Yesterday, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal signed a bill that bans Tweeting while driving. SB 147 will become effective August 1, 2013, and violators may be fined up to $175 for the first offense and up to $500 for subsequent violations.
The new law bans not only Tweeting, but any other social media usage while driving. I believe it is important for drivers and auto manufacturers to become more aware of the distracted driving issues inherent with making one's car a mobile/apps interconnected hub. This new law is another example of the tremendous legal liability issues inherent with social media usage.
To learn how to properly handle social media liability issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2013 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Showing posts with label Social Media Life Skills. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social Media Life Skills. Show all posts
Friday, May 31, 2013
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
The NCAA, Social Media Monitoring, Censorship, the First Amendment, the Supreme Court, and Video Games
Last week, the NCAA may have created a major legal liability quagmire for its member institutions when it alleged that the University of North Carolina failed to monitor the social media activity of its football players.
Social Media/Social Networking Monitoring may lead to Social Media Censorship. Social Media Censorship by NCAA institutions may be gaining acceptance in some schools. According to the Washington Post, the University of Maryland (UMD) may be actively monitoring and regulating the speech of the members of its football team. It appears that UMD is monitoring defensive lineman A.J. Francis' Twitter account. Does Maryland require all of its athletes to turn over their social media account names to their compliance staff? Or, is it only the men's football team?
Could there be a Title IX or a 14th Amendment Equal Protection clause violation if Maryland is only monitoring the men's football team and not treating other teams and/or genders equally? Are only a few athletes of the men's football team being singled out? How did Maryland obtain A.J. Francis' Twitter account information? Did Maryland's compliance department require A.J. Francis to provide it his social media account user names in order to continue to be on the football team and/or receive academic aid?
According to the Clarion Ledger, University of Mississippi signee C.J. Johnson deleted his personal Twitter account after speaking with the Ole Miss athletic department staff. Ole Miss has publicly stated that it did not force C.J. Johnson to close his Twitter account. C.J. Johnson's Twitter activity may be objectionable to some people and it may be best for him to stop tweeting for the time being; however, what if a school gives a student an ultimatum: stop your social media activity or lose your scholarship and/or be kicked out of school?
What if the University of Maryland told Larry David (Seinfeld Co-Creator), Jim Henson (Creator of the Muppets), David Simon (Co-Writer of The Wire), Sergey Brin (Co-Founder Google), Steny Hoyer (Former House Majority Leader), Carl Bernstein (Former Washington Post Watergate Journalist), etc... or the University of Mississippi told William Faulkner (Author), John Grisham (Author), Sheppard Smith (Host of the Fox Report), Gerald McRaney (Actor), and Bill Parsons (Director of NASA's John F. Kennedy Space Center) that they should stop publicly expressing their personal and/or political views while they attended their respective schools? If a public college and/or university starts regulating what its student-athletes express on social media what will stop it from trying to regulate what other members of the student body state online?
The NCAA 2010-2011 Division I Manual does not appear to discuss Social Media/Social Networking Monitoring and/or censorship so I am not sure how public schools thinks that it is acceptable to monitor and then censor its student-athletes.
In Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association, the Supreme Court in a 7-2 majority recently ruled that "disgust is not a valid basis for restricting expression." Justice Scalia wrote, "[l]ike the protected books, plays and movies that preceded them, video games communicate ideas — and even social messages — through many familiar literary devices (such as characters, dialogue, plot and music) and through features distinctive to the medium (such as the player’s interaction with the virtual world)....That suffices to confer First Amendment protection.” Since video games are now constitutionally protected forms of expressive behavior will the First Amendment protect most types of social media activity no matter how offensive unless they defame and/or violate other areas of the law?
Any school that deploys a social media monitoring service to monitor its student-athletes may want to reevaluate their policy. Colleges and universities that utilize social media monitoring and receive government funding may also be creating further unanticipated legal issues. As I have stated over and over, academic institutions should be educating their students about social media and not monitoring and censoring them.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at http://shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Social Media/Social Networking Monitoring may lead to Social Media Censorship. Social Media Censorship by NCAA institutions may be gaining acceptance in some schools. According to the Washington Post, the University of Maryland (UMD) may be actively monitoring and regulating the speech of the members of its football team. It appears that UMD is monitoring defensive lineman A.J. Francis' Twitter account. Does Maryland require all of its athletes to turn over their social media account names to their compliance staff? Or, is it only the men's football team?
Could there be a Title IX or a 14th Amendment Equal Protection clause violation if Maryland is only monitoring the men's football team and not treating other teams and/or genders equally? Are only a few athletes of the men's football team being singled out? How did Maryland obtain A.J. Francis' Twitter account information? Did Maryland's compliance department require A.J. Francis to provide it his social media account user names in order to continue to be on the football team and/or receive academic aid?
According to the Clarion Ledger, University of Mississippi signee C.J. Johnson deleted his personal Twitter account after speaking with the Ole Miss athletic department staff. Ole Miss has publicly stated that it did not force C.J. Johnson to close his Twitter account. C.J. Johnson's Twitter activity may be objectionable to some people and it may be best for him to stop tweeting for the time being; however, what if a school gives a student an ultimatum: stop your social media activity or lose your scholarship and/or be kicked out of school?
What if the University of Maryland told Larry David (Seinfeld Co-Creator), Jim Henson (Creator of the Muppets), David Simon (Co-Writer of The Wire), Sergey Brin (Co-Founder Google), Steny Hoyer (Former House Majority Leader), Carl Bernstein (Former Washington Post Watergate Journalist), etc... or the University of Mississippi told William Faulkner (Author), John Grisham (Author), Sheppard Smith (Host of the Fox Report), Gerald McRaney (Actor), and Bill Parsons (Director of NASA's John F. Kennedy Space Center) that they should stop publicly expressing their personal and/or political views while they attended their respective schools? If a public college and/or university starts regulating what its student-athletes express on social media what will stop it from trying to regulate what other members of the student body state online?
The NCAA 2010-2011 Division I Manual does not appear to discuss Social Media/Social Networking Monitoring and/or censorship so I am not sure how public schools thinks that it is acceptable to monitor and then censor its student-athletes.
In Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association, the Supreme Court in a 7-2 majority recently ruled that "disgust is not a valid basis for restricting expression." Justice Scalia wrote, "[l]ike the protected books, plays and movies that preceded them, video games communicate ideas — and even social messages — through many familiar literary devices (such as characters, dialogue, plot and music) and through features distinctive to the medium (such as the player’s interaction with the virtual world)....That suffices to confer First Amendment protection.” Since video games are now constitutionally protected forms of expressive behavior will the First Amendment protect most types of social media activity no matter how offensive unless they defame and/or violate other areas of the law?
Any school that deploys a social media monitoring service to monitor its student-athletes may want to reevaluate their policy. Colleges and universities that utilize social media monitoring and receive government funding may also be creating further unanticipated legal issues. As I have stated over and over, academic institutions should be educating their students about social media and not monitoring and censoring them.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at http://shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Does the NCAA Understand the Legal Implications of Social Media Montoring?
Does the NCAA understand the legal implications of social media monitoring? The Associated Press reported that the University of North Carolina (UNC) has been accused of unethical conduct, and failure to monitor its players. In particular, the NCAA is accusing UNC with failure to monitor its student-athletes' social media activity.
On page 21 of the Notice of Allegations against UNC (Case No. M357, June 21, 2011) 9. b. it states, "[i]n February through June 2010, the institution [UNC] did not adequately and consistently monitor social networking activity that visibly illustrated potential amateurism violations within the football program, which delayed the institution's discovery and compounded the provision of impermissible benefits in Allegation Nos. 4-a, 4-c, 4-d and 4-e." In 9. g. the NCAA is requesting, "[c]opies of materials posted on Twitter by football student-athletes..." Furthermore, in 9. h. the NCAA is requesting "[a] statement summarizing information reported by ______(left blank) regarding the institution's efforts to monitor the social networking activity of football student-athletes.
As I previously stated on June 9, 2011, social media monitoring is a futile effort that wastes resources since crowdsouring is already performing this service for free. If the NCAA is now going to require its members to actively monitor its student-athletes' social media accounts this will open up a Pandora's box.
Will the NCAA soon require each of its member schools to have a "minder" follow their student-athletes to listen in on every conversation, phone call; and review every email, text message, electronic communication, etc... of their student-athletes? Will the NCAA soon require every student-athlete list all of their social media accounts to maintain eligibility? What if a student-athlete changes his screen name or deletes a social media account and opens a new one? Will the student-athlete be forced to notify their school's compliance office within 24 hours of the change? If a student-athlete forgets to report a social media account change to the compliance office will the student-athlete automatically become ineligible and/or the member school be found in violation of NCAA rules? If so, what will be the punishment?
Will there be strict liability for failure to report? What if a student-athlete forgets or refuses to list an account due to privacy and/or political speech issues? Will a student-athlete lose his scholarship due to a refusal to turn over his social media account information? What if a student-athletes' Facebook wall is private and/or his Tweets protected? What if someone hacks into a student athletes' account and creates posts that may be rules infractions? What if a student-athlete has a rogue account that is not reported to its compliance office? Will the NCAA require its members to track down every possible unreported student-athlete social media account and/or post?
Would the NCAA strip a national championship from a member school for failure to properly report all of their student-athletes' social media accounts and/or ban students from participating in collegiate sports for refusing to turn over their personal social media/electronic account information? The NCAA is going down a very slippery slope that has major First Amendment and privacy implications. I believe the NCAA should rethink its social media compliance allegations against UNC.
Social media usage by student-athletes cannot be eradicated. As the Congressman Anthony Weiner matter clearly demonstrates social media monitoring is futile and is a reactive and not a proactive approach.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
On page 21 of the Notice of Allegations against UNC (Case No. M357, June 21, 2011) 9. b. it states, "[i]n February through June 2010, the institution [UNC] did not adequately and consistently monitor social networking activity that visibly illustrated potential amateurism violations within the football program, which delayed the institution's discovery and compounded the provision of impermissible benefits in Allegation Nos. 4-a, 4-c, 4-d and 4-e." In 9. g. the NCAA is requesting, "[c]opies of materials posted on Twitter by football student-athletes..." Furthermore, in 9. h. the NCAA is requesting "[a] statement summarizing information reported by ______(left blank) regarding the institution's efforts to monitor the social networking activity of football student-athletes.
As I previously stated on June 9, 2011, social media monitoring is a futile effort that wastes resources since crowdsouring is already performing this service for free. If the NCAA is now going to require its members to actively monitor its student-athletes' social media accounts this will open up a Pandora's box.
Will the NCAA soon require each of its member schools to have a "minder" follow their student-athletes to listen in on every conversation, phone call; and review every email, text message, electronic communication, etc... of their student-athletes? Will the NCAA soon require every student-athlete list all of their social media accounts to maintain eligibility? What if a student-athlete changes his screen name or deletes a social media account and opens a new one? Will the student-athlete be forced to notify their school's compliance office within 24 hours of the change? If a student-athlete forgets to report a social media account change to the compliance office will the student-athlete automatically become ineligible and/or the member school be found in violation of NCAA rules? If so, what will be the punishment?
Will there be strict liability for failure to report? What if a student-athlete forgets or refuses to list an account due to privacy and/or political speech issues? Will a student-athlete lose his scholarship due to a refusal to turn over his social media account information? What if a student-athletes' Facebook wall is private and/or his Tweets protected? What if someone hacks into a student athletes' account and creates posts that may be rules infractions? What if a student-athlete has a rogue account that is not reported to its compliance office? Will the NCAA require its members to track down every possible unreported student-athlete social media account and/or post?
Would the NCAA strip a national championship from a member school for failure to properly report all of their student-athletes' social media accounts and/or ban students from participating in collegiate sports for refusing to turn over their personal social media/electronic account information? The NCAA is going down a very slippery slope that has major First Amendment and privacy implications. I believe the NCAA should rethink its social media compliance allegations against UNC.
Social media usage by student-athletes cannot be eradicated. As the Congressman Anthony Weiner matter clearly demonstrates social media monitoring is futile and is a reactive and not a proactive approach.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Players Associations, Sports Leagues, the NCAA, and the Olympics Must Say No To Social Media Monitoring of Athletes
Professional and amateur sports must say no to forcing social media monitoring software (e.g. malware) on their professional, amateur, and student athletes. Criminals in prison and those under house arrest need to be monitored and tracked; however, young men and women should be provided social media life skills.
Institutions that deploy social media monitoring services are wasting their precious resources since crowdsourcing already performs this service for free. Monitoring athletes' social media usage is a reactive approach that is doomed to failure. A recent CBS Sports article touted social media monitoring of professional and amateur athletes as something that both labor and management could agree on. The article further states that within 2-3 minutes after an alleged inappropriate post a cautionary e-mail is sent to both the monitor (a school or franchise) and an athlete. What the article does not discuss is that once a Tweet or a Facebook post has been made it can never be deleted from the Internet. Within seconds, a Tweet can be re-tweeted and a Facebook post can be shared hundreds of times.
Therefore, how can social media monitoring help? It can't. Remember Congressman Weiner's accidental tweet that was meant to be a direct message. Within a few minutes after Mr. Weiner Tweeted a message to a college student that included a link to a photograph of himself in his underwear he tried to delete it. However, once content has been uploaded online it is too late. Mr. Weiner learned this the hard way (no pun intended). Thousands of people were following Mr. Weiner on Twitter so no social media monitoring service could have saved Mr. Weiner from his own stupidity.
Social Media monitoring is like using a condom after sex. It is too late to offer any protection. Once an alleged inappropriate message has been sent out via social media a monitoring service is worthless because it can't protect an athlete or an institution from the consequences of an alleged inappropriate post. Social Media monitoring services are unable to offer protection because they are reactive and not proactive. In other words, these services are fool's gold.
There are multiple major legal issues involved with social media monitoring of athletes. These may include First Amendment, employment, and tort liability issues. Those organizations that deploy social media monitoring of their athletes are not only wasting their time and money on a worthless reactive service, but they also are creating major legal liability issues. Furthermore, it is very easy to change a social media account name and there is the problem of fake accounts and hacked accounts.
The bottom line is that professional and amateur sports organizations along with colleges and universities should not deploy social media monitoring of their athletes unless they are interested in wasting their money and incurring unanticipated legal liabilities.
To learn how to avoid social media legal liability in professional and amateur sports you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Institutions that deploy social media monitoring services are wasting their precious resources since crowdsourcing already performs this service for free. Monitoring athletes' social media usage is a reactive approach that is doomed to failure. A recent CBS Sports article touted social media monitoring of professional and amateur athletes as something that both labor and management could agree on. The article further states that within 2-3 minutes after an alleged inappropriate post a cautionary e-mail is sent to both the monitor (a school or franchise) and an athlete. What the article does not discuss is that once a Tweet or a Facebook post has been made it can never be deleted from the Internet. Within seconds, a Tweet can be re-tweeted and a Facebook post can be shared hundreds of times.
Therefore, how can social media monitoring help? It can't. Remember Congressman Weiner's accidental tweet that was meant to be a direct message. Within a few minutes after Mr. Weiner Tweeted a message to a college student that included a link to a photograph of himself in his underwear he tried to delete it. However, once content has been uploaded online it is too late. Mr. Weiner learned this the hard way (no pun intended). Thousands of people were following Mr. Weiner on Twitter so no social media monitoring service could have saved Mr. Weiner from his own stupidity.
Social Media monitoring is like using a condom after sex. It is too late to offer any protection. Once an alleged inappropriate message has been sent out via social media a monitoring service is worthless because it can't protect an athlete or an institution from the consequences of an alleged inappropriate post. Social Media monitoring services are unable to offer protection because they are reactive and not proactive. In other words, these services are fool's gold.
There are multiple major legal issues involved with social media monitoring of athletes. These may include First Amendment, employment, and tort liability issues. Those organizations that deploy social media monitoring of their athletes are not only wasting their time and money on a worthless reactive service, but they also are creating major legal liability issues. Furthermore, it is very easy to change a social media account name and there is the problem of fake accounts and hacked accounts.
The bottom line is that professional and amateur sports organizations along with colleges and universities should not deploy social media monitoring of their athletes unless they are interested in wasting their money and incurring unanticipated legal liabilities.
To learn how to avoid social media legal liability in professional and amateur sports 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)