Promoting products or events through social media platforms presents a formidable challenge, particularly for social media managers operating within limited budgets. Amidst this challenge, memes emerge as a budget-friendly approach to skilfully communicate messages. Memes have a unique ability to cut through the noise of social media and resonate with people, making them a valuable tool for social media campaigns. Yet, even though memes might seem like mere ‘humorous images’ circulating freely in the digital realm, it’s vital to recognise that Intellectual Property laws still apply to them. Grasping the legal ramifications is paramount for social media managers, to safeguard them from potential complications.
Dois tipos de memes
No que diz respeito à utilização de memes para a promoção de conteúdos, há dois tipos a ter em conta: os memes próprios/partilhados e os memes de terceiros.
Memes próprios/partilhados are those created by the marketing department, where they own or share the intellectual propriedade (IP) rights to the meme. (e.g., look at the recent Barbie film campaign with Oppenheimer aka ‘Barbenheimer’ – embora presuma que haja um consenso e, potencialmente, um acordo de licenças cruzadas entre os dois estúdios para tirar partido do entusiasmo gerado, uma vez que as campanhas de cada filme estão incrivelmente bem coordenadas)
Memes de terceiros are memes that the marketing department does not own the IP rights to. They tend to be more commonly used because of the social currency they hold (be it an image or video clip) which helps propel or colour a message the brand is trying to tell.
Os riscos dos memes de terceiros
While Third-Party Memes can be effective, they come with potential legal risks, especially when they include copyrighted images or videos without the owner’s permission (breach of copyright).
There is a quiet social understanding (not a legal one!) that memes co-opted or employed by other brands (as exemplified in esta publicação no Twitter) don’t encroach upon or contest the comercial rights of the intellectual property (IP) owner. Instead, these memes function as custodians of the IP owner’s copyrighted creation within the social fabric. However, the line between acceptable use and infringement is exceedingly delicate. This balance hinges on the intentions behind meme usage and the identities of both the meme users and the IP holders. Understandably, the owners of intellectual property are unlikely to litigate against a 14-year-old sharing a meme on Twitter, especially when compared to pursuing legal action against a business worth over £100M (*Cough* Burnley).
For absolute clarity, there isn’t a “de minimis” principle that grants free rein in using someone else’s IP, suggesting that using even 10 seconds or less of a song or video clip can potentially trigger legal consequences. While “Fair Dealing” offers some defence, it must align meticulously with specific exemptions pertaining to using another individual’s intellectual property assets. These exemptions, in essence, do not undermine IP owners’ exploitation of their assets or grant third parties the ability to profit from those assets. Hence, the law shows leniency towards certain scenarios, as outlined in s30 and s30A of the Copyright, Design and Patents Act 1988. This leniency extends to instances like parody or satire (under s30A), where the use doesn’t compete with the original IP but rather employs it as a reference to convey a distinct point.
O Burnley FC e os memes
Recently, Burnley FC used memes to announce player transfers in a fun and attention-grabbing way. These posts, while undeniably cringe-worthy, have managed to spark considerable engagement. However, their unconventional approach has also cast a spotlight on potential copyright infringement concerns. The excitement of bringing new players is great and follows a recent tradition of cringey/bad-funny player announcements (*cough* Southampton and Besiktas *cough* but note, these examples fall into the Owned/Shared Meme category! Burnley sadly does not).
A primeira publicação, com destaque para a contratação de Zeki Amdouni pelo clube, apresenta uma semelhança impressionante com um vídeo de reféns, incorporando uma cena dos Teletubbies. Esta publicação alcançou a impressionante marca de 11,4 milhões de visualizações (à data da publicação do artigo).
Da mesma forma, a segunda publicação —anunciando a passagem de James Trafford para o clube—mostra-o numa pose um pouco embaraçosa, recorrendo a uma cena do filme «Regresso ao Futuro». Esta publicação também teve um grande impacto, acumulando 1,4 milhões de visualizações (à data da publicação deste artigo).
Responsabilidades potenciais
A gravidade da situação torna-se evidente quando se analisam as duas publicações com conteúdos dos Teletubbies (propriedade da BBC) e de «Regresso ao Futuro» (propriedade de Robert Zemeckis e Bob Gale). Estas publicações amplificam estrategicamente a presença de Burnley (no valor de mais de 150 milhões de libras) as a prominent Premier League team across the expansive web landscape. This strategic propagation potentially yields indirect commercial advantages. Yet, here lies the core issue: Burnley, as a third party, harnesses the intellectual property (IP) belonging to others to communicate a message about player acquisitions or self-promotion. To be explicit, this usage constitutes a blatant breach of copyright.
Consequentemente, o Burnley fica sujeito a repercussões legais, incluindo eventuais indemnizações a pagar à BBC, ou a Robert Zemeckis e Bob Gale. A par dessas repercussões, a medida imperativa seria remover imediatamente o conteúdo contestado das plataformas de redes sociais do Burnley.
De um ponto de vista teórico, existe a possibilidade de o Burnley ter infringido os termos estipulados pelo Twitter (ou “X”) e pelo Instagram. Ao utilizar propriedade intelectual em plataformas nas quais não detém direitos ou licenças de utilização, surge o risco de a conta empresarial do Burnley ser suspensa em consequência dessas infrações.
Importância da conformidade
Although the chances of account suspension and receiving a cease-and-desist letter are slim, the consequences could be severe. Social media managers and marketing managers must exercise caution and obtain proper authorisation before using Third-Party IP in promotional content. In-house counsel’s guidance and client buy-in can also be valuable in avoiding legal complications.
In conclusion, memes can be a powerful tool for content promotion, but social media managers must tread carefully to avoid legal risks. Unsanctioned use of Third-Party IP can lead to copyright infringement claims, potential damages, and even account suspension. Being aware of these risks and obtaining proper permissions is essential for successful and compliant social media campaigns. Additionally, compliance with online advertising regulations and other relevant regulamentar considerations (I.e., Premier League/FA regulations that affect football clubs) is equally vital to ensure a smooth and risk-free promotion of businesses or organisations.
If you require assistance or advice with any of the issues mentioned in this article or any other commercial matters, our dedicated team is ready to apoio you.
Contactar-nos:
Mansour Mansour: Empresa & Commercial Solicitor │ M.Mansour@rfblegal.co.uk │ 020 3995 7798
Informações adicionais
- Notícias Autor:Mansour Mansour
