, accusing the company of reducing payments to songwriters in favor of replacing human-generated music with AI-generated content. A federal judge dismissed Wixen’s initial copyright claims but allowed for the filing of a revised complaint, focusing on procedural issues rather than the merits of the copyright claims.
This struggle over platform terms of service is not unique to Meta; similar legal disputes are occurring with other tech giants, such as Google. Google has faced lawsuits from independent musicians concerning the use of their music in AI models, arguing that their content was licensed through acceptance of YouTube’s terms of service.
The Copyright Alliance’s advocacy highlights the broader implications of Meta’s proposed changes, indicating that the ramifications extend beyond the media industry to encompass a wide array of creative fields. The organization’s call for Meta to withdraw the changes underscores the urgency of protecting creators’ rights in an increasingly digital landscape where content scraping and usage without consent pose significant challenges.
