Wishing everyone a happy and healthy holiday season along with a happy new year! May the new year bring good health, happiness, and success!
To learn more about the social media legal issues that your entity may confront in the new year you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
Professional Athletes Must Be Careful When Using Social Media
During the past two years, professional athletes have started to embrace social media. For example, active NFL players such Chad Ochocinco and Reggie Bush have more than a million Twitter followers. These two NFL players have successfully combined their on the field play with their off the field personalities to become popular on social media.
Social media offers professional athletes new and exciting ways to engage and interact with their fans. Unfortunately, social media usage by professional athletes may also cause some unforeseen problems. During this time, some NFL players have been fined for violating the NFL's social media policy because they tweeted during a game. Other players have made inappropriate comments on Twitter. For example, former Kansas City Chief Larry Johnson lost more than $300,000 in game day compensation for his Tweets that slurred homosexuals. Johnson's Tweets so enraged Chiefs fans that an online petition garnered more than 32,000 fan signatures to keep Johnson from returning to the team. In addition to lost game day compensation, Johnson may have lost possible lucrative post-career marketing opportunities in Kansas City.
Social media usage by professional athletes may also have serious legal consequences. For example, on December 22, 2010 it was reported by the Baltimore Sun that Ravens rookie Sergio Kindle expressed uncertainty about his NFL career on Twitter after he met with his doctors. Kindle has been on the reserve/non-football injury list since fracturing his skull before training camp opened earlier this year. Discussing one's medical condition is not something that should occur via social media. Less than a week after Kindle's Twitter medical update he was charged with a DUI. In addition, Kindle through an interview allegedly admitted to drinking and driving. It appears that Kindle has deleted his Twitter account within the past 48 hours of this writing.
Kindle's social media usage along with his poor judgment may end up not only harming his NFL career, it may also cause him legal trouble. A prosecutor may utilize Kindle's Tweets and his alleged interview admission regarding the DUI against him in court. Even if Kindle's attorney is able to have Kindle's blood alcohol score and/or other evidence excluded from the case, a prosecutor may still be able to utilize Kindle's Tweets before and after the alleged DUI and his alleged admissions to a reporter regarding the incident.
As more and more people utilize social media, these type of issues will drastically increase. Therefore, it is imperative to think twice before making a social media post because you never know how it may be used against you at a later date.
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.
Social media offers professional athletes new and exciting ways to engage and interact with their fans. Unfortunately, social media usage by professional athletes may also cause some unforeseen problems. During this time, some NFL players have been fined for violating the NFL's social media policy because they tweeted during a game. Other players have made inappropriate comments on Twitter. For example, former Kansas City Chief Larry Johnson lost more than $300,000 in game day compensation for his Tweets that slurred homosexuals. Johnson's Tweets so enraged Chiefs fans that an online petition garnered more than 32,000 fan signatures to keep Johnson from returning to the team. In addition to lost game day compensation, Johnson may have lost possible lucrative post-career marketing opportunities in Kansas City.
Social media usage by professional athletes may also have serious legal consequences. For example, on December 22, 2010 it was reported by the Baltimore Sun that Ravens rookie Sergio Kindle expressed uncertainty about his NFL career on Twitter after he met with his doctors. Kindle has been on the reserve/non-football injury list since fracturing his skull before training camp opened earlier this year. Discussing one's medical condition is not something that should occur via social media. Less than a week after Kindle's Twitter medical update he was charged with a DUI. In addition, Kindle through an interview allegedly admitted to drinking and driving. It appears that Kindle has deleted his Twitter account within the past 48 hours of this writing.
Kindle's social media usage along with his poor judgment may end up not only harming his NFL career, it may also cause him legal trouble. A prosecutor may utilize Kindle's Tweets and his alleged interview admission regarding the DUI against him in court. Even if Kindle's attorney is able to have Kindle's blood alcohol score and/or other evidence excluded from the case, a prosecutor may still be able to utilize Kindle's Tweets before and after the alleged DUI and his alleged admissions to a reporter regarding the incident.
As more and more people utilize social media, these type of issues will drastically increase. Therefore, it is imperative to think twice before making a social media post because you never know how it may be used against you at a later date.
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.
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
New York Jets' Rex Ryan Needs to Take His Feet Out of His Mouth and Address Foot-Fetish Gate
The New York Jets' Rex Ryan needs to take his feet out of his mouth. Usually, when you hear the saying that someone has their foot in their mouth it means that they are saying things that are not very intelligent. However, in this instance, Ryan has figuratively put both of his feet in his mouth to intentionally avoid addressing what will become known as Foot-Fetish Gate.
According to Deadspin.com, a woman who looks very similar to Ryan's wife Michelle has been posting videos onto YouTube about feet fetishes. In addition, if you listen to one of the videos posted the voice sounds similar to Ryan's. The YouTube account ("ihavepretty feet") that originally contained these videos was so popular that YouTube allegedly terminated the account for terms of service violations.
Foot-Fetish Gate was on the Cover of today's New York Daily News. According to NJ.com, when Ryan was asked about the videos in a press conference today he stated, "This is a personal matter and I'm not going to discuss it. This is a personal matter, I hope you can respect the fact I don't want to discuss it."
Ryan should have followed the way Dave Letterman handled his social media situation when Letterman was blackmailed about his personal conduct last year. On December 2, 2009, I blogged about how well Letterman handled his social media crisis and stated that Tiger Woods should follow David Letterman's social media crisis playbook. David Letterman came out publicly very quickly on his show and admitted what had happened. Letterman's honest response made the story die very early in the news cycle with no apparent professional consequences.
In contrast, Tiger Woods for months refused to address his personal problems that became public soon after Thanksgiving 2009. Woods' handling of his social media crisis has derailed his career, cost him millions in sponsorship dollars and destroyed his marriage. The final chapter on Brett Favre's sexting scandal has not been written yet so it is too early to properly review his social media crisis response.
From the facts I have seen so far, it does not appear that Rex Ryan or his wife have engaged in any activity that could cause him legal problems. Therefore, I would advise Rex Ryan to come clean and make this a non-story quickly. Ryan may want to take a page from Hugh Grant's personal incident from 15 years ago when Grant was caught with a hooker. Grant did the talk show circuit and made light of the matter. Grant's career did not suffer because he apologized and acted sincere and audiences have embraced him ever since. If you win football games people generally don't care what you do in your spare time. Even then, the U.S. is a very forgiving country. For example, Michael Vick has resurrected his career due to his recent on the field play and his positive contributions to his surrounding community.
Since Ryan and his wife may only be guilty of poor decision making he should do a 180 as soon as possible and give a press conference that honestly addresses Foot-Fetish Gate before this weekend's NFL games begin. Nobody cares what Ryan and his wife do in their spare time as long as the Jets win. However, if the Jets lose this Sunday and don't make or go far in the playoffs Ryan and/or his wife's off the field activities may be further questioned. Personally, I can't wait to see and hear what the Chicago Bear fans will say to Ryan at this weekend's game. Are you ready for some football?
To learn how to properly handle a social media crisis you may contact me at http://www.shearlaw.com/.
Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
According to Deadspin.com, a woman who looks very similar to Ryan's wife Michelle has been posting videos onto YouTube about feet fetishes. In addition, if you listen to one of the videos posted the voice sounds similar to Ryan's. The YouTube account ("ihavepretty feet") that originally contained these videos was so popular that YouTube allegedly terminated the account for terms of service violations.
Foot-Fetish Gate was on the Cover of today's New York Daily News. According to NJ.com, when Ryan was asked about the videos in a press conference today he stated, "This is a personal matter and I'm not going to discuss it. This is a personal matter, I hope you can respect the fact I don't want to discuss it."
Ryan should have followed the way Dave Letterman handled his social media situation when Letterman was blackmailed about his personal conduct last year. On December 2, 2009, I blogged about how well Letterman handled his social media crisis and stated that Tiger Woods should follow David Letterman's social media crisis playbook. David Letterman came out publicly very quickly on his show and admitted what had happened. Letterman's honest response made the story die very early in the news cycle with no apparent professional consequences.
In contrast, Tiger Woods for months refused to address his personal problems that became public soon after Thanksgiving 2009. Woods' handling of his social media crisis has derailed his career, cost him millions in sponsorship dollars and destroyed his marriage. The final chapter on Brett Favre's sexting scandal has not been written yet so it is too early to properly review his social media crisis response.
From the facts I have seen so far, it does not appear that Rex Ryan or his wife have engaged in any activity that could cause him legal problems. Therefore, I would advise Rex Ryan to come clean and make this a non-story quickly. Ryan may want to take a page from Hugh Grant's personal incident from 15 years ago when Grant was caught with a hooker. Grant did the talk show circuit and made light of the matter. Grant's career did not suffer because he apologized and acted sincere and audiences have embraced him ever since. If you win football games people generally don't care what you do in your spare time. Even then, the U.S. is a very forgiving country. For example, Michael Vick has resurrected his career due to his recent on the field play and his positive contributions to his surrounding community.
Since Ryan and his wife may only be guilty of poor decision making he should do a 180 as soon as possible and give a press conference that honestly addresses Foot-Fetish Gate before this weekend's NFL games begin. Nobody cares what Ryan and his wife do in their spare time as long as the Jets win. However, if the Jets lose this Sunday and don't make or go far in the playoffs Ryan and/or his wife's off the field activities may be further questioned. Personally, I can't wait to see and hear what the Chicago Bear fans will say to Ryan at this weekend's game. Are you ready for some football?
To learn how to properly handle a social media crisis you may contact me at http://www.shearlaw.com/.
Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Sunday, December 19, 2010
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.
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.
Saturday, December 18, 2010
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.
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.
Monday, December 6, 2010
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.
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.
Thursday, December 2, 2010
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.
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
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
Sunday, November 14, 2010
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
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
Monday, November 8, 2010
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]
[Full Disclosure: Shear on Social Media Law is syndicated by ALM's Law.com Blog Network]
Thursday, November 4, 2010
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.
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.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
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.
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.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
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.
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.
Saturday, October 9, 2010
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.
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.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
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 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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)