Meta’s Torrent Controversy Unfolds
Recent revelations have brought to light the extent of Meta’s alleged involvement in the unauthorized use of pirated books for training its artificial intelligence models. Newly uncovered emails have emerged as critical evidence in a legal case against the tech giant, where authors claim that Meta has unlawfully utilized a vast collection of copyrighted texts.
Founded in 2004 by Mark Zuckerberg and his associates, Meta, formerly known as Facebook, has evolved into a powerhouse managing platforms such as Instagram and WhatsApp. In 2021, the company rebranded itself to reflect its ambition to create a comprehensive metaverse—a digital ecosystem linking all its services.
Amidst ongoing legal scrutiny, Meta has acknowledged downloading a contentious dataset from torrent sources, specifically targeting LibGen, a repository of millions of books distributed without the consent of copyright holders. The company reportedly downloaded at least 81.7 terabytes of data from various “shadow libraries,” including a staggering 35.7 terabytes from Z-Library, a notorious platform known for its extensive collection of pirated e-books and academic articles.
While Z-Library has gained popularity among students and researchers seeking free access to information, it has faced numerous domain seizures and blocks due to copyright violations. Meta’s actions, as outlined by the plaintiffs, are unprecedented in scale, raising alarms about the implications of such extensive piracy.
Legal representatives have pointed out that even lesser infringements have led to criminal investigations in the past, highlighting the severity of Meta’s alleged actions. The use of torrent protocols suggests that Meta not only downloaded these files but also disseminated them to other users, compounding the potential copyright violations.
Internal communications from Meta have surfaced, revealing concerns among employees regarding the legality of downloading pirated content on corporate devices. One engineer expressed unease about the practice, while another sought legal clarification on the implications of sharing downloaded books. Despite these warnings, it is alleged that Meta’s leadership continued to obscure their activities, employing specific settings to minimize file distribution.
Further complicating the situation, a Meta researcher described the company’s torrent operations as operating in “stealth mode.” Project lead Michael Clark confirmed in court that the company had intentionally adjusted settings to ensure minimal sharing during downloads.
In light of these developments, the plaintiffs are pushing for a renewed interrogation of key Meta personnel, arguing that previous testimonies may have been incomplete or misleading. Notably, Mark Zuckerberg claimed he was not involved in the decision to utilize LibGen, yet new evidence suggests that the matter reached his level before any decisions were finalized.
While Meta has yet to respond to the latest allegations, the company maintains that its use of LibGen falls under the doctrine of “fair use” as defined by U.S. law. Meta contends that the authors have not substantiated claims that their works were accessed by third parties through its network.
The emerging circumstances have empowered the plaintiffs to broaden their legal arguments, now asserting that Meta’s copyright infringements extend beyond AI training to encompass potential distribution of pirated books via torrents. In response, Meta has expressed its intent to “expose this baseless accusation” as the case progresses.
* Meta and its products have been designated as extremist, and their activities are prohibited in the Russian Federation.
