Social Media, Current Events, and Copyright: Can Everything Published Be Reproduced?
Few issues in the context of copyright in the EU are more hotly debated than that of originality. When digital contexts are added to the equation—social media, in particular—the issue becomes especially intriguing.
Social media has also changed the way that the media accesses content that may be of interest. But to what extent can an author protect such content?
Several issues come to mind in this regard: Do social media posts deserve protection, even when they’re generally very short? Does the subject matter they address have any relevance?
The Court of Justice of the European Union addressed these issues in its September 3, 2026, judgment in Case C-598/24, Gândul Media Network.
The case stems from a 22-line text posted on Facebook by a professor who expressed her opinion about a particular social practice, which was subsequently reproduced in its entirety by an online newspaper without her authorization.
The first issue analyzed by the Court was whether a text of this nature can be protected by copyright.
The CJEU’s answer was affirmative; protection applies when the text constitutes an intellectual creation attributable to its author. What matters in this regard is not its length, but whether its content is the result of free and creative choices.
The existence of a protected work, however, does not mean that any reproduction is necessarily illegal. This is where the second issue analyzed by the Court takes on particular significance—the possible application of the exception given for certain uses related to the reporting of current events.
In this regard, the CJEU notes that the exception must allow for a balance between copyright protection and freedom of information, and that its application must be assessed based on the specific circumstances of the case.
It is therefore not sufficient that the content has been previously published on a social media platform or if it’s of public interest. The conditions established by EU law must also be met, specifically the “three-step test” established in Article 5(5) of Directive 2001/29.
The Court further clarified that the fact that a media outlet which operates for profit does not, in and of itself, preclude the application of this exception.
Essentially, the fact that a text is public and accessible does not mean it is freely usable.
When online content possesses the originality necessary to be considered a protected work, its reproduction by third parties will generally require the author’s authorization unless it is covered by one of the limitations or exceptions provided for under copyright law.
In this regard, neither its length, its format, nor its content are a priori elements that in and of themselves, and under all circumstances, can negate copyright protection. Ultimately, such protection must be assessed by taking into account the existence of free and creative decisions that reflect the author’s originality.
Copyright © 2026 All rights reserved