Does Facebook have a legal duty to monitor for illegal activity on its website? Facebook is an international company with its headquarters in California. However, Facebook must comply with the laws of every jurisdiction where it operates.
In Australia, Facebook was recently pressured to remove a page that was alleged racist. At first, it appeared that Facebook claimed that because it is based in California it did not have to comply with Australia's anti-discrimination laws. However, after more public and governmental pressure Facebook eventually removed the controversial page.
A series of Facebook chats in Canada recently caught the attention of Facebook's staff who reported it to Winnipeg law enforcement officials. Detectives arrested a suspect and he is now facing charges of sexual assault, sexual interference, and luring. It may have been noble of Facebook to report an alleged criminal act but what would have happened if Facebook knew about the chats but didn't report them?
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2012 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC All rights reserved.
Showing posts with label Criminal Law and Social Media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Criminal Law and Social Media. Show all posts
Friday, August 17, 2012
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.
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)