According to a Facebook press release, Facebook has agreed to increase its privacy control options in response to a request from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. Any features that provide its users more control over the use and dissemination of their information is a great news for Facebook users.
Facebook users should limit the amount and type of personal information they provide in their Facebook profiles. Providing too much personal information on social media websites can be very dangerous. Does anybody rememberf the Sandra Bullock movie the The Net? Even though this movie portrays an extreme example of identity theft right before Internet usage became mainstream it is still demonstrates what a determined identity thief can do with the right knowledge and tools. No password or security feature is safe from a determined identity theif and I am sure that identity thieves target Facebook and other social media web sites all the time.
I am dissapointed that it took a Canadian government commission to "encourage" Facebook to act. As I have posted earlier, Facebook is sitting on what the "Mad Men" of Madison Avenue would call the "El Dorado" of marketing research. Facebook has freely obtained millions of bits of personal information that could be utilized by companies to reach a specific target audience. As my British friends would say, "brilliant."
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Friday, August 28, 2009
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Social Media Users Better Pay Their Taxes
Great article in today's Wall Street Journal discussing how some states have turned to Facebook, Myspace, and other social media sites to track down tax delinquents. According to the article, some states have ethical boundaries regarding how they are able to utilize social media and the Internet. For example, in Nebraska, officials are allowed to search social media web sites and Google to track down people who owe back taxes but officials are not allowed to "friend" a target utilizing false information.
As social media increases in popularity, I predict there will be numerous court cases on how government officials can utilize social media in their criminal and civil investigations. I also predict that the government will prevail in most of these cases unless the government's actions are egregious.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
As social media increases in popularity, I predict there will be numerous court cases on how government officials can utilize social media in their criminal and civil investigations. I also predict that the government will prevail in most of these cases unless the government's actions are egregious.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
The Google Book Lawsuit: Continued
A new group called the Open Book Alliance has just created a web site that states the case that the Agreement between Google,the Authors Guild, and the Association of American publishers should be scuttled. Members of the Open Book Alliance include: Amazon, Microsoft, Yahoo, the American Society of Journalists and Authors, the Council of Literary Magazines and Presses, the Internet Archive, the New York Library Association, Small Press Distribution, and the Special Libraries Association.
As I stated in an earlier post, I am against the agreement in its present form because it appears to grant Google an unfair monopoly, it short changes some copyright holders, and it may enable Google to track the published works that a user views. While I applaud Google for taking the lead on this initiative, Google should not be handed a monopoly just because it started the project.
The bottom line is that the parties who favor the Agreement will reap financial benefits from it while the parties who are against the Agreement may be financially harmed or may not benefit from the Agreement. History has demonstrated that monopolies stifle innovation and hurt consumers. For example, when Network Solutions controlled all domain registration the cost to register a domain name was exorbitant . However, after other companies were allowed to become domain name registrars the cost to register a domain name drastically dropped and more people were able to participate in e-commerce.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
As I stated in an earlier post, I am against the agreement in its present form because it appears to grant Google an unfair monopoly, it short changes some copyright holders, and it may enable Google to track the published works that a user views. While I applaud Google for taking the lead on this initiative, Google should not be handed a monopoly just because it started the project.
The bottom line is that the parties who favor the Agreement will reap financial benefits from it while the parties who are against the Agreement may be financially harmed or may not benefit from the Agreement. History has demonstrated that monopolies stifle innovation and hurt consumers. For example, when Network Solutions controlled all domain registration the cost to register a domain name was exorbitant . However, after other companies were allowed to become domain name registrars the cost to register a domain name drastically dropped and more people were able to participate in e-commerce.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Monday, August 24, 2009
"Skanks in NYC" Blogger Planning to Sue Google For Following Judge's Order to Out Her
According to a CNN article, the "Skanks in NYC" Blogger who lost her lawsuit to keep her anonymity is planning on suing Google, the host of her blog, for not doing more to protect her privacy.
Some background for those who have not followed this story. An anonymous blogger made derogatory and possibly defamatory remarks against a model, Liskula Cohen. Ms. Cohen sued to compel the blogger's web hosting company, Google to release the personal information of the anonymous blogger. Ms. Cohen won her lawsuit and as ordered, Google provided the blogger's email address to Ms. Cohen. Ms. Cohen utilizing her gumshoe skills figured out the identify of the anonymous blogger. The media also found out the identity of the anonymous blogger.
Ms. Cohen received several days of positive press and during her media performances she was viewed not as a vindictive and helpless victim but as a person who is willing to forgive and forget and move on.
The anonymous blogger was vilified in the media and wants to blame Google for her self inflicted problems. As I said several days ago, if the anonymous blogger wanted to stay anonymous she should have covered her tracks better. Filing a frivolous lawsuit against Google only continues to demonstrate the blogger's vindicative nature and that she is looking for someone else to blame for her own actions. It is time for the anonymous blogger, Rosemary Port to cut her losses because the longer this story stays viral the more damage it does to her reputation.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Some background for those who have not followed this story. An anonymous blogger made derogatory and possibly defamatory remarks against a model, Liskula Cohen. Ms. Cohen sued to compel the blogger's web hosting company, Google to release the personal information of the anonymous blogger. Ms. Cohen won her lawsuit and as ordered, Google provided the blogger's email address to Ms. Cohen. Ms. Cohen utilizing her gumshoe skills figured out the identify of the anonymous blogger. The media also found out the identity of the anonymous blogger.
Ms. Cohen received several days of positive press and during her media performances she was viewed not as a vindictive and helpless victim but as a person who is willing to forgive and forget and move on.
The anonymous blogger was vilified in the media and wants to blame Google for her self inflicted problems. As I said several days ago, if the anonymous blogger wanted to stay anonymous she should have covered her tracks better. Filing a frivolous lawsuit against Google only continues to demonstrate the blogger's vindicative nature and that she is looking for someone else to blame for her own actions. It is time for the anonymous blogger, Rosemary Port to cut her losses because the longer this story stays viral the more damage it does to her reputation.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Getting Fired For Blogging
The Wall Street Journal and CNN once again have reported on the legal ramifications of blogging and tweeting about your job. In particular, the CNN article discusses what is becoming an almost every day occurrence in the American workplace: an anonymous blogger is terminated after being outed or after he or she reveals his or her true identity under their own free will and accord.
In general, most employment situations in the United States are employment-at-will. This means that an employer or employee can terminate the employment relationship for any reason. Over the years, three main exceptions to this rule have been recognized:
1) A Public Policy Exception
2) An Implied Contract Exception
3) A Covenant Of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Exception
Some states recognize all three while other states may only recognize 1 or 2 of these exceptions. Every organization should have a social media policy. In the 1980's, creating a sexual harassment policy was all the rage. In the 1990's, creating an Internet usage policy became necessary. Now, all organizations that have employees should have a written social media policy. These policies should strike a fair balance between employee and employer rights. Unfortunately, until these types of policies become the norm and not the exception in the American workplace more employees will be terminated for their blogs, posts, and tweets.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
In general, most employment situations in the United States are employment-at-will. This means that an employer or employee can terminate the employment relationship for any reason. Over the years, three main exceptions to this rule have been recognized:
1) A Public Policy Exception
2) An Implied Contract Exception
3) A Covenant Of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Exception
Some states recognize all three while other states may only recognize 1 or 2 of these exceptions. Every organization should have a social media policy. In the 1980's, creating a sexual harassment policy was all the rage. In the 1990's, creating an Internet usage policy became necessary. Now, all organizations that have employees should have a written social media policy. These policies should strike a fair balance between employee and employer rights. Unfortunately, until these types of policies become the norm and not the exception in the American workplace more employees will be terminated for their blogs, posts, and tweets.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Friday, August 21, 2009
"Skanks in NYC" Blogger's Days of Anonymity Are Over
The "Skanks in NYC" blogger who recently lost a lawsuit to keep her identity private has now been outed. According to a NY Post article and the accompanying photo and video, the former anonymous blogger did not appear pleased that her identity has been revealed.
Some of my readers may question why I am even reading the NY Post. I have to admit that as a former New Yorker, one of my guilty pleasures was reading the NY Post instead of my Wall Street Journal while commuting to work. Old habits die hard so every now and then I still check out the NY Post online.
I mentioned in a previous post that this case or another similar one may go all the way to the Supreme Court. It appears my prediction may come to fruition. The article states that the former anonymous blogger "plans to pursue all her legal options against Google and could take the case all the way to the Supreme Court."
I can't see what kind of case the blogger would have against Google. Google complied with a valid court order to release the email address associated with the "Skanks in NYC" blog. If the "Skanks in NYC" blogger truly wanted to keep her identity secret she would have at least:
1) Signed up for her blog using an email address that she only accessed from public terminals
2) Never sent any emails from the email address associated with the blog, and
3) Only accessed her blog from public terminals
From listening to the Good Morning America segment about the case, it appears that the blogger at least broke rule number 2 and utilized the email address associated with the blog for other activities. There could be a legal argument that the blogger did not do enough to hide her identity. Therefore, regardless of the other legal issues involved it may be argued that the blogger was looking to be outed by her own actions or lack thereof.
In my opinion, I believe that most jurisdictions will pursue the line of thought that the court in this case did and it will order Internet Service Providers and Social Media Websites to turn over relevant information about those who are alleged to have defamed others. Internet anonymity is becoming more difficult these days and those who do not take the proper precautions are at risk for having their identities unmasked.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Some of my readers may question why I am even reading the NY Post. I have to admit that as a former New Yorker, one of my guilty pleasures was reading the NY Post instead of my Wall Street Journal while commuting to work. Old habits die hard so every now and then I still check out the NY Post online.
I mentioned in a previous post that this case or another similar one may go all the way to the Supreme Court. It appears my prediction may come to fruition. The article states that the former anonymous blogger "plans to pursue all her legal options against Google and could take the case all the way to the Supreme Court."
I can't see what kind of case the blogger would have against Google. Google complied with a valid court order to release the email address associated with the "Skanks in NYC" blog. If the "Skanks in NYC" blogger truly wanted to keep her identity secret she would have at least:
1) Signed up for her blog using an email address that she only accessed from public terminals
2) Never sent any emails from the email address associated with the blog, and
3) Only accessed her blog from public terminals
From listening to the Good Morning America segment about the case, it appears that the blogger at least broke rule number 2 and utilized the email address associated with the blog for other activities. There could be a legal argument that the blogger did not do enough to hide her identity. Therefore, regardless of the other legal issues involved it may be argued that the blogger was looking to be outed by her own actions or lack thereof.
In my opinion, I believe that most jurisdictions will pursue the line of thought that the court in this case did and it will order Internet Service Providers and Social Media Websites to turn over relevant information about those who are alleged to have defamed others. Internet anonymity is becoming more difficult these days and those who do not take the proper precautions are at risk for having their identities unmasked.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
The Google Book Lawsuit: Next Round
According to the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, Yahoo, Microsoft, and Amazon are planning to join with several non-profit groups in their opposition to the agreement that Google has forged with the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers that would have settled the 2005 lawsuit regarding Google's plan to digitize millions of published works.
I think Google's plan to digitize millions of published works is brilliant (as the British would say). When operational, the project will allow any Internet user to access millions of previously hard to view published works. However, we all must remember that Google did not envision this project as a philanthropic venture. The project was meticulously planned and implemented as another revenue stream. I am glad that some of the other E-Commerce heavyweights are finally realizing that their participation in this discussion is vital to ensuring that Google does not obtain a monopoly as the gatekeeper to the published works they scan. Democracy and capitalism work best when there is healthy discussion and lots of competition.
I think Google's plan to digitize millions of published works is brilliant (as the British would say). When operational, the project will allow any Internet user to access millions of previously hard to view published works. However, we all must remember that Google did not envision this project as a philanthropic venture. The project was meticulously planned and implemented as another revenue stream. I am glad that some of the other E-Commerce heavyweights are finally realizing that their participation in this discussion is vital to ensuring that Google does not obtain a monopoly as the gatekeeper to the published works they scan. Democracy and capitalism work best when there is healthy discussion and lots of competition.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Social Media Executor Will Become Standard In Estate Planning
Naming a Social Media Executor is an estate planning tool that will become standard practice in the future. A Durable Power Of Attorney generally handles ones financial matters when there is an incapacity or death. An Advance Health Directive and a Living Will focus on health care related decisions. Prolific authors may name a Literary Executor whose role is to protect a writer's literary legacy.
However, a Social Media Executor is a position that is slowly becoming another accepted estate planning tool. Some social media websites have posted policies on how to deal with a deceased member. Most social media websites and email providers will not provide user names and passwords to a deceased users' heirs without a court order. Therefore, it is important to create a Social Media Executor and provide the person with all of your user names and accounts.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
However, a Social Media Executor is a position that is slowly becoming another accepted estate planning tool. Some social media websites have posted policies on how to deal with a deceased member. Most social media websites and email providers will not provide user names and passwords to a deceased users' heirs without a court order. Therefore, it is important to create a Social Media Executor and provide the person with all of your user names and accounts.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Is Flickr Hiding Behind Copyright Infringment To Censor Free Speech?
Social Media has the ability to spread ideas like wildfire. However, if you don't own the platform from which you want to espouse your views your speech may be stifled. A perfect example of this occurred when Firas Alkhateeb, a college student from Chicago created a photo that some call art, others call politically charged, and some have called racist.
According to the L.A. Times, Mr. Alkhateeb utilized Adobe Photoshop and modified a photo of President Obama to make the President look like Heath Ledger's Joker character from the most recent Batman movie. In January of this year, Mr. Alkhateeb uploaded his creation to Flickr. Several months later somebody downloaded the photo and put the word "Socialism" on the photo and started plastering posters of the modified photo throughout Los Angeles.
Whether or not you agree with the message that it conveys, it appears that the photo modification is protected under the famous 1841 Folsom v. Marsh case that established the analysis later codified in the United States Copyright Act of 1976 Title 17, U.S.C. Section 107: Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use.
From a legal point of view, there is a valid argument that the photo represents protected political commentary. Under our First Amendment, no matter how reprehensible a person's words or ideas may be that person has a right to them and a right to publish them. As Social Networking use increases, these types of incidents will increase ten fold. Therefore, this type of censorship that Flickr is engaging in may be just the tip of the iceberg.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
According to the L.A. Times, Mr. Alkhateeb utilized Adobe Photoshop and modified a photo of President Obama to make the President look like Heath Ledger's Joker character from the most recent Batman movie. In January of this year, Mr. Alkhateeb uploaded his creation to Flickr. Several months later somebody downloaded the photo and put the word "Socialism" on the photo and started plastering posters of the modified photo throughout Los Angeles.
Whether or not you agree with the message that it conveys, it appears that the photo modification is protected under the famous 1841 Folsom v. Marsh case that established the analysis later codified in the United States Copyright Act of 1976 Title 17, U.S.C. Section 107: Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use.
From a legal point of view, there is a valid argument that the photo represents protected political commentary. Under our First Amendment, no matter how reprehensible a person's words or ideas may be that person has a right to them and a right to publish them. As Social Networking use increases, these types of incidents will increase ten fold. Therefore, this type of censorship that Flickr is engaging in may be just the tip of the iceberg.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Facebook Sued For Being Facebook
Facebook is being sued for what appears to be engaging in evolving as a social networking site. On its face, the lawsuit appears without merit because it does not allege anything new against Facebook. One of the lawsuit's allegations is that Facebook, "seeks to open and/or disseminate private information to third parties for commercial purposes and economic benefit."
Despite what many of its users think, Facebook is not in business to provide free social interactions for the benefit of its users. Facebook is in business to make money by providing a uniqe platform that enables its users to enjoy their online social interactions and activities. If and when Facebook is able to fully monetize all of this freely obtained information it will be the marketing industry's "El Dorado."
Users join Facebook to interact with their friends and potential friends and to share their thoughts and ideas with others. I am a Facebook user. However, I limit the amount of personal information that I post because I know that as soon as I post something I have no ability to fully control it. In contrast, some of my Facebook Friends post a tremendous amount of information that is not fit for professional consumption. For example, a cousin of mine who is a recent college graduate and a Facebook Friend has allowed some of her college Facebook usuage to follow her into the professional world. I have had to warn her not to disparage in any manner her current employer or position in her posts. I just hope that none of her posts boomerang and harm her in the future. As with any new technology, once the Genie has left the bottle you can't put it back in.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Despite what many of its users think, Facebook is not in business to provide free social interactions for the benefit of its users. Facebook is in business to make money by providing a uniqe platform that enables its users to enjoy their online social interactions and activities. If and when Facebook is able to fully monetize all of this freely obtained information it will be the marketing industry's "El Dorado."
Users join Facebook to interact with their friends and potential friends and to share their thoughts and ideas with others. I am a Facebook user. However, I limit the amount of personal information that I post because I know that as soon as I post something I have no ability to fully control it. In contrast, some of my Facebook Friends post a tremendous amount of information that is not fit for professional consumption. For example, a cousin of mine who is a recent college graduate and a Facebook Friend has allowed some of her college Facebook usuage to follow her into the professional world. I have had to warn her not to disparage in any manner her current employer or position in her posts. I just hope that none of her posts boomerang and harm her in the future. As with any new technology, once the Genie has left the bottle you can't put it back in.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
The Google Book Lawsuit
The New York Times has an interesting article about some of the objections to the proposed deal to settle the Google Book Lawsuit. For those not familiar with this lawsuit here is a condensed description of events: Google is in the process of scanning millions of books into digital format from several famous libraries. In return, Google wants to profit from their scanning work along with the authors and publishers of the scanned books.
I have no problem with Google wanting to profit from their work since new ideas are what drives capitalism. However, some of the legal issues that need to be addressed include:
1) Fair Compensation: Is the monetary settlement fair to the rights holders of the published works? For example, is it fair for the settlement to set non-negotiable royalty terms for works that are out-of-print but still in copyright?
2) Privacy concerns: How will Google track users and will Google then profit from selling ads directed to those users. Will the published works rights holders be able to share in the profits from any ad revenue that Google generates from these ads?
3) Monopoly concerns: Will other companies be able to join Google in profiting from this venture? Remember the old AT&T? After AT&T was broken up, we started to have more telephone choices. Some of the Baby Bells have since merged and now there are some rumblings about possible monopolistic activities but in general we have more innovation with healthy competition than we did before the break up.
I am not in favor of any agreement that sets non-negotiable royalty terms for any published work because each work should stand on its own and be given the opportunity for the marketplace to determine its worth. I also have grave concerns about Goggle's "big brother" capabilities and the possibility of a monopoly. The final agreement needs to address these issues and until it does it should not be implemented.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
I have no problem with Google wanting to profit from their work since new ideas are what drives capitalism. However, some of the legal issues that need to be addressed include:
1) Fair Compensation: Is the monetary settlement fair to the rights holders of the published works? For example, is it fair for the settlement to set non-negotiable royalty terms for works that are out-of-print but still in copyright?
2) Privacy concerns: How will Google track users and will Google then profit from selling ads directed to those users. Will the published works rights holders be able to share in the profits from any ad revenue that Google generates from these ads?
3) Monopoly concerns: Will other companies be able to join Google in profiting from this venture? Remember the old AT&T? After AT&T was broken up, we started to have more telephone choices. Some of the Baby Bells have since merged and now there are some rumblings about possible monopolistic activities but in general we have more innovation with healthy competition than we did before the break up.
I am not in favor of any agreement that sets non-negotiable royalty terms for any published work because each work should stand on its own and be given the opportunity for the marketplace to determine its worth. I also have grave concerns about Goggle's "big brother" capabilities and the possibility of a monopoly. The final agreement needs to address these issues and until it does it should not be implemented.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Hollywood Is Trying To Figure Out How To Embrace Social Networking
Great article today in the Baltimore Sun today about how Hollywood is trying to figure out how Social Networking websites effect movie openings. Twitter and other Social Networking websites are great for getting the word out and should be incorporated into every marketing campaign for any business. As demonstrated in the past year in elections throughout the world, social networking when used deftly can be a very powerful tool.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Bloggers' Days Of Anonymity May Be Ending
Yesterday, a Manhattan, NY Judge ruled that Google must identify the anonymous blogger who created and/or posted to a blog titled "Skanks in NYC." The blogger wrote derogatory and possibly libelous posts about Liskula Cohen, an international fashion model. Once Ms. Cohen learns the identity of the blogger she will then be able to file a defamation suit.
Abcnews.com has a good article and an interview with Ms. Cohen. This ruling may signal the beginning of the end of total anonymity in internet posting. I predict that these types of lawsuits will only increase in frequency and jurisdictions throughout the country may differ in their application of the law. Due to the First Amendment issues involved one of these cases may eventually find its way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Abcnews.com has a good article and an interview with Ms. Cohen. This ruling may signal the beginning of the end of total anonymity in internet posting. I predict that these types of lawsuits will only increase in frequency and jurisdictions throughout the country may differ in their application of the law. Due to the First Amendment issues involved one of these cases may eventually find its way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)