If you are interested in learning more about some of the legal issues that may affect in-house counsel I encourage you to attend ALM's 23rd Annual Corporate Counsel Conference East Coast. The conference will be held at the Marriott Marquis in New York City on June 7 and June 8th.
Some of the topics that will be addressed include: Trends in Transactions; M&A and Restructurings;
Copyright Law and the Internet's Evolution Continues to Break New Ground; Social Networking and Its Impact on Employment Law; Preparing Your Company for Social Media Attacks; and
Risk Readiness & Information Security in Today's World.
Here is the link to register and this is the link for more information on the sessions that will be offered.
[Full Disclosure: Shear on Social Media Law is part of ALM's Law.com Blog Network]
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Professional Athletes and Celebrities are Harmed by Social Media Credential Fraud
Social Media Credential Fraud may destroy endorsement opportunities for professional athletes and celebrities in the digital space. Sponsors and advertisers are trying to determine the value of a Twitter follower, a Facebook Like, a Klout score and other social media metrics. Monetary and personal decisions are being made based upon social media profiles. Therefore, eliminating Social Media Credential Fraud is extremely important for the marketing industry.
If Social Media Credential Fraud is not stopped in its tracks it will destroy the social media marketing industry before it has even gotten off the ground. In 2009, the FTC updated its advertising regulations and within the last few months it has started to crack down on unethical digital marketing practices. The FTC has not even begun to flex its regulatory muscles and activities like Social Media Credential Fraud and other unethical and misleading marketing activities will not stop until the FTC makes cleaning up this space a priority.
Fortune 500 companies have been hesitant to embrace social media marketing until recently because there are few reliable metrics to measure success. Some professional athletes and celebrities such as Kim Kardashian are already making money due to their social media activity. This is due in part not only because of their popularity but also because advertisers are confident that these professional athletes and celebrities have real organic Twitter Following to Followers figures and other accurate and verifiable social media footprints.
The potential for an expansion of endorsement opportunities in the digital space will be destroyed if those who are perpetrating Social Media Credential Fraud are not punished by the FTC. Therefore, I challenge the marketing industry to take proactive measures against those who perpetrate fraudulent digital activity before it further inhibits the digital marketing space from blossoming. Until the marketing industry eliminates Social Media Credential Fraud and other unethical and misleading activities, sponsors and advertisers will not be able to accurately determine their return on investment for their digital advertising campaigns.
To learn how to how professional athletes and celebrities may avoid violating the FTC endorsement and testimonial guidelines and how to fully monetize one's social media assets you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
If Social Media Credential Fraud is not stopped in its tracks it will destroy the social media marketing industry before it has even gotten off the ground. In 2009, the FTC updated its advertising regulations and within the last few months it has started to crack down on unethical digital marketing practices. The FTC has not even begun to flex its regulatory muscles and activities like Social Media Credential Fraud and other unethical and misleading marketing activities will not stop until the FTC makes cleaning up this space a priority.
Fortune 500 companies have been hesitant to embrace social media marketing until recently because there are few reliable metrics to measure success. Some professional athletes and celebrities such as Kim Kardashian are already making money due to their social media activity. This is due in part not only because of their popularity but also because advertisers are confident that these professional athletes and celebrities have real organic Twitter Following to Followers figures and other accurate and verifiable social media footprints.
The potential for an expansion of endorsement opportunities in the digital space will be destroyed if those who are perpetrating Social Media Credential Fraud are not punished by the FTC. Therefore, I challenge the marketing industry to take proactive measures against those who perpetrate fraudulent digital activity before it further inhibits the digital marketing space from blossoming. Until the marketing industry eliminates Social Media Credential Fraud and other unethical and misleading activities, sponsors and advertisers will not be able to accurately determine their return on investment for their digital advertising campaigns.
To learn how to how professional athletes and celebrities may avoid violating the FTC endorsement and testimonial guidelines and how to fully monetize one's social media assets you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Saturday, May 14, 2011
How to Respond to Criticism in the Social Media Age
Properly responding to Social Media Criticism is an important skill to learn. In the Social Media Age, those who learn this skill will be successful. Those who are unable to master this ability will suffer. There are several methods that may be utilized when dealing with Social Media Criticism. Some of the ways to deal with Social Media Criticism include:
1) Ignoring the criticism and hope it subsides and is soon forgotten.
2) Responding to the criticism in the same medium to demonstrate that the criticism is unfounded.
3) Taking legal action against those who have criticized you.
Ignoring the criticism may work in some instances. However, do not hide under a rock. Monitor the criticism to understand if and how it may harm your reputation and brand.
If one decides to respond to social media criticism it may be done in the same medium that the original criticism occurred. For example, when legal marketer Larry Bodine called me a crank and appeared to defend an unethical and misleading marketing practice when I outed a fellow legal marketer who was practicing Social Media Credential Fraud I responded to Bodine by stating the facts and the law to rebut his position. Since I was correct about the law and facts he has not responded.
Another way to respond to social media criticism is to file a lawsuit against those who have directed criticism towards you. On April 1, 2011, The Washington Post wrote a story about lawyer Joseph Rakofsky's handling of his first trial. Rakofsky's first trial did not go as planned. It ended in a mistrial and according to the Washington Post the judge in the case indicated among other things, that Rakofsky did not have good grasp of legal procedures. Subsequently, the American Bar Association, Thomson Reuters, and other well-respected media outlets and lawyers discussed this case in traditional media outlets, on blogs, Twitter, Facebook, and other social media platforms.
It appears that Rakofsky was not pleased that he was criticized so he decided to sue everyone he believed had criticized him and he has alleged that the criticism rose to defamation. Scott Greenfield has nicknamed the case Rakofsky v. Internet.
Some of the alleged facts of this matter include:
1) This was Rakofsky's first trial which was also a felony murder case.
2) Rakofsky was not licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction upon which the case originated and needed to be admitted pro hac vice in order to handle his first trial.
3) In paragraph 102 (p23) of Rakofsky's complaint he states "as a result of the blatant alliance between Judge Jackson and the AUSA"....
4) In paragraph 111 (p28) of Rakofsky's complaint it appears he is accusing a judge of intentionally publishing on the record slanderous and defamatory statements against him.
5) In paragraph 122 (p33) of Rakofsky's complaint he tries to explain that he used an unfortunate shorthand word ("trick") while stating in an email to his investigator "Please trick...(old lady) into admitting:"
Rakofsky should have learned to walk before he ran with a murder case. One's first trial should not be defending an alleged murderer. The above points and the rest of the complaint demonstrates that Rakofsky may not understand the legal definition of defamation. Rakofsky makes unfounded allegations against a judge, a prosecutor, reporters, members of the media and fellow attorneys. Does Rakofsky believe that the New Jersey Rules of Professional Conduct for the Lawyers (and NY and DC; even though he is only barred in NJ) and the FTC Advertising Regulations do not apply to him?
According to the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct, it appears that Rakofsky may be engaging in the unauthorized practice of law in Washington, DC. In an advertisement that appears to list Rakofsky's Washington, DC address (a Regus virtual office address) it may provide the impression that Rakofsky is a Washington, DC barred lawyer. Rakofsky may want to review In re Banks, 561 A.2d 158 (DC 1987) and Brookens v. Committee on Unauthorized Practice of Law, 538 A.2d 1120 (DC 1988). Rakofsky's actions (ex: obtaining a DC virtual office address without a DC license) may demonstrate an intent to circumvent the DC Bar rules.
Taking legal action against those who have criticized you via social media should only be done after all other options have failed and only when one has the law and facts on his side. Filing a lawsuit against The Washington Post, The American Bar Association, Thomson Reuters, and numerous other entities and attorneys will not restore one's reputation. The best way for an attorney to build his reputation is through ethical conduct, hard work, and successful client representation. Unethical conduct, misleading advertising, and unsuccessful client outcomes are not the building blocks for a successful legal career.
The only reason I did not address "the Rakofsky Affair" earlier is that I was busy discussing Social Media Credential Fraud and I felt all of those who Rakofsky sued said everything that needed to be said about the matter. The moral of the story is in the Social Media Age young lawyers should not follow Joseph Rakofsky's playbook.
Rakofsky should drop his lawsuit before it further destroys his life. This situation should serve as a final exam hypothetical in every law school throughout the country.
If Rakofsky takes legal action against me and/or my law firm for this post or any past or future posts I will file a complaint against him with the New York, New Jersey, and Washington, DC Attorney Grievance Committees, the Federal Trade Commission, and I will file a counter suit. To paraphrase Clint Eastwood, Rakofsky... go ahead MAKE MY DAY!
To learn how to respond to social media criticism you may contact me at http://shearlaw.com/attorney_profile.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
1) Ignoring the criticism and hope it subsides and is soon forgotten.
2) Responding to the criticism in the same medium to demonstrate that the criticism is unfounded.
3) Taking legal action against those who have criticized you.
Ignoring the criticism may work in some instances. However, do not hide under a rock. Monitor the criticism to understand if and how it may harm your reputation and brand.
If one decides to respond to social media criticism it may be done in the same medium that the original criticism occurred. For example, when legal marketer Larry Bodine called me a crank and appeared to defend an unethical and misleading marketing practice when I outed a fellow legal marketer who was practicing Social Media Credential Fraud I responded to Bodine by stating the facts and the law to rebut his position. Since I was correct about the law and facts he has not responded.
Another way to respond to social media criticism is to file a lawsuit against those who have directed criticism towards you. On April 1, 2011, The Washington Post wrote a story about lawyer Joseph Rakofsky's handling of his first trial. Rakofsky's first trial did not go as planned. It ended in a mistrial and according to the Washington Post the judge in the case indicated among other things, that Rakofsky did not have good grasp of legal procedures. Subsequently, the American Bar Association, Thomson Reuters, and other well-respected media outlets and lawyers discussed this case in traditional media outlets, on blogs, Twitter, Facebook, and other social media platforms.
It appears that Rakofsky was not pleased that he was criticized so he decided to sue everyone he believed had criticized him and he has alleged that the criticism rose to defamation. Scott Greenfield has nicknamed the case Rakofsky v. Internet.
Some of the alleged facts of this matter include:
1) This was Rakofsky's first trial which was also a felony murder case.
2) Rakofsky was not licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction upon which the case originated and needed to be admitted pro hac vice in order to handle his first trial.
3) In paragraph 102 (p23) of Rakofsky's complaint he states "as a result of the blatant alliance between Judge Jackson and the AUSA"....
4) In paragraph 111 (p28) of Rakofsky's complaint it appears he is accusing a judge of intentionally publishing on the record slanderous and defamatory statements against him.
5) In paragraph 122 (p33) of Rakofsky's complaint he tries to explain that he used an unfortunate shorthand word ("trick") while stating in an email to his investigator "Please trick...(old lady) into admitting:"
Rakofsky should have learned to walk before he ran with a murder case. One's first trial should not be defending an alleged murderer. The above points and the rest of the complaint demonstrates that Rakofsky may not understand the legal definition of defamation. Rakofsky makes unfounded allegations against a judge, a prosecutor, reporters, members of the media and fellow attorneys. Does Rakofsky believe that the New Jersey Rules of Professional Conduct for the Lawyers (and NY and DC; even though he is only barred in NJ) and the FTC Advertising Regulations do not apply to him?
According to the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct, it appears that Rakofsky may be engaging in the unauthorized practice of law in Washington, DC. In an advertisement that appears to list Rakofsky's Washington, DC address (a Regus virtual office address) it may provide the impression that Rakofsky is a Washington, DC barred lawyer. Rakofsky may want to review In re Banks, 561 A.2d 158 (DC 1987) and Brookens v. Committee on Unauthorized Practice of Law, 538 A.2d 1120 (DC 1988). Rakofsky's actions (ex: obtaining a DC virtual office address without a DC license) may demonstrate an intent to circumvent the DC Bar rules.
Taking legal action against those who have criticized you via social media should only be done after all other options have failed and only when one has the law and facts on his side. Filing a lawsuit against The Washington Post, The American Bar Association, Thomson Reuters, and numerous other entities and attorneys will not restore one's reputation. The best way for an attorney to build his reputation is through ethical conduct, hard work, and successful client representation. Unethical conduct, misleading advertising, and unsuccessful client outcomes are not the building blocks for a successful legal career.
The only reason I did not address "the Rakofsky Affair" earlier is that I was busy discussing Social Media Credential Fraud and I felt all of those who Rakofsky sued said everything that needed to be said about the matter. The moral of the story is in the Social Media Age young lawyers should not follow Joseph Rakofsky's playbook.
Rakofsky should drop his lawsuit before it further destroys his life. This situation should serve as a final exam hypothetical in every law school throughout the country.
If Rakofsky takes legal action against me and/or my law firm for this post or any past or future posts I will file a complaint against him with the New York, New Jersey, and Washington, DC Attorney Grievance Committees, the Federal Trade Commission, and I will file a counter suit. To paraphrase Clint Eastwood, Rakofsky... go ahead MAKE MY DAY!
To learn how to respond to social media criticism you may contact me at http://shearlaw.com/attorney_profile.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Thursday, May 12, 2011
ALM's LegalTech West Coast 2011
[Full Disclosure: Shear on Social Media Law is part of ALM's Law.com Blog Network]
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Friday, May 6, 2011
Maryland's Social Media Evidence Authentication Decision Provides Much Needed Guidance
Maryland's highest court, the Court of Appeals recently decided a case regarding authentication of social media accounts and the content contained therein. In Antoine Levar Griffin v. State of Maryland (No. 74, September Term 2010; filed April 28, 2011), the Court of Appeals held that"[t]the potential for abuse and manipulation of a social networking site by someone other than its purported creator and/or user leads to our conclusion that a printout of an image for such a site requires a greater degree of authentication than merely identifying the date of birth of the creator and her visage in a photograph on the site in order to reflect that [defendant] Ms. Barber was its creator and the author of the "snitches get stitches" language." (Griffin v. State, page 14 of the decision and page 16 of the linked pdf)
In the Maryland Daily Record, Maryland's main legal newspaper, there was a post on their Generation J.D. blog disagreeing with the Court of Appeals decision. The blog post states," Lawyers attempting to get social networking into evidence must contend with a group of judges who probably have never used a social networking site between the seven of them", and "The likelihood of fake pages and tampering is remote..." and "[g]iven the prevalence of social networking and the unlikelihood of false pages or fraudulent access..." and "[i]f any of them (Members of the Maryland Court of Appeals) have ever tried it (Facebook) out, or are active users, they are to be commended."
The above statements by John Cord demonstrate a lack of understanding of social media. Mr. Cord's post also states, " I'd love to be proven wrong." A less than 1 second Google search of "fake facebook profiles" shows that fake social media pages occur more often than than Mr. Cord states. It is very easy to create fake social media pages and have your social media account hacked. Fraudulent access to social media pages occurs more often then some may think.
In the Griffin case, the Maryland Court of Appeals spread their social media wings and demonstrated they understand some of the inherent dangers with unauthenticated social media pages. The Court was correct in determining that the prosecution should have utilized a different method to authenticate statements that appear on social media accounts and the Court offered several possible methods that may be acceptable.
A simple Google search and a thorough reading of the decision should have been done before criticizing Maryland's Court of Appeals and its judges. Before publicly criticizing a court and/or its judges, let alone the highest court in one's home state a lawyer should perform the utmost due diligence. #29 of Judge Dennis M. Sweeney's Rules For Courtroom Conduct states, "Remember that nastiness and rudeness rarely impresses the court or help your client. Courtesy is never inappropriate."
To learn how social media intersects with the law you may contact me at http://shearlaw.com/attorney_profile.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
In the Maryland Daily Record, Maryland's main legal newspaper, there was a post on their Generation J.D. blog disagreeing with the Court of Appeals decision. The blog post states," Lawyers attempting to get social networking into evidence must contend with a group of judges who probably have never used a social networking site between the seven of them", and "The likelihood of fake pages and tampering is remote..." and "[g]iven the prevalence of social networking and the unlikelihood of false pages or fraudulent access..." and "[i]f any of them (Members of the Maryland Court of Appeals) have ever tried it (Facebook) out, or are active users, they are to be commended."
The above statements by John Cord demonstrate a lack of understanding of social media. Mr. Cord's post also states, " I'd love to be proven wrong." A less than 1 second Google search of "fake facebook profiles" shows that fake social media pages occur more often than than Mr. Cord states. It is very easy to create fake social media pages and have your social media account hacked. Fraudulent access to social media pages occurs more often then some may think.
In the Griffin case, the Maryland Court of Appeals spread their social media wings and demonstrated they understand some of the inherent dangers with unauthenticated social media pages. The Court was correct in determining that the prosecution should have utilized a different method to authenticate statements that appear on social media accounts and the Court offered several possible methods that may be acceptable.
A simple Google search and a thorough reading of the decision should have been done before criticizing Maryland's Court of Appeals and its judges. Before publicly criticizing a court and/or its judges, let alone the highest court in one's home state a lawyer should perform the utmost due diligence. #29 of Judge Dennis M. Sweeney's Rules For Courtroom Conduct states, "Remember that nastiness and rudeness rarely impresses the court or help your client. Courtesy is never inappropriate."
To learn how social media intersects with the law you may contact me at http://shearlaw.com/attorney_profile.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Utlize Social Media To Support The Navy SEAL Foundation
United States Navy SEa Air Land (SEAL) teams and their precursors have defended our country since World War II. Most recently, Navy SEALs were part of the force that carried out the heroic mission that killed Osama bin Laden. bin Laden was the leader of al Qaeda and mastermind behind the September 11th attacks that killed approximately 3000 people in the United States and thousands of others throughout the years around the world.
To paraphrase Winston Churchill, bin Laden's death does not mark the end of the War on Terror; it marks the end of the beginning of the War on Terror. Navy SEALS, U.S. Special Forces along with thousands of members of the United States military and intelligence communities hunted bin Laden for almost 10 years. These government workers are dedicated to protecting our country and ensuring our ideals and freedoms are passed onto our children.
The brave men and women who worked tirelessly day in and day out tracking down public enemy number #1 are our neighbors next door, our friends around the corner, and the people whom we see at the mall and ballpark. They may even be our professors and/or mentors.
One of my favorite law school professors at the University of Baltimore School of Law, Robin Winchester Goodenough, was a Navy Frogman (a member of an Underwater Demolition Team-a precursor to the SEALs) before he was a politician, statesman, and then law professor. Prof. Goodenough served our country with distinction during World War II and the Korean War. He was one of the most instrumental influences in my life. In addition to being a great professor, he was also a friend and mentor. He reiterated on many occasions that there are no shortcuts to success and that one should never give up on their hopes and dreams.
I didn't realize the extent of Prof. Goodenough's heroics until I visited him at his home several years after I graduated from law school. He was the epitome of class and dignity. Prof. Goodenough always said he wasn't in the legal profession but in the "human relations" business. While visiting Prof. Goodenough's home, he showed me some of his photographs and commendations from when he served our country. He never talked about his missions in class. However, the day I visited him we spent several hours discussing life and how to turn lemons into lemonade. His advice that day and whenever we spoke has been instrumental both personally and professionally.
Freedom is not free. The cost is very high and it disproportionately falls onto the families of those who have died while serving our country. Its time for our country to thank the Robin W. Goodenoughs of the world. These courageous defenders of freedom are the unsung heroes in the War on Terror. Because of their selfless acts, I am able to practice law, blog about social media, have a first amendment right to speak my mind, and go to sleep at night without being in constant fear that a terrorist attack will destroy my home.
You may be able to help support the families of these brave heroes who toil in anonymity to protect our country. This may be done through the Navy SEAL Foundation. According to its website, the Navy SEAL Foundation supports all [SEAL] families and their parent commands by easing financial burdens, establishing support networks, and funding command sponsored activities."
I encourage everyone who reads this blog to spread the news about the Navy SEAL Foundation via all social media platforms including Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, etc...
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. This post may be re-purposed in any manner that may be able to benefit the Navy SEAL Foundation and the U.S. military and intelligence communities.
To paraphrase Winston Churchill, bin Laden's death does not mark the end of the War on Terror; it marks the end of the beginning of the War on Terror. Navy SEALS, U.S. Special Forces along with thousands of members of the United States military and intelligence communities hunted bin Laden for almost 10 years. These government workers are dedicated to protecting our country and ensuring our ideals and freedoms are passed onto our children.
The brave men and women who worked tirelessly day in and day out tracking down public enemy number #1 are our neighbors next door, our friends around the corner, and the people whom we see at the mall and ballpark. They may even be our professors and/or mentors.
One of my favorite law school professors at the University of Baltimore School of Law, Robin Winchester Goodenough, was a Navy Frogman (a member of an Underwater Demolition Team-a precursor to the SEALs) before he was a politician, statesman, and then law professor. Prof. Goodenough served our country with distinction during World War II and the Korean War. He was one of the most instrumental influences in my life. In addition to being a great professor, he was also a friend and mentor. He reiterated on many occasions that there are no shortcuts to success and that one should never give up on their hopes and dreams.
I didn't realize the extent of Prof. Goodenough's heroics until I visited him at his home several years after I graduated from law school. He was the epitome of class and dignity. Prof. Goodenough always said he wasn't in the legal profession but in the "human relations" business. While visiting Prof. Goodenough's home, he showed me some of his photographs and commendations from when he served our country. He never talked about his missions in class. However, the day I visited him we spent several hours discussing life and how to turn lemons into lemonade. His advice that day and whenever we spoke has been instrumental both personally and professionally.
Freedom is not free. The cost is very high and it disproportionately falls onto the families of those who have died while serving our country. Its time for our country to thank the Robin W. Goodenoughs of the world. These courageous defenders of freedom are the unsung heroes in the War on Terror. Because of their selfless acts, I am able to practice law, blog about social media, have a first amendment right to speak my mind, and go to sleep at night without being in constant fear that a terrorist attack will destroy my home.
You may be able to help support the families of these brave heroes who toil in anonymity to protect our country. This may be done through the Navy SEAL Foundation. According to its website, the Navy SEAL Foundation supports all [SEAL] families and their parent commands by easing financial burdens, establishing support networks, and funding command sponsored activities."
I encourage everyone who reads this blog to spread the news about the Navy SEAL Foundation via all social media platforms including Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, etc...
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. This post may be re-purposed in any manner that may be able to benefit the Navy SEAL Foundation and the U.S. military and intelligence communities.
Monday, May 2, 2011
Osama bin Laden killed by U.S. Special Forces
I have the utmost respect for the United States Intelligence Community, U.S. Special Forces and the brave men and women of the U.S. Military for all of their hard work that led to the killing of Osama bin Laden. bin Laden's ideology and orders led to the death of thousands of innocent lives around the world. Countless resources, whether economic, political, emotional, or human were utilized to respond to the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States that killed nearly 3000 people.
According to NBC news, the compound where bin Laden was staying had 12-16 foot walls and a tremendous amount of security. Interestingly, the structure did not have Internet access or telephones. bin Laden was found due to good old fashion human intelligence. Therefore, Social Media can't take credit for killing bin Laden.
bin Laden was killed in a firefight with U.S. Special Forces. The death of bin Laden will not end the fight against terrorism. To paraphrase a quote from Winston Churchill when he was referring to the British victory over the German Afrika Corps at the Second Battle of El Alamein, the killing of bin Laden "is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is perhaps, the end of the beginning" of the War on Terror.
The U.S. operation that killed bin Laden demonstrates that whenever the United States puts its mind to something it can accomplish it. There is nothing our country can't do. Whether its liberating Europe, putting the first man on the moon, or making the world a safer and better place to live, the United States is a beacon of hope for all around the globe.
One day, the United States may not have the largest economy in the world; however, as long as the United States still has the largest heart and remains a place where the best and the brightest from all over the world come to live, work, and raise their families, we will still be the greatest country in the world.
God Bless America!
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
According to NBC news, the compound where bin Laden was staying had 12-16 foot walls and a tremendous amount of security. Interestingly, the structure did not have Internet access or telephones. bin Laden was found due to good old fashion human intelligence. Therefore, Social Media can't take credit for killing bin Laden.
bin Laden was killed in a firefight with U.S. Special Forces. The death of bin Laden will not end the fight against terrorism. To paraphrase a quote from Winston Churchill when he was referring to the British victory over the German Afrika Corps at the Second Battle of El Alamein, the killing of bin Laden "is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is perhaps, the end of the beginning" of the War on Terror.
The U.S. operation that killed bin Laden demonstrates that whenever the United States puts its mind to something it can accomplish it. There is nothing our country can't do. Whether its liberating Europe, putting the first man on the moon, or making the world a safer and better place to live, the United States is a beacon of hope for all around the globe.
One day, the United States may not have the largest economy in the world; however, as long as the United States still has the largest heart and remains a place where the best and the brightest from all over the world come to live, work, and raise their families, we will still be the greatest country in the world.
God Bless America!
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Tweet deletion may lead to tampering with evidence charges
May deleting a Tweet and/or sending out false and misleading social media posts result in tampering with evidence charges? In the case against Dharun Rhavi regarding his alleged role in roommate Tyler Clementi's apparent suicide, evidence tampering charges are based upon allegedly deleting a Tweet and creating false and/or misleading social media posts.
Clementi was a freshman at Rutgers University and it is believed he committed suicide last year by jumping off the George Washington Bridge. It is thought that Clementi was so distraught after he found out that Ravi had webcasted a sexual encounter that Clementi had with another man Clementi decided to take his own life.
After law enforcement started to investigate the circumstances surrounding Clementi's death, it is alleged that Ravi tampered with evidence by deleting one or more of his Tweets and making false and/or misleading social media posts in an effort to cover up the allegations that he may have invaded Clementi's privacy.
Deleting Tweets and/or trying to cover up one's online activity is futile. Whether its the Library of Congress preserving public Tweets or Google indexing an old cached version of a website or a post, once something is put online it can never be permanently removed from the Internet.
I believe evidence tampering charges based on social media usage will increase in the future as more people utilize social media and social media becomes a larger part of the judicial process. I have no idea if Ravi was deleting his Tweets to intentionally tamper with evidence of if he was just a scared college freshman who was afraid of the media scrutiny that was surrounding his roommate's death.
This is another example of how one's online activities are just as important, if not more so, than everything done off-line. Unfortunately, it appears that a few clicks of a mouse along with some ill-advised Tweets and other social media posts may have contributed to the suicide of young person.
In the Internet Age, a hidden web cam in the movie American Pie was a funny joke. In the Social Media Age, a hidden web cam is no laughing matter because billions of people may view what is streamed online and this may have unintended consequences.
This tragic case should be a wake up call to restart a national conversation on personal privacy. I believe social media education should be taught starting in elementary school. The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) only protects children under the age of 13 so our children should be provided the tools necessary to successfully navigate the Social Media Age before they reach 13 years of age. If the lessons learned from this tragedy are not discussed with our children Tyler Clementi will have died in vain.
To learn how to protect your privacy and your children in the Social Media Age you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Clementi was a freshman at Rutgers University and it is believed he committed suicide last year by jumping off the George Washington Bridge. It is thought that Clementi was so distraught after he found out that Ravi had webcasted a sexual encounter that Clementi had with another man Clementi decided to take his own life.
After law enforcement started to investigate the circumstances surrounding Clementi's death, it is alleged that Ravi tampered with evidence by deleting one or more of his Tweets and making false and/or misleading social media posts in an effort to cover up the allegations that he may have invaded Clementi's privacy.
Deleting Tweets and/or trying to cover up one's online activity is futile. Whether its the Library of Congress preserving public Tweets or Google indexing an old cached version of a website or a post, once something is put online it can never be permanently removed from the Internet.
I believe evidence tampering charges based on social media usage will increase in the future as more people utilize social media and social media becomes a larger part of the judicial process. I have no idea if Ravi was deleting his Tweets to intentionally tamper with evidence of if he was just a scared college freshman who was afraid of the media scrutiny that was surrounding his roommate's death.
This is another example of how one's online activities are just as important, if not more so, than everything done off-line. Unfortunately, it appears that a few clicks of a mouse along with some ill-advised Tweets and other social media posts may have contributed to the suicide of young person.
In the Internet Age, a hidden web cam in the movie American Pie was a funny joke. In the Social Media Age, a hidden web cam is no laughing matter because billions of people may view what is streamed online and this may have unintended consequences.
This tragic case should be a wake up call to restart a national conversation on personal privacy. I believe social media education should be taught starting in elementary school. The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) only protects children under the age of 13 so our children should be provided the tools necessary to successfully navigate the Social Media Age before they reach 13 years of age. If the lessons learned from this tragedy are not discussed with our children Tyler Clementi will have died in vain.
To learn how to protect your privacy and your children in the Social Media Age you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)