This article examines the practices of social media users and explores how people value, protect, and circulate content on social media platforms. Legal scholarship shows us that much of the mundane online distribution and consumption of media infringes copyright law and as a result raises complex questions around the distribution and circulation of content. Through exploring this misalignment between copyright law and everyday social media practices, this article identifies existing norms on social media platforms and asks whether they could provide guidance for a future copyright reform agenda. Drawing on a series of group interviews with people who identified as regular users of social media, we explored emergent norms of attribution and circulation. Applying a grounded theory approach, an emergent thematic analysis of the data uncovered a range of responses coalescing around the themes of attribution, platform norms, and commercialization. The data show that people make complex and nuanced decisions around when they should attribute content, seek permission to use content, or allow others to use their content. We suggest that these decisions are informed by the vernaculars of each platform and a critical assessment of the broader commercial logics of social media, which results in many people placing a greater importance around attribution. The authors conclude by proposing that rather than stretching the logic of a legal framework that is increasingly not fit for purpose for everyday social media content distribution, policymakers should take into account these emergent practices on social media platforms when considering reform opportunities.
For many privacy scholars, consent is on life support, if not dead. In July 2020, we held six focus groups in Australia to test this claim by gauging attitudes to consent and privacy, with a spotlight on smartphones. These focus groups included discussion of four case studies: ‘shadow profiles’, eavesdropping by companies on smartphone users, non-consensual government surveillance of its citizens and contact tracing apps developed to combat COVID-19. Our participants expressed concerns about these practices and said they valued individual consent and saw it as a key element of privacy protection. However, they saw the limits of individual consent, saying that the law and the design of digital services also have key roles to play. Building on these findings, we argue for a blend of good law, good design and an appreciation that individual consent is still valued and must be fixed rather than discarded - ideally in ways that are also collective. In other words, consent is dead; long live consent.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.