Who Owns Your Tweets – Twitter, You Or Anyone?

This is a guest posting by Shea Bennett. Shea is the founder of Twittercism, a blog that explores the various aspects of Twitter, from the great to the dark. We love Shea’s wits and guts, so we will be bringing his thoughts to you on a regular basis!

Consider this, if you will: I decide to write a book through Twitter, 140 characters at a time. Moroever, I do this stream-of-consciousness style, and just let it all flow out. I keep no backup. I write my book, tweet after tweet after tweet. Soon, thousands and thousands of my words are in the system.

For their own reasons, Twitter decides I’ve done something wrong, and suspends my account. All my work is lost.

What are my legal rights? Who owns those tweets? Can I get them back?

In Twitter’s terms of service, under a section called, “Copyright (What’s Yours is Yours)”, they state:

We claim no intellectual property rights over the material you provide to the Twitter service. Your profile and materials uploaded remain yours. You can remove your profile at any time by deleting your account. This will also remove any text and images you have stored in the system.

We encourage users to contribute their creations to the public domain or consider progressive licensing terms.

That’s fine, but under “General Conditions”, they also say:

We reserve the right, in accordance with any applicable laws, to refuse service to anyone for any reason at any time.

We’ve seen this happen before with accounts such as the fake Christopher Walken. The reasons for the suspension of that user were fairly clear, but what about all those tweets that he wrote? They’ve also been removed without a trace. The account had a loyal and amused following, and those tweets were funny and had value.

Twitter doesn’t provide any kind of backup service within the site; external ways to ‘save’ your tweets exist, but they’re more than little crude. The majority of tweets are, of course, hardly worth keeping forever, but some are. And I can see many instances in the future where Twitter will be used for different purposes and more and more of these tweets will have value.

One obvious example is where Twitter breaks a news story before anywhere else because the submitter was on the scene when it took place. That tweet becomes a source – who does it belong to?

Moreover, say Twitter decides to produce The Book Of Tweets, and selects 10,000 of the greatest-ever updates for publication. Can they do that without the permission of the authors? Can anybody do that without permission of the authors? Where is the line?

This is a very hazy area and my gut feeling tells me that until a legal precedent is set it’s going to remain that way. Until then, you might want to think about it a little – who owns your tweets? And would you be happy for somebody else to make money off them without your permission?

Category: Unique Insights

  • Emily
    I found this post because I happened to search for its exact title: "who owns your tweets?" I was curious because a Twitter user called @baseballisms messaged me—and many other users—to thank me for my "contribution" to their ebook of baseball-related tweets.

    I don't follow Baseballisms; Baseballisms doesn't follow me. I knew nothing about the ebook and probably never would have if they hadn't "thanked" me for "contributing," or, more precisely, to give me a heads up after the fact that I had been included.

    While I think the concept of the book is pretty cool, I'm very uneasy about the fact that my words, my account name, and my face, in the form of my Twitter avatar, were "published" in an ebook without my knowledge or permission.

    Twitter's TOS may "encourage" users to contribute to the public domain, but does that mean that we do so by default, just by using Twitter?
  • Pet Travel Blog
    such a good post..Everybody have their own strategy.. And my personal strategy is that what I send out into cyber space is my gift of heaven to all readers, and therefore out of my hands forever..
    Pet Travel Blog
  • staffing555
    This is really good work.
    For more jobs visit http://www.staffingpower.com
  • This article, it's good enough, certainly Christopher Walken it's a cool Weapon Of Choice. But, what really happened if is not the real man, that is also an impersonation part of the liberty of expression. No matters who own of our tweets, this is a way to express to make others know what really it's on your mind. Publicize Yourself!
  • Boring and common topic. You're shit.
  • pinz
    Apparently Nick Douglas now 'owns' the 'Rights' to "freely" contributed tweets for his first ever book - 'Twitter Wit'. He also got 'authorization' from Biz Stone, Co-Founder of Twitter, who wrote the 'foreword'. Harper Collins is now selling said tome, (All Rights Reserved), for $12.99 ...

    http://browseinside.harpercollins.com/index.asp...
  • Twitter has made it clear that tweets belong to the user who wrote them. However, the fact remains that with Twitter, as with any web service, things can happen to cause loss of information, pictures, tweets, etc. Relying on these sites to keep your information safe is foolish, and if anything happens to it, the blame can fall squarely on the shoulders of the user. If your tweets are very important to you, copy and save them to an external source in case something happens and you lose them from the site.
    As far as I have seen, Twitter is very responsible in keeping their site running smoothly and are generally fair to the users. I don't think that 'tweet theft' will be a problem.
  • chaszey
    From my many years in human resources and direct involvement with court cases related to employees I can tell you that what goes out into cyberspace becomes the domain and property of the public. This may be a bit different with Twitter as the question begs, do the tweets belong to Twitter or the sender of the tweets. My personal strategy is that what I send out into cyber space is my gift of heaven to all readers, and therefore out of my hands forever. Once I click "send" or "update" I let it go, literally. So I make it my utmost ambition to tweet what is of value to others.
  • That's completely incorrect. You seem to be confusing a right of ownership and a right of privacy. While there is certainly no reasonable expectation of privacy when you post something online, that doesn't impact copyright. You may also be thinking (as your background is in HR) of the idea that an employer owns an employee's work product; however, that is a matter of contract between the employee and the employer and in such a case copyright is assigned explicitly by contract.
  • mafraederscheidt
    As an artist who posts every day a painting I may be a better example for the copyright problems that seem to occur. I share my work for free use, but if you want to use them in commercial circumstances you have to respect my copyright. I have the original piece and you are invited to enjoy it, otherwise you have to contact and hopefully pay me.
    Otherwise I would be a complete fool (or "stupider" than that) when I would expect Twitter or any platform in the internet society to store my data forever. I posted my work on several platforms because I have the imagination of a complete drugged computer nerd, playing with the red knob that is the only barrier between the eternity and me…
    Tweets are something for the moment. They exist in the instant and their fascination is that they live the essence of time and the fluid of the moment. It's a little bit like improvised music that has validation just and only in the moment of its creation, every record is not more than a technical reproduction and loses the sensuality of the moment. "Me drinking wine" is exiting now, but not tomorrow. So if you do great work store it for yourself, make backups, it's your job and you can publish it wherever you want. Twitter is a tool, like my brush and my paint and my canvas, that have no responsibility for taking care of my paintings. Me and you and everyone give the soul to Twitter and nobody else and that's the erotic moment in it.
  • WyrdestGeek
    I don't think the question of ownership of the tweets is hazy. I agree that if Twitter suspends your account the question of how you are going to *get access* to your tweets could be a sticky one, but as to the basic question of ownership it's simple. Since Twitter is not making any claim of ownership over the *content* itself, it's pretty obvious that the content belongs to the creator. I mean those rights are already well-established. I think if you want to make sure you always have access to the things you've tweeted, you may want to make "backup copies" of them. I realize this is a goofy, awkward idea, but it is doable.

    Anything you write, including this post, is automatically copyrighted, or at least that's how it works in the U.S.
  • mike
    I thing that they (Twitter) have to announce when your account is violating something before it deletes it. Something like that, so you can correct it or something like that.
  • I believe that if people is worried about this they shouldn't have used Twitter in first place.

    As a recommendation: For phrases that I like, what I do is publishing them on my Tumblr and then have Tumblr to tweet it as a quote, that way my Tweet is a quote, not a public comment :).
  • loa
    it's only 140 characters, if what you write is sooo amazing, just re write it and save it to your computer or whatever. or do it the crude way. it's basically the status update portion of other social networks without the other stuff.
  • sirubin
    Great article.
    My account was suspended and i´ve no idea why. So twitter is acting with me like I was as a criminal (since they don´t answer my mails, and say that they have 30 days to that) while everybody see that my account was suspended due "suspect, illegal activity".
    I´m feeling a complete idiot. They can´t do that. I never did nothing against twitter law or any law.
    What can I do?
  • stacey
    aggravating!
  • I save all my tweets where I'm saying something really funny. Because I have a way of really cracking myself up sometimes. So when I want a really good chuckle -- I just whip these babies out, and start laughing out loud!

    But what really cracks me up are statements like: "This is a very hazy area and my gut feeling tells me that until a legal precedent is set it’s going to remain that way. " as if this stuff was really important!

    I think I'll save this and read it later. I'm already starting to chuckle. ;-).
  • JanSimpson
    Nice post - and good point - that is why everyone needs to be on www.friendfeed.com -

    JanSimpson
  • Until friendfeed loses your data, right?
  • You bring up excellent points. I've never thought about these things before now. Thank you.
  • I would think that this could be solved as easily as blogs that are syndicated to other blogs via RSS - with or without Twitter's cooperation.
  • I'm sorry, but if you "write a book through Twitter, 140 characters at a time" and "keep no backup" then you don't deserve to own the content.
  • lainer
    I don't believe it's right to print anything without the writer's permission, even if it's on Twitter. Otherwise, Twitter wouldn't make such a big deal about authenticating celebrities following that law suit about a man pretending to be some baseball pitcher. You can't have it both ways.
  • I won't hold my breath trying to figure this out. Er, it's your content, period. If you place something on the Internet, not just with Twitter, that is libel, slander, illegal, hateful, and the like, the publisher is held responsible. Tony LaRussa is a fine example. He told Twitter "take the fake user with my name off your service or get sued." Twitter complied not because they were responsible, but because at their discretion chose to enforce their TOS.
  • David Crais
    This will become a growing issue with Twitter "aggregation" services (3rd party) that will combine and comb through many "Tweets" to find value. Similar to datamining in a database or with demographic information, the valuable information is not with individual Tweets, or "data points" but in the aggregate. This will be a confluence of the Tweets of one account holder, between one account holder and those they "reply" with, and also with random Tweets.
    I can see how this is valuable and copyright law and case history will have to catch up with it soon.
  • I think the original poster's point about individual tweets having value is still valid, in the case, for instance, of comedy tweets. You're also right about aggregation, but then it's not an issue of copyright. It's always fair under copyright law to reference a source, as long as the source is cited properly, and fair-use arguments can be made in the case of actually quoting the source, too.

    In any case, your point about data-mining is interesting, but it doesn't seem to go to copyright concerns.
  • Glad someone else has thought of this. I use Twitter mostly as a way of putting witty notions out there to make people chuckle. Some of them I would like to retain as ideas for developing short stories.

    Twitter says it doesn't assume intellectual property rights, but how can they do that without allowing its users to maintain theirs?

    Something stinks in the state of Denmark.
  • You're confused about what it means to retain rights. Have a look at my post above.
  • Bill
    The only answer is 'go in with your eyes open'. Your blog helps there.

    As I understand it the law in the UK is pretty clear in the case if Twitter wanted to make a book (or TV show!) or anything else that would reach UK audiences and that used people's tweets. They would need written permission from each creator of each of their copyright Works.

    What is unclear, to me anyway, is whether it's always technically legal to RT. If someone RT'd another user in a critical context they would argue it was 'criticism or review' (rightly in my view), but the owner might argue it was unlicensed publication, even if just to threaten the RT'er with the expensive process of defending themselves. Copyright law really must catch up.
  • sausheong
    I think the same question can be asked of blogs and generally any material I produce that is published on the Internet. You write a blog entry in your blog in blogspot -- who owns it? I don't think anyone disputes that I own it. If I happen to write only 140 characters in my blog entry it doesn't mean blogspot can now own it instead of me.

    I own the copyright of materials I produce. I don't think there is much haziness in this aspect beyond the general haziness of copyright of anything on the Internet.
  • I agree w/you 100%; just wanted to add, though, that the "haziness of copyright of anything on the Internet" is more a problem of people's lack of understanding (or caring perhaps) and less a problem of law. The law is clear.
  • sausheong
    Actually there are related issues with copyright though it's out of topic here wrt this post. For example, though who owns it is not disputed, but which laws apply means could be debatable. From what I see in the TOS Twitter doesn't say which jurisdiction the tweets belong to - "Twitter undertakes to obey all relevant copyright laws." If someone was to sue, which copyright law would it fall under? Under US copyright law where Twitter is registered in? Under the plaintiff's? Or the respondent's? It's just one simple example. But generally I believe there is no doubt on who owns the tweet.
  • I'll concede that point. This might be sloppy lawyering on Twitter's part, but I am not a lawyer...
  • The tweet belongs to you - assuming it's your original work. You can choose how you want it to be licensed (Creative Commons, strict copyright etc.)

    The *platform* belongs to Twitter. If they decide to shut down the site, refuse you service or delete everything you've written, that's their prerogative.

    There's really no confusion here. You are performing in a privately owned space. The performance is yours, the space is theirs

    I've had social network accounts of mine closed down - as a result I regularly back-up my work and, where possible, my friend data.

    Here's a post I wrote about it earlier in the year http://shkspr.mobi/blog/index.php/2009/01/how-s...
  • I think you may be confusing ownership rights with the idea that it's distasteful to lose something without recourse.

    Presumably what's on your hard drive is yours, too, but if it crashes you're SOL. Many people write books and save them to their hard drive without a backup. This is stupid, and doing likewise on twitter is stupider. Your ownership of your tweets does not give you a right to access them if you leave them on Twitter and twitter deletes your account. This would be akin to borrowing someone else's computer, writing your novel on it, then the owner of the computer erases the hard drive - do you have recourse? Of course not. Your action was irresponsible. Are they liable in any way? Of course not, it was their computer, and they haven't violated your copyright by losing your data.

    There can be no reasonable expectation for Twitter to provide a backup service, particularly for free (perhaps they should add the idea to their business plan). They never have before, and as you say, several means to backup one's own account exist (crudeness of available methods is not relevant).

    To draw a parallel between the loss of "Fake Christopher Walken" tweets and the idea of Twitter or anyone else releasing a book of tweets is fallacious at best. These are two entirely separate issues and bear no real relation to each other.

    In essence, Twitter is a publishing service, and one that's both free to use and unreliable to depend on. Anyone publishing content on Twitter clearly has exclusive copyright to their content. Copyright means that it can't be reproduced without permission, not that it can't be deleted irrevocably without permission. As usual, responsibility lies with the owner both to enforce ownership rights on and to maintain the security of the content.
  • This is a great reply but misses some of the points I’m making which, while connected, are varied.

    To respond in order of your paragraphs:

    1. This isn’t about a HD crash, which while undesirable (and folk would be pissed), is typically an accident. And it isn’t about a situation that might arise between a couple of friends. This is about the rights we have as users of a service, particularly with regard to the wilful removal of an account by Twitter. Sometimes it’s blindingly obvious why this has happened (the user was a blatant spammer, say). However, Twitter never comes out and states the specific breach of TOS that led to an account being removed, and I’ve had a number of contacts on the network have their accounts suspended for no obvious reason. Twitter, as is typical, has never responded to their ‘why?’ queries, and while some have had their accounts restored after a period of time (often days or weeks), others have not. It’s difficult to find out what this person might have done, as nobody can now access their account.

    It’s one thing for Twitter to reserve the right “to refuse service to anyone for any reason at any time”, but for this to be a reasonable policy they need to explain in all instances why this has happened, and in my opinion allocate a way for you to retrieve anything that you own – a right they’ve also given you according to their TOS. If you’re banned from a nightclub, they can’t keep your stuff. If a bank closes your account because you’ve bounced a few direct debits, they can’t keep all of your money. If I truly own those tweets, then they should remain ‘mine’ whether the service is open to me or not. I say that by closing my account and therefore deleting my tweets, Twitter is either claiming ownership and/or breaching my own rights.

    2. There’s every reason to expect Twitter to provide a way to backup your account. This measure has been drummed into us as nothing short of essential in all aspects of information technology. The backup facilities available now are useless, because there is no way to get the data on those platforms back on to Twitter. So, in the event of a crash or something else which wiped your account, the backup is redundant. I’d have absolutely no objection to this being a premium feature – I firmly believe some add-ons on Twitter should be subscription-only as it’s a great way to monetize the service those users that want a little more than standard.

    3. I didn’t draw a parallel between those points – you did. They’re separated by two paragraphs. ;)

    4. Okay – let’s agree that Twitter is a publishing service, and that because of this anyone using the service does, as you say, have exclusive copyright on their content. I own my tweets. Twitter closes down my account. I cannot find out why as I cannot raise a help ticket as my account is invalid – not that they ever do much more than send you a generic auto-reply anyway. Nor can I now access anything I’ve submitted. Even if I’ve regularly backed my stuff up using an external service, it’s only as good as my last backup. While Twitter naturally reserves the right to close my account at any time, if I actually own the copyright to that submitted material, do they not need to provide me with the facility to re-claim it? Or at least allow a reasonable way for this to be done while my account is active?

    It’s the awkwardness of backing up your Twitter account that makes this a fairly complex issue. If I truly own my submissions to Twitter, then a facility needs to exist for me to be able to retrieve them. Because bad things happen to good people – accounts get suspended for the wrong reasons, servers crash, Twitter runs out of money, or some all-conquering virus wipes out millions of users timelines. All of these things, and more, could leave Twitter in a bit of a pickle, to a point where the courts are likely to get involved.

    Of course, it’s unlikely to be an issue if it happens to you and me, but if @aplusk loses everything – watch out. :)
  • sirubin
    I really liked your post. Twitter suspended my accpunt: www.twitter.com/simonerubin and I don´t know why. Isn´t that at least wrong? Shouldnt they say why I´m suspect or suspend my account if they have proves about that?
    Is wroten in my page:

    "Sorry, the account you were headed to has been suspended due to strange activity. Mosey along now, nothing to see here."
    (if is nothing to see here, why i was suspended? they are embarassing me!)
    +..."or if you're curious as to why an account might be suspended, head over this way for the juicy details."
    (the juicy details link ís not working. What the hell is that?0 They are not only owning my tweets and not answering my mails and making me feel an idiot... Thats ridiculous!
  • OK, I think your concerns are valid but they do not seem to have anything to do with copyright. I will add the disclaimer that I'm writing from the US and don't have a lot of familiarity with non-USA copyright systems, but from what I gather you are in the UK and our copyright systems bear more than a passing similarity.

    1. Your rights as a user of the service are limited to the publishing of your data, which as far as I can reason, you intend when you submit a tweet to be published. If you don't keep a copy, that is definitely not Twitter's problem. For their TOS to be reasonable, you have to agree to it, which you do by using the service - so I don't think you have a leg to stand on, legally speaking (I'm not a lawyer, but this seems pretty clear to me). You're using their free service, they make no warranties, and you've agreed to their terms. It looks pretty clear-cut to me. Your parallel between a bank keeping your money or a club keeping your stuff and twitter keeping/losing your data doesn't hold water, because intellectual property rights are not the same thing as physical property rights. The content of the tweets belongs to you, but if you trust someone to keep that content for you who is not trustworthy and makes no claim of being trustworthy in this respect, then effectively you've failed to do your due diligence. The complaints about Twitter's customer service are valid, but are not a matter of copyright law. Perhaps for the BBB but not for a court.

    2. While you may feel that you have reason to expect a backup (and I agree they should perhaps sell this) I don't see that this expectation would hold water in a court (there's no agreement between you and twitter about this - again, a matter for due diligence on your part); also, I must observe again that this concern doesn't go to a copyright complaint.

    3. I wasn't 100% clear in my point about the "book of tweets" vs. the "Fake Christopher Walken" account deletion. My point was that you're presenting both of these issues as copyright infringement, and while publication of a book (presumably without user permission) would be an obvious violation of copyright terms, deletion of an account has nothing to do with copyright. My use of the term parallel was intended to indicate the fact that you'd cited both as copyright problems.

    4. You don't own your actual submissions to twitter (tweets) per se - you own the rights to the content of those tweets. Publishing them on twitter doesn't create any bailment as far as I can tell, and doesn't oblige them to provide any service beyond that which they have agreed to provide, to wit, whatever they say they'll provide in the terms of service; you've already observed that the TOS is pretty thin on commitments, and I cannot imagine that this was done unintentionally.

    As to the awkwardness of backing up - again, it's not a copyright issue, it's a matter of due diligence on the part of the user, and that includes @aplusk. He might be able to afford to make more noise and cause twitter more of a headache with a frivolous copyright claim than you or I could do, but it would still be frivolous.

    ---

    As a practical matter (this part is not related to my response above, but is intended as a helpful hint for those who would like some means of backing up tweets) you might consider submitting tweets through some other service. Twittermail immediately comes to mind, as I use it myself (mostly as a matter of my own convenience). It's not designed as an archive, but it does have the side benefit of retaining a copy of anything I send to it. Actually, I've set up an email account on a domain I own which relays tweets to twittermail (again as a matter of convenience for other reasons); this also has the benefit of creating an additional archive of tweets that I send through that account.

    Now that I think of it, I have to wonder how many other twitter clients out there are caching copies of your tweets, legitimately or otherwise? Those concerned about copyright and not using the web/sms client should probably consider reviewing the TOS of the services/clients they are using, as that unknown factor could be a considerably larger threat to copyright than the possibility of twitter losing your data.
  • I thought you whole comment was very intellectually written/typed, and was very persuasive.

    Until you used the word 'stupider' lol xD

    Nah but seriously, I agree with you;
    It is not twitter's responsibility to store any data that users upload to their website.
    Same with any other similiar sites, such as myspace, facebook etc.

    It's very unfortunate when personal data is lost, but external hardrives arent too expensive, so back your shit up :D
    (I learned the hard way LOL )

    x
  • Maybe if enough people use "stupider" on a regular basis it'll become standard... i'm shooting for that! i'm a pioneer, or something. plus it's early... i'm gonna go make some coffee.

    ok fine, "more stupid" heh
  • mingyeow
    haha, i am waiting for the author to get back to this posting. I want to
    update the posting with your comment, but need some more discussion. ;)
  • most insightful twitter article i have ever read.
  • Graeme
    Are you paying Twitter to store anything for you?
  • very interesting!
  • IMHO - The tweet belongs to the tweeter, that should be clear, and is about rights, which would provide an argument against publishing as a book etc. But don't expect twitter.com to back them up unless explicitly stated by them - that's about a service agreement.

    Without such a service agreement I'd be foolish to "publish" my works (!) by handing over the ONLY copy to the publishers.
  • mingyeow
    The issue is *precisely* that it is not clear who the tweets belongs to. The
    TOS are really fuzzy on that
  • It's very clear. read my comment below. These two issues are completely unrelated.
  • There is much to be sorted out with the legalities of online content. You raise some very valid questions.
  • I down load the twitt book wich had all my tweets and it even listed me as the copy write owner
  • Rob
    What is Twitt book?
  • This is not about Twitter. This is about any of the services on the web. In every of that services if your account is suspended, then you'll lose your intellectual works, doesn't matter if they are tweets, photos, videos, mails, etc.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Back to top