Creator Economy Law – Issue #26

Taking a break from AI, That TikTok hearing, and more!


This is Creator Economy Law, a newsletter dedicated to exploring and analyzing the legal issues surrounding the creator economy, creators, and internet platforms. If you enjoy what you’re reading, share with friends, and invite them to subscribe using the button above and share using #CreatorEconomyLaw.


9, 9, 9, 60, 61, 61. Those are the ages of the six children and adults that were killed on Monday morning at the Covenant School in Nashville, TN. As a Nashville native, this one hits hard.

How can you support Nashville?

  • The Community Foundation of Middle Tennessee started the Caring for Covenant Fund to manage the donations made in response to this tragedy. All donations made to the Fund, minus credit card fees, will be directed to The Covenant School to support the healing of those affected by this tragedy.
  • GoFundMe is offering a couple of verified fundraisers for people affected by the shooting.

Gun laws need to change. If you are still unsure of why this is a fact, I highly recommend this recent episode of The Problem with Jon Stewart (Apple TV+).


Here’s what’s been happening in the world of Creator Economy Law.


What You Should Know

9, 9, 9, 60, 61, 61. Those are the ages of the six children and adults that were killed on Monday morning at the Covenant School in Nashville, TN. As a Nashville native, this one hits hard.

How can you support Nashville?

  • The Community Foundation of Middle Tennessee started the Caring for Covenant Fund to manage the donations made in response to this tragedy. All donations made to the Fund, minus credit card fees, will be directed to The Covenant School to support the healing of those affected by this tragedy.
  • GoFundMe is offering a couple of verified fundraisers for people affected by the shooting.

Gun laws need to change. If you are still unsure of why this is a fact, I highly recommend this recent episode of The Problem with Jon Stewart (Apple TV+).


Here’s what’s been happening in the world of Creator Economy Law.


What You Should Know

That TikTok hearing… 😵💫 plus Section 230

If you’re working with creators, or are a creator yourself, it’s important to know about Section 230 and the potential impact legislation changes may bring.

This week, I wrote a piece for The Daily Dot and their creator economy newsletter Passionfruit that explores the TikTok congressional hearing from the perspective of the creator economy.

Plus, I wrote a second explainer piece for Section 230. Thanks to Jess Miers of Chamber of Progress and Hannah Poteat of LTK (formerly rewardStyle & LIKEtoKNOW.it) for sharing their thoughts, too!

📖 Read:

In support of TikTok, AOC went viral with a TikTok video voicing concerns over banning the app, while the CEO has become an internet heartthrob. However, the legislative and political attempts may not be enough, as Axios explores how any actions may ultimately be decided by the courts. But maybe Walmart will come in and save TikTok? Or, at least remove the “strategic issue” it causes for national security?

But, with all the focus on the main TikTok app, will regulators enforce the same on the company’s other apps, such as Lemon8, that that company is actively pushing and growing through partnerships with influencers? What about CapCut, which was actually mentioned at least one time that I heard during the hearing?

Meanwhile, concerns are being voiced over the broadly drafted approach to the RESTRICT Act and DATA Act, and how other apps collecting data may also have Chinese ties.

🎧 Listen: “The RESTRICT Act Isn’t About Banning TikTok, It’s About Expanding Government Powers” by Nathaniel Whittemore via CoinDesk

And then there’s the rising concern among the entertainment and media industries about the impact a ban on TikTok would have when it comes to marketing and promotion and discovery. The Washington Post highlights the potential impact on Hollywood. It will also impact the music industry.

The coming social media regulations

On Thursday, March 23, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox signed two bills into law that set forth some of the most restrictive requirements for social media platforms aimed at protecting minors. However, the provisions in the bills have a much wider impact on all age groups.

Would you want to scan and upload your state driver’s license or another form of identification to continue social media use? Is the age of 18 the appropriate starting point for restricting access, or should it be 21 similar to tobacco and alcohol? Or, should it be 13 or 15 to align with privacy laws?

SB152 includes:

  • Age verification for Utah residents that want to maintain a current, or open a new, social media account.
  • Parental consent for anyone under 18, plus access by parent/guardian to the account
  • Investigation power given to Division of Consumer Protection, with ability to seek injunctions, civil penalties ($2,500 per), and other judicial relief, with funds from penalties deposited into an education fund for consumer protection
  • Provides a private right of action for consumers / users to bring lawsuits for violations and collect damages

If an account is opened for a minor, it must include additional restrictions:

  • Disabling direct messaging tools
  • Excluding their content from search
  • No advertising
  • No personal data collection, sharing, or use
  • No targeting: ads, account suggestions, or content suggestions
  • Limits on use time

Additionally, the house bill, HB311, includes a provision that “prohibits a social media company from using a design or feature that causes a minor

to have an addiction to the company’s social media platform.” The fines could be up to $250,000 for each violating design choice.

The laws are set to go into effect on March 1, 2024, so it may be some time before the challenges begin.

📖 Read:

📺 Watch: “Utah law could dramatically limit teens’ access to social media” by PBS News Hour via YouTube

🗣 Franklin’s Take: Are they constitutional? It remains to be seen whether or not these types of laws will be upheld when challenged in court, which is very likely to happen as soon as an opportunity to bring claims of harm arises.

Hitting Pause on AI

Nearly 2,000 signatures have been added to the Future of Life Institute’s open letter calling for a pause by all AI labs for 6 months on the development of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4. The list of names is a who’s who of AI and technology innovators, including Elon Musk and Steve Wozniak, and founders and leaders of companies such as Pinterest, Stability AI, Getty Images, and more.

📖 Read:

📺 Watch: “Elon Musk, Wozniak Call for Pause on AI Systems” by Bloomberg Technology via YouTube

🗣 Franklin’s Take: AI deepfakes are making headlines more often now, so what should we be doing? Content authenticity is becoming more and more of an issue on social media platforms. Especially given the rise in both the availability and capabilities of generative AI tools, and the ease of their use when it’s as easy as crafting a text prompt.

It is starting to beg the question of when should social media platforms step up and start implementing protections, and, equally important, HOW do they start implementing such content moderation?

Adobe’s Firefly is a good case study for where to start. If generative AI tools include metadata that enables other software, like a social media platform, to automatically identify and verify the authenticity of content, then it creates a safer and more transparent platform for all users where sharing and consumption of generative materials may be happening.

Also, platforms can start including product features that allow for user-driven disclosing and flagging of generative AI content when a user chooses to share such content. This would enable clear disclosure to other users, as well as allow for a heightened review process by the platforms before an algorithm allows such content to go viral.

Are they going to do this voluntarily? Or, will it take legislative and policy action? Are some already doing this?

What do you think? I’d love to hear in the comments!


Don't Miss

TikTok

TikTok launched Effect House Branded Effects, a new solution that allows brands to work directly with TikTok effect creators to produce custom Branded Effects. For now, brands work with the top effect creators that are already using TikTok’s Effect House, the effect creation platform. “Branded Effects allow brands to boost their content to a wider audience with paid branding traffic solutions, control what brand safe pinned videos appear on the effect detail page, and place their effects in premium placements on the trending tab of the effect panel.”

TikTok is partnering with Cymbio, a company that allows brands the ability to sell on multiple marketplaces and drop ship products, to power the TikTok Shop.

Japan is looking into potentially banning TikTok, as well as other social media platforms that spread disinformation campaigns. The Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) plans to release a proposal in April. France will soon be doing the same.

Meta

new lawsuit targets Meta’s executive leadership and directors, including Mark Zuckerburg, alleging they failed to take sufficient action to prevent the spread of sex trafficking and child sexual exploitation across Facebook and Instagram.

Meanwhile, Meta is rolling out an update set to start next week that will allow Facebook and Instagram users in the EU to opt out of sharing first-party data that drives personalized ad experiences.

In the EU, Austria’s data protection authority found that the use of Meta’s tracking technologies violated data transfer rules under GDPR.

Twitter

Twitter’s got a leaky code problem. Someone went rogue and posted Twitter’s source code to GitHub. Now, Twitter is on the hunt for the person responsible by using the DMCA and other legal methods of forcing GitHub to hand over user information. And, most recently, a court has ordered GitHub to reveal the details of the user that uploaded the code, as well as any accounts that downloaded it.

The New York Times reported that Elon Musk requested a meeting with the FTC’s Lina Khan last year, but was told no. The company is under investigation by the FTC over its data privacy and security efforts (or lack thereof?).

“Starting April 15th, only verified accounts will be eligible to be in For You recommendations.” Elon tweeted. The change won’t impact accounts a user follows from still showing up on their “For Your” page.

“On April 1st, we will begin winding down our legacy verified program and removing legacy verified checkmarks,” the company tweeted. Also, Twitter announced $1,000 per month for verified organizer accounts.

Is Twitter worth $20 billion? That’s the valuation at which employees are reportedly receiving their stock grants. The Information reports it amounts to less than half of the $44 billion paid by Musk last year.

Vox reports on the problem Twitter is facing as advertisers are fleeing and not returning. The long-term impact, and response by the company, is going to be something to watch. Meanwhile, the company is facing backlash over its new API tiers and pricing.

Other News


Learn With Me

We’re two weeks away from the start of the American Bar Association’s Annual IP Conference in Washington, DC!

I’m so excited about the panel I’m moderating (see above picture) plus two additional benefits of attending:

🔥 Stellar programming across a wide range of Intellectual Property law topics (that’s what I LOVE about this conference — I have the opportunity to learn so much that’s outside of my comfort zone)

🔥 Unparalleled networking opportunities with some of the key policymakers, legal minds, and friends across IP (and the world)

Will you be there? Let me know in the comments!

Music Video of the Week

Listen on YouTubeApple Music, or Spotify.


Editor's Notes

Affiliate Links. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. I have noted above where links to products on Amazon may earn me a commission if you make a purchase. Thanks for supporting my work!

Not Legal Advice. This newsletter is published solely for educational and entertainment value. Nothing in this newsletter should be considered legal advice. If you need legal assistance or have specific questions, you should consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction. I am not your attorney. Do not share any information in the comments you should keep confidential.

Personal Opinions. The opinions and thoughts shared in this newsletter are my own, and not those of my employer or any of the third parties mentioned or linked to in this newsletter. No affiliation or endorsement is implied or otherwise intended with third parties that are referenced or linked.


Enjoying this? Share with someone you think might be interested! If this was forwarded to you, jump over to LinkedIn and subscribe for free.

%d