Copyright Enforcement on Social Media Platforms: Intermediary Liability and the Changing Digital Landscape

Abstract

Social media platforms have fundamentally transformed the creation, distribution, and consumption of copyrighted material. Users can reproduce and disseminate photographs, music, audiovisual works, literary material, and other protected content to audiences extending across national boundaries within seconds. Although these platforms have created substantial opportunities for creators and rights holders, they have also generated persistent difficulties concerning copyright infringement and intermediary responsibility. This article examines the evolving legal framework governing copyright enforcement on social media platforms and evaluates the appropriate allocation of responsibility between rights holders, users, and digital intermediaries. The analysis focuses on the legal obligations of platforms to identify, prevent, remove, or otherwise respond to allegedly infringing content. It considers the limitations of traditional notice-and-takedown mechanisms and evaluates the development of automated content-recognition technologies as an alternative enforcement mechanism. The article also examines the risks associated with excessive automated enforcement, including erroneous removals, restrictions on lawful quotation, criticism, parody, education, and other legitimate forms of expression. Particular attention is given to the tension between effective copyright enforcement and the preservation of freedom of expression in digitally mediated environments. The article argues that platform liability should not be based exclusively upon the technical ability of an intermediary to control user-generated content. Instead, responsibility should be calibrated according to the platform's role, knowledge, technological capabilities, and response to credible infringement notifications. The article further considers transparency requirements and procedural safeguards that may improve the fairness of content moderation systems. Comparative analysis demonstrates that legal approaches remain fragmented, particularly regarding proactive monitoring obligations and intermediary immunity. The article concludes by proposing a balanced model combining effective rights enforcement, transparent platform procedures, meaningful human review, and safeguards for lawful user expression.