NY 2nd Dept. finds statute of limiations didn’t toll in suit against anonymous blogger

This case comes courtesy of some of the folks up in the Town of Wayawaynda in Upstate New York.   The controversy plays out like an oscar worthy movie.  Seems as if  someone beheaded a horse and then left the head in a Wayawanda Town Board member’s swimming pool.  The incident sparked accusatory anonymous blogs, posted in turn by  wayguy, johnny500 and wawayandafirst.  The posts occured on or about August 29, 2007 and  October 6, 2007 and accused plaintiff of pulling off the “Tom Hagan.” (although, like the plaintiff in this case, no one is sure that Don Corleone’s adopted son actually committed the heinous act).

Plaintiff filed suit on July 28, 2008 against Mike Hawkins, knowns as “wayguy” and two other bloggers, John Doe johnny500 (johnny500) and John Doe wawayandafirst (Wawayandafirst). Defendant Wayne Skinner was not identified by name in the original complaint, but on September 18, 2008, Plaintiff served Skinner  with copies of the original summons and complaint assuming Skinner was  John Doe johhny500 and wawayandafirst.   Three months later, on October 20, the complaint was amended, to include Wayne Skinner (and his wife.)

Skinner argued that the case should be dismissed since the statute of limitations ran prior to the October 20th filing. (the statute of limitations had not run out prior to July 28).   But, here is the twist, turns out that although skinner was not johnny500 he   was “wawayandfirst” and the court found that since  “the remaining John Doe named by the original complaint — “John Doe wawayandafirst’ (Wawayandafirst’)” — referred to Wayne Skinner, and since he was alleged in the complaint to be the individual responsible for issuing the Wawayandafirst blog posts. Under these circumstances, the original complaint was sufficient to have apprised Wayne Skinner that he was one of the intended defendants.”

I’m not sure whether the actual claim will stick, but I am certainly glad to see the court craft its opinion to hold an “originally anonymous” blogger responsible.

What does it take to make a blog review defamation?

Calling someone a “real tool” is not enough to defame a doctor’s reputation.  The Minnesota Supreme Court recently ruled in the case, McKee v. Laurion, that a web review, written by Dennis Laurion the son of a one of Dr. David McKee’s patients, which stated, among other things, “Dr MCKee is a real tool,” was an opinion rather than fact, and therefore not actionable.

Ironically, Dr. McKee, like so many  doctors, presumably brought the action to defend his reputation, which was originally tarnished by those reading, and believing, the website on which the rating appeared.  Ironically, because of the McKee’s suit, Laurion’s words have gone viral.  What a bummer for Dr. McKee, not only did he lose his suit, but he potentially lost a wider patient base too!

Did Netflix Violate SEC Regulations on Facebook?

Netflix CEO Reed Hastings was very excited when his company reached a milestone, achieving one billion hours of content on their streaming service. Hastings was so excited, that he posted the information on his personal Facebook page. However, the SEC requires that disclosures about company information must be distributed “through a press release on a widely disseminated news or wire service, or by ‘any other non-exclusionary method’ that provides broad public access.”

With Facebook having over one billion active monthly users and considering the top newspaper only circulates approximately 62,000,000 copies monthly, has Facebook become the more appropriate venue for companies to release information?

Government seems to be taking bigger steps toward regulating social media

Privacy is finally catching the real attention of the Government.  In a moved aimed at keeping our social media traffic private, the FTC is urging social media companies to include a do-not-track feature in their software and apps.  A NYTimes article, which is available at  http://tinyurl.com/algljc8 discusses the very real concern’s of government officials and highlights a recent FTC fine  of $800,000 issued against the neophyte social networking app, Path for violating federal regulations against collecting personal information on underaged users.  While the move seems like a good one, it also smacks of a little too much government regulation, even for this seemingly staunch anti-libertarian.

Waitress at Applebee’s Fired for Posting Receipt on Social Media Site

A server at Applebee’s received a receipt from a customer (a Pastor, apparently) which left her no tip for a party of 20 people, and read “I give God 10%, why do you get 18?”  Another waitress, trying to make the scene into something more lighthearted,  posted a picture of the receipt on her Facebook page.  She left the signature visible. Once the identity of the diner was being guessed online, the story spread, and the waitress who posted the photo was fired.

I post this, partly to follow up on my recent post about Federal Regulations prohibiting employer’s from blanket bans on employee social media postings.  If the waitress had posted the photo without the signature line visible, would she still have her job? Would she also have had to exclude the name/address of the restaurant?

 

The Government’s Ability to Read Your Email

The New York Times recently published an article entitled  “Google Says Electronic Snooping by Government Should Be More Difficult.” According to the article, “If a government wants to peek into your Web-based e-mail account, it is surprisingly easy, most of the time not even requiring a judge’s approval.” Click  here to read the article.

Till Death Do Us Part

Despite little regulation of social media and other online entities, Nebraska is contemplating what to do with your online presence once you’ve bit the dust! Interestingly, few states have passed statutes related to tortious and criminal conduct on the internet, but now Nebraska is contemplating how to send your online aura to the grave along with your cadaver. Nebraska is just one of the latest states to tackle the issue of how your executor should pull the plug on your digital personality when managing your estate.

Employer’s Attempts to Limit Employee Speech – and the NLRB’s Response

This semester, I’m writing about how social media has changed/is changing the face of employment discrimination law suits. In that vein, here’s an article from the NYTimes about how employers have attempted to limit employee speech online – regulations which have clashed with union advocates and federal regulations.

 

Skip to toolbar