May it Please The Court, I’d Like to Tweet Now

Last week, the Iowa Supreme Court submitted a proposal to revise its current rules for expanded media coverage during courtroom proceedings, specifically addressing the use of smart phones, tablets and the like to live blog and tweet. With most of my courtroom experience to date taking place in NY and PA courts I found this to be quite interesting. Although some judges in NY and PA allow certain uses of mobile devices, most courts I have been in had a pretty strict no-cell-phone-use policy. I have, on more than one occasion, witnessed judges stop everything in order to reprimand an attorney or even a gallery member for not having their phone on silent. There are currently 36 states (see survey link below) that have a policy addressing the use Twitter in the Courtroom, but only a handful of those policies actually allow members of the media to use social media to report live from court.

One can immediately see at least some of the upside of allowing live tweets from court, as nationwide-dissemination of a tweet to the general public will grant them instantaneous access and knowledge of everything happening in the proceeding. However, one should just as easily be able to recognize some shortfalls of allowing the use of social media from live court. For instance, what if an empanelled juror came across certain blogs or tweets that affects their impartiality? Can justice truly be served or will the use of social media during a live trail put certain litigants at a disadvantage? With the exponential growth of social media and more and more people getting their news from social media platforms each year, it seems only inevitable that these are questions courts across the country will be facing in the near future. However, according to the most recent survey conducted by the CCPIO, an organization that partners with the National Center for State Courts, we are still further away than one might think from all courts hopping on the Social Media Train.

California Law Attempts to Protect our Youths Online

A few weeks ago California Governor Jerry Brown signed a new bill (SB 568) consisting of two distinct laws that will take effect January 1, 2015. The bill’s first law attempts to prevent certain online advertisements from reaching the eyes of minors. Any website or mobile application that is directed to minors, or has knowledge that minors use its service, are prohibited from marketing items including alcohol, firearms, tobacco/cigarettes, drug paraphernalia, UV tanning devices, spray-paints, tattoos and fireworks.

In my opinion, the implementation and regulation of this law will lead to more problems than it will solve. The language of this law is so over-inclusive and ambiguous that it fails to create a clear picture for website operators/advertisers to rely on. No where in the law does it require a website to obtain the ages of its users and without such information how are advertisers supposed to know which websites the law is covering? I’m not so sure that advertisers of the ‘black listed’ items intentionally direct their advertisements at kids in the first place, however, I do understand the desire to filter certain aspects of Internet use when it comes to children.

The bill’s second law, the so-called ‘Online Eraser’ law, requires social media type websites (Facebook, Twitter, MySpace and the like) and applications to allow the removal of public content (post, tweet, etc.) upon request of registered users under the age of 18. Again, I completely understand the rationale behind this law (attempting to help a user erase an embarrassing tweet/post from their youth), but it simply will not work as is. A number of commentators have written the law off as ineffective due to the absence of any language that mentions reposts, retweets, or copies of the original. So although the user may be granted a takedown of their original post the law does nothing to help them further. Considering the user is going through the trouble to takedown such ‘regrettable posts’ it seems only logical that the content will be interesting enough to become a 3rd party’s repost or retweet. Recent court decisions have granted First Amendment protection to specific characteristics of social media so even if the law did refer to these subsequent posts aren’t we clearly venturing into First Amendment territory? Critics to this new California law believe that we are.

Social Media Strikes Again: Teens Charged With Making OnlineThreats Against Steubenville Rape Victim

There is no doubt that Social Media played an important role in the Steubenville Rape Case.   In fact, the prosecution would have had a significantly weaker case had it not been for the several tweets, videos, and pictures exchanged among students regarding the events that occurred.  It is disgraceful that young students would commit such a horrific act, and then brag about it through social networking sites.  It is even more troublesome, that the numerous students who viewed these tweets, pictures, and video did not report the incident.  Many would hope that young students would learn from this incident and the implications Social Networking Sites may have if used irresponsibly.  However, that is not that case for two teenage girls who used Social Media to threaten the young victim in the Steubenville Rape Case following the verdict.  A 16-year-old girl is charged with aggravated menacing after using Twitter to threaten the life of the victim, and a 15-year-old girl is charged with one count of menacing after making a threat on Facebook.

What will it take for young students to realize that their actions on Social Media sites have real life consequences?

Research for Paper Topics

Hello all, as I was attempting to find some research for my own topic involving social media and matrimonial law I cam across this article titled, “INVASION CONTRACTS: THE PRIVACY IMPLICATIONS OF TERMS OF USE AGREEMENTS IN THE ONLINE SOCIAL MEDIA SETTING” cited as Jared S. Livingston, Invasion Contracts: The Privacy Implications of Terms of Use Agreements in the Online Social Media Setting, 21 Alb. L.J. Sci. & Tech. 591 (2011). Although this is not related to my own topic, I do know that someone in class was talking about this being a part of this topic so I figured I would post it for all who may be interested or writing about user agreements and you can find the article on Westlaw or Lexus. Hope you are all having a great monday!

New York City Restaurants Banning Food Photography

Do you take pictures of your food at restaurants? Plan on taking a picture of your Valentine’s Day dinner? You might be banned from taking that picture this Valentine’s Day. This is because New York City restaurant owners are banning food photography by customers. The restaurant owners don’t want people  posting pictures of their food on social media sites.  Is this fair? Should the practice be banned?  Read the CBS News story here, and comment on this post with your thoughts.

More States Consider Social Media Privacy Bills

The concept of legislatively limiting employer access to employee social media traffic is gaining traction.  Legislators in Georgia, Montana and North Dakota are considering bills similar to the one already adopted by the Illinois legislature.  The bills would restrict employers from researching social media sights as a means of gaining additional insights about employees and/or employee candidates.  More information about the potential laws is available here.

Are these bills innovative or are they just a natural extension of the HR workplace rules that prohibit, say, asking a candidate is she is pregnant?

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?

 

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.

What do we mean when we say social media?

The Dayton Business Journal recently published the list of the top ten most visited social media websites. The list was compiled based on total number of visits.  No big surprise with Facebook, YouTube and Twitter in the top three spots.  Interesting to me was that Pintrest ranked fourth and that two relatively new sites, MeetMe and Tagged, scored pretty high up there, bumping Yelp at the same time.  Nothing much legal about a list of sites, but I think it interesting to have a sense of just what we are speaking of when we say “social media.”

Skip to toolbar