Users have reported limited reach of the famous 'Non-Player Character' lives on TikTok; Expert explains rules for users and whether the judiciary can interfere.
A hot topic on the internet in recent days, 'NPC lives' became known in Brazil after digital influencer Felca joined the trend, sharing it with his more than three million followers on TikTok. What was supposed to be a simple test has become a great source of money.
Because the performances are considered eccentric, leading to intense public debate on social networks, the social network TikTok has reduced the reach of lives of this nature, as reported by users on Tuesday, 19. A new warning has been displayed by the platform, restricting "repetitive, inauthentic and degrading content to induce viewers to send gifts".
The lives are based on gifts. As the audience sends gifts and/or money, characterized by different drawings/icons, the streamer reacts with specific words and gestures, referring to the influences of cosplayers. Each gift is returned in a few cents to the content creators of these lives.
With the new restrictions by TikTok - which has an average of 74.1 million active users in Brazil, according to data from DataReportal - how should users protect themselves and ensure that their content doesn't fall foul of tougher restrictions? Marcelo Mattoso, a lawyer specializing in Games and eSports Law at Barcellos Tucunduva Advogados, explains that each platform has its own set of rules, which are most often called "terms of use", "terms of use" or "terms of service". According to the expert, there are also other documents such as privacy policies, data use policies, partnership policies and remuneration policies.
"All of them, including TikTok, have a framework to protect both them and their users, whether they are producers or viewers. These rules do not override the law, but for the most part they are all drawn up in accordance with the legal system of the locality in which they operate. In rare cases of dissonance, there may be legal action to review or annul an abusive clause, but, as a rule, these rules, if accepted by the user, constitute a contract between the parties, including producers/viewers and the platform."
Still according to Mattoso, the majority understanding of the current judiciary says that by accepting them - and this happens when the user clicks or selects the infamous checkbox with the words "I have read and agree to the 'terms of use'" - it is presumed that the viewer or content producer has read and agreed to them. "It's as if the parties were formalizing a partnership contract, in which one party undertakes to provide the dissemination platform and the technology, as long as the user or producer adheres to the rules previously established," he says.
Although each platform has its own set of rules, in general, both TikTok and others in the Meta group, such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and LinkedIn, have very similar policies. They all provide for the possibility of immediate suspension of users who in any way produce or make available content that is toxic, aggressive, discriminatory (gender, ethnicity, religion, etc.), related to spam or crimes (fraud, embezzlement, ideological falsehood, etc.), as well as using third-party programs (hack) to try to access the platform's servers, among others.
"It's worth noting that, in the event of content being made available that is not permitted by the platform's rules, whether illegal or abusive, in addition to the penalty of suspension of the user's account from the platform and removal of the content, the producer/user may also face legal action for their actions in accordance with the law," warns Mattoso, stressing that removal of the content and suspension of the user is only the contractual sanction applied by the platform and does not mean that the user cannot be penalized under civil or criminal law.
For its part, TikTok cannot be held responsible for the user's actions or their content because, according to the lawyer, the platforms are in compliance with art. 19 of law 12.965/14, which is the civil framework for the internet. "They will only be punished if, even after the infringement has been established and a court order has been given, the content is not taken down by the platform," he concludes.
Source: Migalhas