Again, the waters are murky here – even the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is vague about some details.
When we talk about tweets, the WIPO says that, in fact, some of them may be too short to qualify for the copyright protection usually enjoyed by the authors. Why, could you ask? Because their short duration means they are "unlikely to reach the level of creativity required". Of course, comedians who create unusual silverware may ask to defer here – especially when so many of them have their content tricked by other accounts, which switch off the content as their own without a credit. That said, there may be exceptions. A 2009 WIPO article cites some experts who claim that a collection of tweets may be subject to author rights, which is quite pertinent in light of the longer-lasting allowances and thread popularity, where posts are combined.
that you would be the exclusive copyright holder for the content you post on other social media platforms, but the OMPI says it is always worth reading the small print. In the past, if you have uploaded photos to Facebook or videos on YouTube, you have the right to use the content you post. Having said that, on the positive side, both platforms offer mechanisms in which posts that tear content can be eliminated.
The dynamics of copyright on social media are constantly evolving. Recently, the EU voted in favor of two controversial provisions contained in a new directive on the right of author. The article 11 indicates that technology giants such as Facebook and Google, as well as aggregator sites, should pay outlets for news every time they link their stories or share extracts of their articles. In the meantime, Article 13 would mean that video sharing sites must obtain licenses to show music videos, in the hope that this will improve the remuneration for artists.