The Social Media Privacy Protection Act is coming. No such Act has yet been proposed but I predict this will be the name of the Act that regulates social media. The FTC is currently seeking comments on revising the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) to include social media. The U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation held a hearing today examining how social media affects COPPA. Congress is first determining how it can best protect children's privacy in the social media age. The next logical step is to create legislation that will include the rest of their constituents.
On April 27, 2010, 4 U.S. Senators: Charles E. Schumer (D-NY), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Mark Begich (D-AK), and Al Franken (D-MN) publicly released a letter that they had sent to Facebook's CEO Mark Zukerberg regarding their concerns about Facebook's recent user changes. The letter urged Facebook to allow its users to have more personal control over the site's privacy settings, to change its third party data storage policy, and to simplify the instant personalization options.
I recommend that my clients set their Facebook privacy settings so that only their Facebook Friends are able to view their personal information. It is best to limit the amount of information you post and share because if your account is ever compromised by a hacker the information can easily be used to steal your identity. If you thought that the Internet Age was scary after watching Sandra Bullock's 1995 movie "The Net" the Social Media Age should terrify you.
The recent MIT Project Gaydar study proved that just by inserting data from a person's social media profile it is possible to determine a person's sexuality. I was surprised that so many people appeared shocked by this finding. If a researcher or marketer knows a Facebook user's personal habits and hobbies, friendships, employer/job, socio-economic status, marital/family status they have the ability to make a lot of predictions about a person. Profiling or forecasting is used by law enforcement, wall street, and meteorologists. The more data points you have the more accurate the model or prediction.
In the "old days," your mail carrier knew more about your business than even your neighbors. Then it was the credit card companies and credit bureaus who knew everything financially about you. However, nobody or entity, including the U.S. Government has the treasure trove of data that Facebook accumulates about its users. Most of these other entities spend a tremendous amount of time and resources collecting your data. What is amazing is that Facebook is able to obtain its data for free directly from its users. Not a bad concept, eh?
It appears that Facebook does not yet understand that its recent actions have angered enough people to prompt Congress to become extremely interested in the manner in which it utilizes and protects its users' personal information. Facebook's failure to acknowledge this is evident by the response that Facebook's spokesman Andrew Noyes and vice president of global communications and public policy Elliot Schrage have so far provided.
Social media users must be careful about what personal information they post on social media. In addition, social media users must be proactive in protecting their social media personal profile and companies must be aware of the legal liabilities that they may incur for mishandling their customer's personal information. To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Showing posts with label Privacy issues. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Privacy issues. Show all posts
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Monday, December 14, 2009
Supreme Court To Hear Potentially Groundbreaking Social Media Law Case
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a Federal appeals court case from California that may lay the groundwork for determining whether an employee has an expectation of privacy when sending a personal text message and other personal communication from a work computer or other work issued property in the Social Media Age. The case, City of Ontario, California, et al., Petitioners v. Jeff Quon, et al. (No. 08-1332) may enable the Supreme Court to determine when and if an employer has the right to monitor any of the following personal accounts accessed at work: a personal email account, a Facebook account, or a Twitter feed.
Police sergeant Jeff Quon sued the City of Ontario, CA for violating his workplace privacy rights. Quon claimed that the City conducted a constitutionally banned unreasonable search by reviewing his text messages, despite those messages being sent from a city owned and paid for pager account. Notwithstanding Quon's claim, the trial court ruled that the City of Ontario had not violated his privacy. Quon successfully appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit which reversed the trial court's decision. The City of Ontario has since appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court claiming that Quon did not have an expectation of privacy in his communications.
In my opinion, the Supreme Court should reverse the 9th Circuit's ruling and find for the City of Ontario because an employer needs to be able to review any electronic communication that is sent via an employer owned account. Email, text messaging, and pagers have been commonly used in the workplace for more than 15 years and employees know or should know that they have no expectation of privacy when sending messages through an employer owned account. An employee should only have an expectation of privacy when communicating on his or her own personal computer, personal cell phone, or personal smartphone.
Police sergeant Jeff Quon sued the City of Ontario, CA for violating his workplace privacy rights. Quon claimed that the City conducted a constitutionally banned unreasonable search by reviewing his text messages, despite those messages being sent from a city owned and paid for pager account. Notwithstanding Quon's claim, the trial court ruled that the City of Ontario had not violated his privacy. Quon successfully appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit which reversed the trial court's decision. The City of Ontario has since appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court claiming that Quon did not have an expectation of privacy in his communications.
Interestingly, Quon signed a form that acknowledged that his personal communications on his work-issued electronic devices would not be private. Despite signing the form, he utilized a work issued pager to send non-work related messages, including messages that some have deemed sexually explicit.
In general, an employer has the right to monitor any electronic communications accessed via employer owned equipment. Internet and Social Media Law is still evolving and the courts have begun to recognize there may be a distinction when an employee accesses personal email and social media accounts utilizing an employer's property.In my opinion, the Supreme Court should reverse the 9th Circuit's ruling and find for the City of Ontario because an employer needs to be able to review any electronic communication that is sent via an employer owned account. Email, text messaging, and pagers have been commonly used in the workplace for more than 15 years and employees know or should know that they have no expectation of privacy when sending messages through an employer owned account. An employee should only have an expectation of privacy when communicating on his or her own personal computer, personal cell phone, or personal smartphone.
The case is scheduled to be argued in Spring 2010 with a Summer 2010 decision likely.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Employers Are Using Social Media to Reject Job Applicants
The current economic climate has been extremely brutal across the country. In many industries, a paradigm shift has occurred and thousands of jobs that have been cut will never re-appear when the economy recovers. Those companies that are hiring have a large pool of candidates to choose from. However, having the "pick of the litter" is not good enough for some employers. According to an article on MSNBC.com, some employers are not just reviewing the information that an applicant has provided, but they are also diving deep into the candidate's social media background to find people to contact that may have some "dirt" on a candidate. This is only a breach of protocol from the normal process and not illegal. However, some companies are now requiring as part of the interview process that a candidate sign a waiver not to sue if a former boss or a social media contact disparages a candidate. While the former is just sneaky, the later is downright disgusting and should be against the law.
People who need a job will sign almost anything when they are in a vulnerable position. A waiver may provide immunity to an "off-list" reference to say anything about the candidate whether true or not. When the reference is someone a candidate has chosen there usually is not much to worry about. However, this type of waiver may be forced upon a candidate for every single "friend" or "connection" that a person has in their social media accounts.
I am generally against Congress interfering with our daily lives. However, this is the type of situation if allowed to become a generally accepted business practice could undermine people's ability to obtain a job or even keep a job. Therefore, before this type of practice becomes widespread, Congress needs to step in to stop it dead in its tracks.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
People who need a job will sign almost anything when they are in a vulnerable position. A waiver may provide immunity to an "off-list" reference to say anything about the candidate whether true or not. When the reference is someone a candidate has chosen there usually is not much to worry about. However, this type of waiver may be forced upon a candidate for every single "friend" or "connection" that a person has in their social media accounts.
I am generally against Congress interfering with our daily lives. However, this is the type of situation if allowed to become a generally accepted business practice could undermine people's ability to obtain a job or even keep a job. Therefore, before this type of practice becomes widespread, Congress needs to step in to stop it dead in its tracks.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Flight Attendant Utilizes Facebook To Harrass 15 Year Old Female Passenger
We have only seen the tip of the iceberg regarding social media harrassment or misuse. Australian Airline Jetstar has a male flight attendant who thought that it was socially acceptable to try to "friend" on Facebook a 15 year old female passenger. It appears that the airline employee obtained the female's name from her boarding pass.
This story reminds me of the old Seinfeld episode where Jerry gets the phone number of a woman he wants (and whom appears interested in him) to date off of an AIDS Walk list. At the time of the episode's original broadcast, this type of "ingenuity" was not socially acceptable and Jerry could not stop thinking about what would happen if the woman found out how he acquired her phone number. However, Jerry did not use private information that only an employee of a company could utilize to try to obtain a phone number.
Even though this occurred in Australia, and there has not been any litigation yet, I believe that this type of behavior has occurred in the United and will occur again here. I predict that there is going to be a tremendous amount of litigation in the future regarding social media misuse.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
This story reminds me of the old Seinfeld episode where Jerry gets the phone number of a woman he wants (and whom appears interested in him) to date off of an AIDS Walk list. At the time of the episode's original broadcast, this type of "ingenuity" was not socially acceptable and Jerry could not stop thinking about what would happen if the woman found out how he acquired her phone number. However, Jerry did not use private information that only an employee of a company could utilize to try to obtain a phone number.
Even though this occurred in Australia, and there has not been any litigation yet, I believe that this type of behavior has occurred in the United and will occur again here. I predict that there is going to be a tremendous amount of litigation in the future regarding social media misuse.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Saturday, October 3, 2009
The UK's High Court Permits Injunction To Be Served Via Twitter
The United Kingdom's High Court has permitted an injunction to be served via Twitter. Under UK law, there is no requirement that an injunction be served in person. In the UK, injunctions may be served via fax and e-mail, and now via social media.
It is possible that one day service by social media will be allowed in the U.S. However, the authentication issues involved must be properly addressed. One reason for requiring personal service in the U.S. is to ensure that the person being sued is made aware of the litigation. In my opinion, it may take years, but once all of the authentication issues are addressed it would not surprise me if service of process by social media is eventually allowed in the U.S.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
It is possible that one day service by social media will be allowed in the U.S. However, the authentication issues involved must be properly addressed. One reason for requiring personal service in the U.S. is to ensure that the person being sued is made aware of the litigation. In my opinion, it may take years, but once all of the authentication issues are addressed it would not surprise me if service of process by social media is eventually allowed in the U.S.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Federal Trade Commission is Planning Privacy Discussions in December
Due to the increasing popularity of social media web sites and the numerous legal issues involved, the Federal Trade Commission is planning to hold a series of discussions regarding privacy issues and social media.
I believe this type of government involvement is long overdue. I am generally against government intervention in the private sector. However, due to the underlying concern for identity theft that is intertwined into this discussion, I believe the FTC's involvement is long overdue.
For those who are interested in submitting written comments or original research regarding this topic you should click on the link to do so. The deadline is November 6th.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
I believe this type of government involvement is long overdue. I am generally against government intervention in the private sector. However, due to the underlying concern for identity theft that is intertwined into this discussion, I believe the FTC's involvement is long overdue.
For those who are interested in submitting written comments or original research regarding this topic you should click on the link to do so. The deadline is November 6th.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Monday, September 21, 2009
Facebook Increasing Users' Privacy
Great news on the Facebook Privacy Front. Facebook has agreed to dismantle its Beacon Advertising System and to create an independent foundation that will focus on online privacy. This agreement will settle a class action suit that was brought against Facebook because its Beacon Program was collecting a large amount of data about the Internet activities of Facebook users and then broadcasting this information.
To Facebook users this program was like a "Peeping Tom" that would also inform others about your activities. The system was extremely difficult to opt out of it entirely and this problem rightfully frustrated many users.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
To Facebook users this program was like a "Peeping Tom" that would also inform others about your activities. The system was extremely difficult to opt out of it entirely and this problem rightfully frustrated many users.
Copyright 2009 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Friday, August 28, 2009
Facebook Improves Privacy Controls for Users
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.
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.
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.
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.
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)