Twitter is deleting the copied jokes on the basis of copyright violation following the objections raised by some of the users that their jokes are being shared without permission. Some of the tweets that have been taken down now show copyright notices and a message saying “tweet withheld.”
Writing an interesting tweet is an easy task. One option is to just copy the tweet of other user, and post it as your own. This copying of tweets has been going on right from the start, but not anymore. Such users or popularly called as tweet-stealers will have their tweets deleted on the legal ground now.
@PlagiarismBad, who was the first to notice this change, said at least five different tweets were deleted for copying this joke:
“saw someone spill their high end juice cleanse all over the sidewalk and now I know god is on my side.”
Olga Lexell, the first to publish this joke on Twitter, filed a request to have the tweets removed. The freelancer writer confirmed the news, saying: “I simply explained to Twitter that as a freelance writer I make my living writing jokes.” Elaborating on the matter, she said spam account users mostly post other people’s jokes.
This is not the first time a request like this has been encountered by Twitter. Speaking to The Verge on the matter, Lexell states she has filed similar requests for her other jokes also. The offending tweets are generally removed by the Twitter without further inquiry, Lexell said.
A nice initiative from Twitter
Twitter has a team to handle claims related to copyright violation. Mainly, the claims are related to photos and videos or for any link to other websites having illegal copyrighted material. Any user can submit a claim with the help of Twitter’s web form. The claim is examined by the staff to check its validity. If the micro-blogging firm believes the claim is valid, the tweet is either removed or deleted from the platform. Thereafter, the offending user is issued a 10 days’ notice to file a counter-notice.
Twitter’s approach to removing tweets violating copyrights can be seen as a positive development. The micro-blogging firm has had a tough stance around copyright, but this is the first instance when users are being referred to as “original authors” and “copyright holders.”