Notre Dame, Manti Te'o, Catfishing, Online Impersonation, and the Law

Notre Dame has one of the most storied college football programs in the country.  From the Gipper to Knute Rockne to Ara Parseghian to Rudy to Joe Montana, Notre Dame has a great reputation for winning with mystic and honor.  Unfortunately, a recent incident may temporarily tarnish Notre Dame's reputation.

Notre Dame's biggest star Manti Te'o who led the Fighting Irish to the BCS championship game this year and was 2nd in the recent Heisman Trophy voting was allegedly a victim of an online hoax.  During this past season, Manti Te'o's grandmother passed away and then within the same week his alleged girlfriend also died.  Having more than one person you are close with die in such a short period of time may be very difficult to handle and Manti Te'o received a tremendous amount of media attention during this past season partly because of it, and because he was the biggest star on the Notre Dame football team.

There were many red flags about this story that the media and Manti Te'o should have picked up on months ago.  Unfortunately, it appears that Manti Te'o did not realize he had been allegedly catfished until recently.  According to the Urban Dictionay, catfishing occurs when someone utilizes social media to create a false identify to pursue an online romance.

In general, catfishing is not against the law.  Multiple states have online impersonation laws that make it a crime to impersonate an actual person.  However, both California and Washington state's law focus on impersonating real people and not those who are part of someone's imagination.  Other states such as Arizona are also trying to pass legislation banning online impersonation. Unfortunately, some of these laws may infringe on the First Amendment and may eventually be declared unconstitutional.

This incident may cost Manti Te'o tens of millions of dollars in potential earnings.  Even though he did not win the Heisman Trophy or the BCS national championship, Manti Te'o had a good story and was a great college player.  However, NFL teams who were thinking about selecting him in the upcoming NFL draft may think twice about someone who either fell for an online hoax or who may have been part of an alleged marketing scheme.

Until all of the facts have been verified it is too soon to determine whether Manti Te'o was catfished or he intentionally perpetuated misinformation for personal gain.  I am giving Manti Te'o the benefit of the doubt at this point because it appears that he was at some point a victim and continued to be a victim of a cruel joke for a period of time.  Manti Te'o may have continued perpetuating the misleading statements about his alleged girlfriend after learning the truth out of embarrassment that he fell for it. 

Unfortunately, NFL teams and potential sponsors may not want to spend millions of dollars on someone who was allegedly duped in such a public manner.  Despite this incident, I believe an NFL team may take a chance on Manti Te'o because he may have a chip on his should to prove this incident was an aberration and that he has the talent to become a great NFL player.    

Until all the facts have been verified, it is too early to determine if an online impersonation law may apply to this situation.  There are reports that the photograph(s) of a real person was utilized; if so, that may help determine if an online impersonation law may be applicable.

The bottom line is that one must always be careful when dealing with others online and if someone doesn't have a phone and/or can't meet you in person that may indicate you are being catfished.

To learn more about these issues you may contact me at http://shearlaw.com.

Copyright 2013 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.

Social Media Monitoring NCAA Student-Athletes May Create Legal Liability in Excess of $100 Million Dollars

In the past 6 months, California, Michigan, Delaware, and New Jersey have enacted laws banning school athletic departments from requesting or requiring their student-athletes verify their social media/digital media usernames/passwords and/or install cyberstalking software onto their personal accounts or devices.  Many other states along with Congress have introduced legislation to ban these practices to protect schools from legal liability and to protect the personal privacy of students.   

Unfortunately, some companies/"social media experts" are approaching NCAA schools and intentionally misleading athletic departments about their experience, their understanding of NCAA compliance, and their knowledge of state and federal law.  Some of these companies may claim that their "social media monitoring" services "respect privacy", or "promote compliance", or they "never ask for passwords" or that their services"facilitate education".  These claims are misleading and may create tremendous legal liability for NCAA athletic programs that engage any of these companies.

The legal liability of engaging a social media monitoring company to digitally track a program's student-athletes or employees may be tens of millions of dollars. Anyone who disagrees with this analysis needs to review the facts about the Penn State Jerry Sandusky scandal.  Emails from 10 plus years ago destroyed the careers of several well respected members of the Penn State administration/faculty and may cost the school more than $100 million dollars in fines/legal fees/judgements/settlements, etc.. 

Digital evidence (emails) was key in the Freeh Report which the NCAA appears to have relied on to levy a $60 million dollar fine against Penn State.  The total cost of this terrible scandal to Penn State may reach $150-$200 million dollars.  Absent the digital evidence, the Freeh Report may have reached a different conclusion, the NCAA may not have had the evidence to support a fine and other sanctions, and plaintiffs may have a hard time proving Penn State knew about Mr. Sandusky's behavior.  

Do schools and athletic department employees want to monitor and archive potential evidence that may be discoverable and utilized against them in lawsuits?  The bottom line is that NCAA athletic departments should not engage services that may harm their interests and put them in a position that may create tens or hundreds of millions of dollars in legal liability.  

To learn more about these issues you may contact me at http://shearlaw.com.

Copyright 2013 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved. 

Norway's Consumer Ombudsman: Facebook Generally Agrees it Has a Counterfeit Goods Advertising Problem

According to Norway's Consumer Ombudsman, Facebook has a problem with counterfeit goods and scamming schemes being advertised on its platform.  On November 6, 2012, Norway's Consumer Ombudsman held a meeting with Facebook's representatives and the topic of discussion was misleading advertising for counterfeit goods and scamming sites on its website.

Norway's Consumer Ombudsman's position appears to be that Facebook allows onto its website a significant number of ads for web shops and scamming schemes that are in violation of the Norwegian Marketing Control Act (MCA).  These finding are very troubling and may indicate that Facebook may need to spend significantly more to comply with Norway's Marketing Control Act. 

How much more will Facebook need to spend to comply with Norway's law will depend on the depth of problem.  However, it appears that Facebook's screening process may also fall short here in the United States.  I have personally reviewed hundreds of suspected ads for counterfeit merchandise on Facebook so I believe this may be a much larger challenge than many realize.

Does Facebook have a Google pharma ad problem on its hand?  In 2011, Google agreed to pay a $500 million dollar fine to avoid prosecution due to displaying advertisements from Canadian pharmacies which illegally sold prescription drugs to American consumers.  An important question in the Google case was did it intentionally turn a blind eye to the matter?  Is Facebook intentionally turning a blind eye regarding advertising for counterfeit merchandise on its platform?

To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.

Copyright 2013 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.

Survey Says: Parents Care About Online Data Privacy in Their Children's Schools

A Brunswick Insight survey was released earlier this week regarding digital privacy issues that affect school students.  The online survey was conducted between August 25-28, 2012 and questioned 1,035 American adults who had children in grades 1-12.  The survey's margin of error was +-3% at the 95% confidence interval. 

The overall findings of the survey strongly indicate that U.S. parents care deeply about the digital privacy of their children.  The survey results demonstrate that a national conversation is needed regarding student privacy in the Digital Age. 

Overall, 93% of parents surveyed expressed concern regarding online tracking of their children. A majority of parents questioned (54%) stated they were "very concerned" about online advertising companies tracking the email and Internet usage habits of their children while in school in order to target them with Internet advertising. Even though more than nine in 10 parents surveyed were concerned that at some schools online advertising companies may be tracking the email and Internet usage habits of children in order to target them with digital advertising, almost half (49%) of parents stated they have heard "nothing at all" about this issue.

An overwhelming majority (92%) of parents agreed that school boards that accept free email services from advertising firms should require the companies to offer a privacy policy expressly designed for school children that provides strict guarantees against user profiling or web tracking.  In addition, 90% of parents surveyed agreed that school boards that accept free email services from advertising firms should insist on contracts that expressly ban the use of children's email for ad-related purposes, including targeting of ads outside the email service.  Furthermore, 87% of parents indicated that school boards that accept free email services from advertising firms should insist on contracts that expressly require that all advertising functionality, even if purely optional, be completely removed from the software.    

Interestingly, 84% of parents questioned stated that they would be likely to take action against online tracking in schools and 50% of those questioned stated they would be "very likely" to take action.  Potential action that was listed in the survey's questionnaire included speaking out at a PTA meeting or calling a school official.  This aspect of the survey was very telling because it indicates that parents are willing to take affirmative steps to protect the digital privacy of their children. 

During the past year, parents across the United States have gone from indicating in surveys that they would be likely to take action to protect the digital privacy rights of their children to taking affirmative steps to stop practices they believe harm the digital privacy and safety of their children.  For example, parents in Delaware, California, New Jersey, and Michigan have worked to ban schools from being able to request or require students provide access to their personal digital accounts so schools may track their students' personal digital activities. 

Parents and public school students in Texas have protested against being required to wear school identification badges embedded with RFID chips that digitally track their movements while at school.  In Maryland, parents' outrage over schools that were utilizing palm scanners to obtain biometric data from students to pay for school lunches and potentially track the eating habits of students recently led to the termination of the program.  The bottom line is that parents are willing to openly protest and take legal action against practices they believe may be putting their children in harm's way.    

When parents are provided the tools and opportunity to make informed decisions they act to protect the data privacy and safety of their children.  The findings of this Brunswick Insight survey indicate that more information and transparency is needed so parents may be able to learn more about these issues so they can take the appropriate steps necessary to protect their children's digital privacy and security.  

To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
 

Copyright 2013 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC All rights reserved.