Writers and journalists prepare action against Meta
Lira, Auteursbond and NVJ are calling creators together on Tuesday at Facebook’s Dutch office.
Dutch writers, journalists and translators are organising action against Meta on Tuesday. The organisations are also preparing collective proceedings over the use of copyright-protected work to train AI models.
The gathering is scheduled for Tuesday 29 September at 10.00 am outside Facebook Nederland’s office on Jollemanhof in Amsterdam. The call comes from Stichting Lira, Auteursbond and the Nederlandse Vereniging van Journalisten. Creators can also show their support online through the Opstand campaign.
The organisations say that texts by freelance writers, journalists and translators have been used without permission or payment to train language models. That wording describes their legal and political position; the sources consulted contain no court ruling establishing all individual instances of use.
According to Lira, Auteursbond and NVJ, they previously formally demanded that Meta stop using the texts. The organisations say that step did not open the way for talks. They are therefore gathering support for collective proceedings and negotiations on a structural arrangement.
The demands centre on three points: payment for the use of work, creators’ say over the conditions and greater transparency about the sources used to train AI models. The debate is therefore not only about Meta, but also about which rules apply when protected content becomes part of large datasets.
Meta develops the Llama language model, among other products, and operates Facebook and other platforms. The campaign is aimed at Facebook’s Dutch office, while the possible proceedings concern the policy of an international technology company. The precise legal route and the question of which creators can act on whose behalf still need to be worked out.
The action is taking place in a sector where income from texts is already under pressure from falling advertising revenues, dependence on platforms and automation. At the same time, technology companies generally point to the importance of large datasets for innovation. The forthcoming proceedings could provide clarity on permission, exceptions in copyright law and collective licensing.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- Lira, Auteursbond and NVJ are organising action at Meta in Amsterdam on 29 September.
- The organisations are preparing collective proceedings and are calling for payment, a say in the conditions and transparency.
- The legal question of whether the specific use of texts was unlawful has not yet been determined by a court.
Left
Arguments Public knowledge and creative work must not be used without permission as cheap raw material for a profitable AI industry. Creators must be able to negotiate collectively, because individual freelancers have little power against large technology companies.
Values Workers’ rights, fair distribution of proceeds, cultural diversity and protection of public information.
Consequences Without an arrangement, rates and employment for creators could come under further pressure. A collective licence could add costs for technology companies, but also return income and negotiating power to creators.
Centre
Arguments There is a need for clear, workable rules that enable innovation while regulating permission, transparency and payment. An independent collective licensing or oversight mechanism could be more practical than thousands of individual proceedings.
Values Legal certainty, proportionality, innovation and institutional enforceability.
Consequences A compromise could reduce legal uncertainty, but requires an arrangement that helps not only large publishers and also represents freelancers and small creators.
Right
Arguments AI companies should not be treated in advance as though every use of text is automatically theft. Overly onerous permission and payment obligations could hamper European innovation and favour established rights holders.
Values Property, freedom of enterprise, technological progress and limited government intervention.
Consequences Broader exceptions could accelerate AI development, but without transparency and negotiating power it will remain difficult for individual creators to demonstrate abuse or enforce compensation.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The factual information about the gathering and the collective proceedings comes from the websites of NVJ, Auteursbond and the campaign itself. Claims about unauthorised use are clearly attributed to the organisations.
- confirmed The action will take place on Tuesday 29 September at 10.00 am at Facebook Nederland in Amsterdam. — Mentioned by NVJ and Auteursbond. source
- confirmed Lira, Auteursbond and NVJ are preparing collective proceedings against Meta. — Description on the NVJ website. source
- confirmed The organisations are demanding payment, a say in the conditions and transparency. — The campaign explicitly mentions these aims. source
- confirmed The organisations say that texts were used without permission for AI training. — This is confirmed as the organisations’ public position, not as a judicially established fact. source
Editor's note
The action, the organisations involved and their demands have been confirmed. The allegations about Meta’s use of texts have been presented as the organisations’ position; the sources consulted contain no independent judicial finding.Sources
- NVJ, Lira en Auteursbond verzamelen steun voor collectieve procedure tegen Meta — Nederlandse Vereniging van Journalisten
- Schrijversopstand tegen AI-misbruik — Auteursbond
- Schrijvers, journalisten en vertalers komen in opstand tegen big tech — Opstand.ai