News/Media Alliance Criticizes Meta’s New Terms Over Copyright and AI Concerns
Share your love
-Editorial
The News/Media Alliance has criticized changes to Meta’s commercial terms of use scheduled to take effect Oct. 30, warning that the updated policies could allow the technology company to collect copyrighted content from news organizations’ websites for use in its products, including artificial intelligence.
The concerns follow reporting by Nieman Lab that Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, updated its commercial terms to permit automated collection of information from websites associated with business accounts.
Danielle Coffey, president and CEO of the News/Media Alliance, said the changes could undermine publishers’ intellectual property rights and force news organizations to choose between protecting their content and maintaining access to audiences through Meta’s platforms.
“Meta’s new commercial terms of use are outrageous and probably illegal,” Coffey said in a statement. “The company’s decision to withhold access to its audience unless businesses allow Meta to scrape content from their websites is an appalling, bad-faith policy, and a clear abuse of the company’s market power.”
The alliance called for the disputed provisions to be stopped before their scheduled implementation.
According to Nieman Lab, an earlier version of the updated terms explicitly referenced using collected website content to train Meta’s products. Following criticism, Meta removed the reference to training but retained language permitting automated collection of information to develop, improve, and research advertising and business products.
The revised wording has raised questions about whether copyrighted news articles and other material could still be used in developing AI technologies without separate licensing agreements.
The News/Media Alliance argues that the policy could affect not only newspapers and digital publishers but also other businesses and copyright holders with websites connected to Meta accounts.
Coffey cited musician Taylor Swift and stock photography company Shutterstock as hypothetical examples of copyright holders whose online material could potentially be affected.
“News publishers aren’t the only ones at risk,” Coffey said, warning that the implications could extend to publicly available written, photographic and musical works.
Meta has disputed interpretations suggesting its updated terms authorize unrestricted collection of news content, maintaining that the changes concern its existing advertising and business services.
The controversy comes amid broader disputes between news publishers and technology companies over compensation, copyright protections and the use of journalism to develop generative AI systems.
The legal enforceability of the disputed provisions remains uncertain. However, the News/Media Alliance maintains that publishers should not be required to surrender control over their intellectual property as a condition of accessing major digital platforms.
