Sure, posting a photo of you in your living room with the painting in the background isn't reproducing the original work. It'd be hard to argue that it's infringing. But let's get back to the original topic: OnlyFans' terms of use almost certainly does not give users the right to redistribute purchased content. This would destroy their entire business model: one subscriber could just repost everything.
> Sure, posting a photo of you in your living room with the painting in the background isn't reproducing the original work.
Most people wouldn't think so, but it technically is. If an algorithm spots the painting in the background and matches it to a known hash it could block the post automatically. If it didn't, than anyone could print out revenge porn and tape it to a wall, photograph it, and facebook's system would never remove it. The point of revenge porn isn't to reproduce and sell perfect 1:1 copies of a copyrighted work, but to harass someone and less than perfect copies will do that job very well.
It's not that I think any system must be perfect or else it's useless, but others have already pointed out how easy this system could be to game to remove all kinds of other content, youtube's efforts with their similar "Content ID" system shows us that these automated systems will have negative impacts for many innocent people, and these systems are becoming increasingly common (for example, apple scanning your personal devices to generate hashes to match against photos of child abuse) so it really is important that companies get this right and protect their users. Especially for a company like facebook who is doing it so that they can avoid paying for the kind of human oversight which is actually needed to combat the problem. This seems like a poorly thought out scheme that could have major consequences for users but let's Facebook off the hook because they've doing "something".
