UK approves Tweeting in the Court Room During Assange Bail Hearing

You have to give credit to Julian Assange where credit is due. His name and his organization WikiLeaks strikes fear in every government and large corporation throughout the world. He has the ability to destroy international relationships and expose secrets with a simple keystroke. Due to Assange's creation, no "For Your Eyes Only" document is safe from "inquiring minds."

So far, Wikileaks' infamous document releases have been a big disappointment to me. Reading how U.S. diplomats view leaders from around the world is boring. I want WikiLeaks to release its documents on Bigfoot, the incident at Roswell, New Mexico in 1947, and its information on the Warren Commission. I want to know if Lee Harvey Oswald was the only person involved with President Kennedy's assassination.

Despite WikiLeaks major shortcomings, we can thank Assange's actions and current celebrity for a UK court's acceptance of the usage of Twitter during a court room proceeding. Howard Riddle, the Chief Magistrate presiding over Assange's bail hearing was asked and provided permission to a reporter that he could send Tweets if it is done quietly and does not disturb the court. Therefore, it appears that mircoblogging during a trial by reporters may be acceptable in the UK.

As of this writing, the US does not have a uniform rule on microblogging by reporters during trial. In a recent high profile trial in Chesire, Conn a defendant is using as part of his basis for appeal that Tweeting during trial created a "circus atmosphere." So far this argument has fallen on deaf ears. However, until there is uniformity throughout the US this argument may succeed in some jurisdictions.

In my opinion, up until this point in time,WikiLeaks' major contribution is that it has assisted a UK court in deciding that Tweeting during a judicial proceeding is acceptable. Only after WikiLeaks uploads the documents that answer all of my questions regarding Area 51, the Roswell Incident, and the Bigfoot can I truly say that it has topped its biggest accomplishment to date which is having a UK jurist determine that Tweeting during a court proceeding is acceptable.

To learn more about how your legal rights may be affected by social media usage you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.

Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.

How To Choose A Social Media Lawyer

Choosing a social media lawyer is difficult because there are so few bona fida social media attorneys around. You should choose a social media lawyer in the same manner that you choose a lawyer for any other matter: via due diligence. Social Media Law is like entertainment law and sports law in that there are several different areas of the law that a practitioner should understand.

Some of the areas of the law that a social media lawyer should be knowledgeable about include: Internet law, intellectual property, employment law, business law, media law, and privacy law. A social media lawyer should also know how social media may be used in other legal specialties and the business of social media. In addition, a social media lawyer must understand social media technology and how social media is utilized. A social media lawyer must not just talk the talk, he must walk the walk.

I have noticed some lawyers falsely advertising they have social media experience and some who have even fraudulently created social media credentials. Due diligence via a Google search, a review of an attorney's social media usage, and personal recommendations should enable a client to determine a lawyer's true social media knowledge. Having a blog, a Twitter account, or a Facebook or Myspace page for your practice does not mean you are a social media lawyer. It just means that you spend your spare time creating content that you want the entire world to see.

To learn more about my social media credentials I welcome you to do a Google search and review my lawyer profile. If you are in need of social media lawyer you may contact me at http://www.shearlaw.com/.

Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.

Copyright Office Has Extended Comment Dates For Sound Recordings Fixed Before 2/15/72

The Copyright Office has extended the comment and reply period for its Notice of Inquiry requesting public input for sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972. Initial comments due in the Office of the General Counsel of the Copyright Office by January 31, 2011. Reply comments due by March 2, 2011. The Copyright Office prefers that comments be submitted electronically via www.copyright.gov. For more information check out the Federal Register notice regarding this update.

A change in the law will have significant consequences for social media usage of the content that falls under this category.

To learn how to protect and monetize your intellectual property you may contact me at http://www.shearlaw.com/.

Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.

Does Google agree with my 1 day DMCA safe harbor definition of expeditiously?

According to the Associated Press, Google has stated that it will respond to complaints about pirated material within 24 hours after receiving notification. This announcement also states that Google will better police the sites that utilize its ad network to try to limit copyright violations. This long overdue announcement is great news for content creators.

On June 30, 2010, I stated that even though Viacom lost the initial round of the Viacom v. YouTube case, the case may be a win for copyright holders in the long run. I made my prediction because if YouTube was able to remove more than 100,000 infringing copyrighted clips within 1 business day of being notified more than three years ago, there is no reason why commercial entities shouldn't be held to this standard today.

Google's new 24 hour policy is welcome news because content creators have lost billions of dollars to intentional copyright infringement over the past ten years. Google also needs to enact this policy for trademark infringement. I am waiting for Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, etc... to agree to the same policy for not just copyright infringement but also for trademark infringement. Only after these companies actively enforce a 24 hour turnaround for intellectual property infringement may they claim they are actively protecting content creators.

I challenge Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, and every other social media company to follow Google's lead in protecting intellectual property.

To learn how to protect and monetize your intellectual property you may contact me at http://www.shearlaw.com/.

Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.

Did a Social Media "October Surprise" Derail the U.S. 2022 World Cup Bid?

There will be a tremendous amount of soul searching in the coming weeks from the U.S. soccer community regarding its failed 2022 World Cup bid. U.S. bid chairman Sunil Gulati did everything legally possible to bring the World Cup competition back to the United States. Gulati traveled all over the world and enlisted President Clinton and Oscar winner Morgan Freeman for the final presentation. Unfortunately, that was not enough. Qatar was awarded the 2022 World Cup.

After FIFA announced who would host the 2022 World Cup Gulati stated, "Can I sit here today and say these are the seven things that we would do different? No..I think we did everything we could." President Obama weighed in and stated it was the "wrong decision." As a U.S. soccer fan, I am disappointed about the outcome. However, I am not surprised.

According to ESPN, the U.S. bid "far exceeded its rivals in the areas of ticketing, media rights, licensing, hospitality and sponsorship." Having the best bid or pitch does not guarantee success. Even though there have been accusations that graft may have occurred during the bid process, the bottom line is that the U.S. will not be hosting the 2022 World Cup.

In my opinion, the latest WikiLeaks document release may have swayed the voters. In other words, Social Media may have been the cause of the U.S. not being the host of the 2022 World Cup. Some of my colleagues may think I am off my rocker and that I sound like a modern day Fox Mulder right out of the X-Files. However, during the past several days the WikiLeaks U.S. cable document release has dominated international news. This story has been on the cover of every major news publication all over the world. You had to be living in a cave without a modern day electronic device not to hear about it.

WikiLeaks is a website that relies on user generated content. According to its website it is, "a non-profit media organization dedicated to bringing important news and information to the public." On November 28, 2010, WikiLeaks made available on its website more than 250,000 secret U.S. diplomatic cables. The fact that WikiLeaks was able to obtain these secret cables in the first place demonstrates that the U.S. has a serious problem with data security that I am hoping will be resolved in the near future. However, the content inside some of the cables provides the impression that some of the U.S. State Department employees are using diplomatic cover to spy. This allegation along with many other embarrassing revelations such as how U.S. diplomats view some world leaders was not helpful to the U.S. World Cup bid.

If I was a World Cup voter from another country I may have been angry at the U.S. and may have have taken my anger out against it by voting for Qatar. I may have asked myself, "if the World Cup is held in the U.S. will my fellow countrymen and diplomats have to worry about being spied on during the competition?

It appears that WikiLeaks has been in possession of these documents for some time. Therefore, why were these documents released just a few days before the World Cup vote? Was this release an "October Surprise" that was done with the precision akin to a smart bomb? Is WikiLeaks part of a modern day SPECTRE (Special Executive for Counter Intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion) that wreaked havoc on the world in the James Bond books and movies? The latest WikiLeaks document release is extremely politically damaging and it appears that it was intentionally timed to inflict maximum political and economic damage on the United States. Why else were the documents released over Thanksgiving weekend just before the World Cup vote?

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

Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved

USPTO's Inquiry on Copyright Policy in the Internet Economy Comments Due on 11/19/10

The U.S. Department of Commerce's Internet Policy Task Force is reviewing how copyright law should evolve to balance the needs of content creators and users in the Social Media Age. Since the original Napster came on the scene in 1999, copyright protection has become more difficult for rights holders. Napster's technology created the first widely distributed peer to peer file sharing system that enabled its users to easily share MP3 files. Napster and its progeny such as Limewire (which was shut down a few weeks ago) allowed consumers to download/share music for free. If you were an artist, content creator, or content owner such as a musician, publishing house, record label, movie studio, author, etc... peer to peer file sharing changed your business model almost overnight and made it more difficult to profit from your copyrighted work.

Therefore, those parties that are interested in affecting government policy on copyright protection in the Social Media Age have until November 19, 2010 to file comments about how copyright law should evolve. To file comments electronically you may e-mail them to: copyrightnoi-2010@ntia.doc.gov.

To learn more about copyright protection in the Social Media Age you may contact me at http://www.shearlaw.com/.

Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved

ALM Has Relaunced Law.com

I encourage my readers to check out ALM's relaunched Law.com website. The updated site is easier to navigate and has an enhanced content offering. In particular, the site contains more articles and information from ALM's newspapers, magazines, newsletters, etc.. and from sources outside the ALM family. The Legal Blog Watch is now located under the News heading on the far left of the menu on Law.com's home page. The streamlined look is also more aesthetically pleasing than before. If you have any suggestions that you want me to pass along to the team involved with the relaunch please let me know.

[Full Disclosure: Shear on Social Media Law is syndicated by ALM's Law.com Blog Network]

Will The FEC Regulate Social Media For the 2012 Election Cycle?

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) may need to regulate the use of social media for the 2012 election cycle. As I have repeated time and time again, I am not in favor of the government regulating every nook and cranny of our existance. However, this is not 1999 and we are no longer in the Internet Age. We are in the Social Media Age.

The Internet Age was about emailing and surfing the web. The Social Media Age is about conversation, engagement, and user generated content. Think Facebook, MySpace, Twitter,YouTube, and Foursquare for starters.

Under the FEC's October 2006 Special Notices on Political Ads and Soliticitations, public communications are:
•Broadcast, cable or satellite transmission;
•Newspaper;
•Magazine;
•Outdoor advertising facility (e.g., billboard);
•Mass mailing (defined as more than 500 pieces of mail matter of an identical or substantially similar nature within any 30-day period);
•Telephone banks (defined as more than 500 telephone calls of an identical or substantially similar nature within any 30-day period); or
•Any other general public political advertising. General public political advertising does not include Internet ads, except for communications placed for a fee on another person’s web site

Even though the FEC Internet and Communications Activity regulations were updated in June 2007 and appear to cover most Internet activity due to the language, "and any other form of communication distributed over the Internet", they were created before the widespread use of social media for political campaigns. (See page 64 of the Final Rules and Explanation and Justification for the Internet Communications Rulemaking). Therefore, I believe the time is right for the regulations to be updated again to reflect changes in technology. As the 2008 Presidential Election first demonstrated, social media has the power to elect a President and change the course of history due to its viral nature.

Until the widespread use of the Internet in the U.S. in the late 1990's, people obtained most of their information from television and print. In my opinion, some people already obtain most of their information from social media and this number will increase in the future. Since television, radio, and print election advertising generally has some type of disclosure requirement, I do not believe it would be burdensome to require disclosure requirements for a federal candidate's official campaign social media pages and accounts since social media is being used to advertise to potential voters. This requirement would ensure that voters know that a social media account is the actual candidate's and not a fake page. I am not in favor of the FEC creating new guidelines that may hamper free speech or make it economically burdensome or administratively difficult for candidates to utilize social media.

Earlier this year, the State of Maryland created model social media election regulations that may be easily adopted by other states for state elections and by the FEC for federal elections. I assisted the State of Maryland in drafting these regulations and input was received from Facebook, Yahoo!, AOL, and Google. Since Maryland's regulations received input from the social media industry and a social media lawyer, the final regulations were passed with near unanimous support.

In my opinion, social media will never replace personal candidate-voter interaction. However, social media adds another method to connect with voters that print and television communication does not. Therefore, due to the growing usage of social media the FEC should create social media election regulations based upon Maryland's model for the 2012 campaign cycle. I would be happy to provide assistance to the FEC when they are ready to draft federal social media election regulations.

To learn how to properly utilize social media for state and/or federal elections you may contact me at http://www.shearlaw.com/.

Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.

A Wall Street Journal Investigation Proves the Need For the Social Media Privacy Protection Act

A recent Wall Street Journal investigation found that some third party applications on Facebook and MySpace were both obtaining more personal data from the applications' users than they were allegedly allowed. This situation has been going on for a long time so I am not sure why this was such a shock to major media outlets. I have been writing about the need for stronger internal privacy controls by the major social media sites for months because of this issue.

On June 2, 2010, I blogged that Facebook/Disney's Tickets Together application was inherently dangerous. This application enables child molesters to know in advance where our children may be at a particular date and time. After Facebook/Disney launched the application, the New York Times wrote an extremely positive article about the application without fully understanding how the application works. Even after I pointed out how dangerous this application may be to our children, the New York Times dropped the ball and did not investigate this application or others. However, I am glad that the Wall Street Journal did the investigative reporting that was needed to demonstrate that some social media web sites may turn a blind eye to this troubling problem.

Earlier this year, Gawker reported that Google fired an engineer because the engineer allegedly accessed user accounts without authorization. The engineer allegedly accessed the accounts of young children. According to TechCrunch, this is the second time a Google engineer has been fired for unauthorized access of users' accounts. In that same TechCrunch article, it linked to a blog post that alleged that at least two Facebook employees have been fired for accessing its users' data.

I am loathe to articulate the need for further government regulation because the government has a hard time enforcing the laws already on its books and delivering some basic government services. For example, why can't the government settle on a secure and reliable method to vote? Electronic voting without a paper receipt that may be reviewed for a recount is too easily susceptible to hackers.

An easy solution to unauthorized data proliferation is to avoid putting your personal or professional information on a social media site. However, the social media companies want you to continue to "share" so they can monetize your data and users want to continue to "share" so they showcase themselves to others. There is no easy answer here but since the industry continues to fail miserably to enforce its own internal policies and does not have any real incentive to protect its users' data it may be time for Congress to act. Therefore, until the major social media companies demonstrate a real initiative to protect its users' personal data I strongly advocate for the passage of the Social Media Privacy Protection Act.

To learn how to protect and monetize your social media profile you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.

Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.

Brett Favre, Sexting, and Social Media Crisis Management

Brett Favre, the NFL, and the Minnesota Vikings have a social media public relations crisis that needs to be resolved immediately. This matter was allegedly caused by Brett Favre's innapropriate use of social media and electronic communication devices.

According to Deadspin, in 2008 while Brett Favre was playing for the New York Jets he contacted Jets hostess Jenn Sterger mulitple times in order to spend some "personal time" with her. It appears that Ms. Sterger was not interested in spending "personal time" with Favre. On Deadspin.com's website it is also alleged that Favre may have tried to have inappropriate contact with other females who had some type of professional relationship with the Jets organization. The messages allegedly left by Favre on Sterger's voice mail appear to be very troubling. In addition, it is alleged that Favre sent pornographic photos of himself electronically to Sterger.

On December 2, 2009, and on December 10, 2009 I discussed how Tiger Woods should handle his social media crisis. Unfortunately, Woods did not follow my advice and he lost his family, his reputation, millions of dollars in endorsements, and the ability to focus on his professional career.

As of this writing, Brett Favre has not publicly addressed in detail this matter and has reportedly only apologized to his teammates for being a distraction. Favre has said little to the media regarding the allegations against him. However, Favre has not stated that he is innocent of these allegations.

If Favre directly addresses this matter he has to be careful about what he says because there may be legal issues in addition to the NFL personal conduct policy issues that need to be resolved. At first glance, it appears that any possible legal issues may only be civil and not criminal in nature. One possible legal issue may be sexual harassment. However, this situation is fluid and may change depending on the facts uncovered.

Therefore, I advise Favre to do what I advised Woods to do: sit down with your legal counsel and tell them exactly what happened so your legal team can draft and execute a strategy that will keep your reputation intact. Favre's relationship with his family, fans, sponsors (Ex: Wrangler), the NFL community, etc... depends on Favre working closing with his legal team to resolve this matter. If there is a possibility that Favre's accuser has evidence that may damage Favre's reputation it may be in Favre's best interests to reach a confidential settlement with his accuser so Favre can keep his image intact. I would hate to see Favre experience the same type of downward spiral that has engulfed Tiger Woods.

This matter should be a wake up call to everyone to watch what you post on the Internet. In particular, you should be careful about what you write in an email, what you say in a voice mail or text message, and what you post on a social media site such as Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter, etc...

To learn how to protect your social media profile you may contact me at http://www.shearlaw.com/.

Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.

Facebook's New Group Tools Should Be Opt-In

Facebook recently launced a new tool called Groups that enables users to create mini social networks within a Facebook user's list of friends. According to the Wall Street Journal, "Facebook’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg said the impetus for groups was to make communicating with your friends on Facebook more like talking with them in the real world."

Facebook Groups was created not to mimic real world communication but to better enable Facebook to monetize your personal data. Many Facebook users have hundreds of Facebook Friends. However, Facebook does not know what a user's true relationship is with each of its Facebook friends. A user's Facebook Friends may include: high school friends, college friends, graduate school friends, co-workers, family members, strangers, associates, significant others, ex-friends, ex-significant others, etc...

According to a recent PC Magazine article, a Facebook spokesperson stated "[w]e made the decision to allow Group members to add others to the Group in order to make the product simple, and because it resembles something we all understand: adding one of your contacts to an e-mail thread." An e-mail thread may be more analagous to unsolicited junk mail (snail or email) than a real group. In addition, opting-in instead of opting out would have made the product simple for users because opting out forces users to take steps that are not user friendly.

If Facebook wanted to make its new Groups feature mimic real world communication it would have enabled users to individually opt-into Groups instead of making users opt-out. Making users opt-out instead of opt-in has the potential to create some unintended legal issues for some of its users. For example, what if a boss or family member or friend reviews a Group page and found out you were a member of a Group that had some sort of stigma?

In my opinion, Facebook made groups opt-out instead of opt-in to better collect and then sell your personal data to marketers. Facebook is on a furious pace to monetize its users' data to demonstrate to prospective bidders for its future IPO Facebook's monetary potential. If Facebook cares about its users' privacy it will change its Group's feature to be opt-in instead of opt-out. When was the last time you had to opt-out of going to dinner with a real group of friends? To go out with a real group of friends you must opt-in. Therefore, I challenge Facebook to correct this major oversight to its new Group tool.

Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.

Latest Cyberbullying Tragedy May Trigger Congressional Action To Address Social Media Law Issues

Cyberbullying has once again gained national headlines due to the recent tragic case of Tyler Clementi. To summarize this case, Clementi was a freshman at Rutgers University who committed suicide by jumping off the George Washington Bridge. Clementi was apparently extremely distraught because allegedly his roommate and another student utilized a webcam to stream onto the Internet Clementi being intimate with another person.

The students who allegedly set up the webcam that captured Clementi without his conset have been charged with Invasion of Privacy. Unfortunately, there is usually a lag between the rapid pace of new technology and the law that governs the use of new technology. In the case of civil and criminal digital crimes this lag is substantial.

This past July, I wrote about cyberbullying because a new Georgia law aimed at curtailing cyberbullying may have some unintended 1st Amendment related consequences. While I believe that Georgia's cyberbullying law has the right intent I do not believe it will withstand constitutional scrutiny for the reasons I stated in that post.

Unfortunately, it has taken another cyberbullying victim to get the attention of Congress. Over the past several years, there have been several high profile cases of cyberbullying. Earlier this year, Phoebe Prince was the poster child for cyberbullying. Now Tyler Clementi. I would hate to see another person's life cut short because they felt their life was over because of content that was uploaded about them online.

Currently, 45 states have some type of anti-bullying law. Even with all of these laws on the books this problem still persists. I believe education at home and in the schools is the best first line of defense in combatting cyberbullying. However, it appears that this may not be enough to deter this destructive activity.

Therefore, I would be happy to assist Congress in drafting a national anti-cyberbullying statute that would balance the need for 1st Amendment protection along with the way information is spread in the Social Media Age along with the need to protect cyberbullying victims. If Senator Lautenberg's office is interested in my assistance his office may contact me directly at www.shearlaw.com.

Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.

The Social Network, Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, and Social Media Public Relations

The movie "The Social Network" premiered in New York City this past Friday and will be widely distributed on October 1st. The screenplay was written by Aaron Sorkin and is based on Ben Mezrich's book, "The Accidental Billionaires: The Founding of Facebook A Tale of Sex, Money, Genius, and Betrayal."

According to the Wall Street Journal, Facebook tried to influence the narrative in "The Social Network." Last month, the New York Times stated that, "[b]ehind the scenes, however, Mr. Zuckerberg and his colleagues have been locked in a tense standoff with the filmmakers" regarding the content of the film." I don't blame Facebook for trying to persuade the filmmakers to create a film that puts its founder in the best possible light; however, Facebook needs to realize that trying to massage a message in the Social Media Age is very difficult. Instead of trying to ignore "The Social Network," Facebook should embrace and own the story of its founding with its warts, real and imagined.

In the movie, "Clear and Present Danger," the fictional president has a public relations problem on his hand because a close friend of his may have been involved in drug trafficking. Harrison Ford's character (Jack Ryan) advises the president something along the lines that he should tell the media that the friend in question was not just a friend but a close friend. This advice killed the story because the fictional president embraced and owned up to the relationship.

On December 2, 2009, and then again on December 10, 2009, I blogged how Tiger Woods should handle his public relations situation and provided David Letterman and Meredith Baxter as examples of great Social Media public relations. As the world knows, Woods did not listen to my advice. Woods allowed the situation to spiral out of control and he lost his family, hundreds of millions of dollars, and his ability to focus on his profession.

Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg should openly embrace and promote the movie, "The Social Network" because downplaying the movie and/or ignoring it enables others to own the narrative. Zuckerberg is extremely hypocritical because he wants everyone to share their private information but he refuses to reciprocate. If Zuckerberg held a press conference and publicly explained the entire situation regarding the founding of Facebook and was open and honest about all the lawsuits he has had to settle surrounding Facebook's founding the story would die a natural death because he would own the narrative.

I have read Ben Mezrich's book, "The Accidental Billionaries" and David Kilpratrick's "The Facebook Effect". Mezrich's book is a much more interesting account than Kilpatrick's. In addition, I watched Zuckerberg's recent Oprah appearance and Zuckerberg seemed uncomfortable when "The Social Network" was brought up.

The truth in how Facebook was started is most likely somewhere in between Mezrich's account and Kilpatrick's Facebook endorsed version. "The Social Network" has been made and Facebook and Zuckerberg's public relations team should embrace movie. Facebook's stance towards the movie is only going to encourage more people to want to see it.

The bottom line is that Facebook and Zuckerberg need to reevaluate their Social Media Public Relations strategy.

To learn how to create and execute a Social Media Public Relations and Crisis Management Plan and to understand the legal issues that may affect your plans you may contact me at http://www.shearlaw.com.

Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.

Protecting Your Social Media Profile Against Text Spam

On April 29, 2010, I stated why the Social Media Privacy Protection Act is needed. I reiterated my position again on July 25, 2010. I did not wake up thinking about privacy issues. However, when I logged into my Google account this morning, I received the message, "What would happen if you lost access to your Google Account tomorrow?" The screen listed my email address and requested my cell phone number in case I need to reset my password.

In my opinion, password resets via cell phone SMS is a ruse to obtain access to your cell phone number so the number may be used at a later date to perform mobile marketing. Social Media companies are trying to collect as much information about their users as possible because they are building a monetizable data bank. As the Brits may say, "brilliant."

Google may argue that a cell phone number is the easiest and most secure way for a consumer to obtain a password reset. I disagree. The best way to do this is via email and/or a personal security question. Google recently fired an employee for accessing the personal accounts of its users. Just think of all the possibilities when private companies (not the government-whole different conversation) have access to this type of personal information.

Social Media companies are trying to entice their users to turn over as much of their personal information as possible. Unfortunately, too many consumers are freely providing Social Media companies their information without a second thought. For example, there is no reason for any company to ask for or for anyone to list their religion on their social media profile.

When I recently tried assisting a friend of mine with obtaining a personal URL for his Facebook account it requested a cell phone number for confirmation. When I obtained my personal URL soon after consumers were allowed to do so I did not need to provide a cell phone number. Social Media companies want your cell phone number so they can monetize this information.

The bottom line is that people need to be careful about providing any data to third parties. Do you really want to be bombarded at some point in the future with spam text messages that you will have to pay for? Therefore, unless a company needs your cell phone number do not provide it.

To learn how to protect your Social Media Profile you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.

Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.

Corporate Counsel's IP Trademark, Copyright & Licensing Cousel Forum

On September 14th and September 15, ALM's Corporate Counsel will be hosting a seminar that will discuss current intellectual property issues. The conference's keynote speaker will be Marybeth Peters, Register of Copyrights. Intellectual Property practitioners from all over the country will be speaking and will be in attendance.

Some of the topics that will be discussed at the conference include: Protecting Your IP in a Digital Environment, Monetizing Your Copyright and Trademarks, Recent Online Litigation Developments, Structuring Licensing Programs, and IP Issues in Social Media Marketing.

Some of the organizations that will be represented at the event include: The New York Times, the Recording Industry Association of America, The Author's Guild, Gannett Co., the U.S. Copyright Office, News Corporation, Comcast Entertainment Group, Conde Nast, ESPN, ABC, and NBC Universal.

The Conference will be held at The Harvard Club of New York. For more information click here.

[Full Disclosure: Shear on Social Media Law is part of ALM's Law.com Blog Network]