by eclewis | Aug 26, 2009 | IP Law, Online/Social Media Law
Another Twitter Lawsuit
Several weeks ago, I talked to people about the Chicago Twitter defamation case. Monday, another case regarding defamation surfaced. This time, it involved celebrity Courtney Love and a dispute with a designer. The designer accuses Courtney Love of using twitter and her website to defame her. Among the accusations are that Courtney Love used these mediums to allege she was a drug addict, a prostitute, and some other words that I don’t want to publish on my blog.
According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Courtney Love’s attorney has stated “It is important that this cherished right not be marginalized when speech is communicated via the Internet. Ms. Cobain (Love) enjoys using Twitter and expressing her views … to her fans and those who are interested in following what she has to say.”
Although most of my readers (I think) aren’t famous, the question still arises – what is safe and what isn’t safe to say on my blog or website. Unfortunately, this really depends on who you are and what you do. For instance, if I was an advising an accountant, I would say that you need to be careful about what tax advice you give (along with thousands of other things). I would advise a teenager to be careful about posting explicit information or pictures about another teen (in addition to a thousand other things). For pretty much everyone, I would say to be careful posting anything untrue about anyone or something that you wouldn’t want said about yourself.
Just like with any other media, if you say something that is an outright lie (i.e. Elizabeth Lewis is a terrible artist, because, come on guys, I can actually draw, paint, and take photographs!), you can face defamation charges. So, for instance, if in the case described above, the person isn’t actually a drug user or prostitute but the information was posted to cause people to stop using her, there could be a problem. However, on the other hand, if the person is a drug addict and prostitute, it would be hard to argue defamation.
In order to make sure either you, or your company, is safe from law suits, it is always good to have someone familiar with online law to review what you are posting online. For instance, I review companies’ communication policies to ensure that anything said online or offline about the company or its clients isn’t going to cause the company problems. I also review companies’ websites and literature to ensure it is okay to print. So whether it is in print or online, if you are going to be printing something, make sure you are in compliance with defamation, advertising, and any other laws that may apply!
by eclewis | Aug 18, 2009 | IP Law, Online/Social Media Law
There are more than 4 million Twitter accounts and more than 30 million Facebook accounts. Social media sites, such as Facebook, Twitter, MySpace and LinkedIn, are no longer just a place for kids to post pictures and share the latest gossip with their friends. Adults are beginning to use the sites for everything from planning high school reunions to marketing their businesses. Even companies like Comcast are getting in on the action by having employees respond to user complaints on Twitter. However, as the use of social media sites increases, so does the need for people to understand the legal issues that can arise from their use. The following are just a few of the ways you can get into trouble when venturing online.
Personal Safety
The first way you can get into trouble online is by endangering your physical safety. In California, “buyers” held up a couple selling sweatshirts through a Craigslist ad. The transaction was to take place in a semi-deserted parking lot; instead, the “buyers” took the couple’s merchandise and their cash. The moral of the story: if at all possible, meet the other party at a public place if using a site to buy or sell merchandise on Craigslist and always be aware of your surroundings.
Job Seekers Beware
The second way you can get in trouble online is by hurting your employment chances. Just as individuals are getting more familiar with online sites, so are employers. By posting information online, a jobseeker may be asking to not be hired. At the age of 20, it may seem fun to post pictures of yourself in a compromised position at Mardi Gras or your best friend’s bachelorette party. At 26, when applying for a job, a prospective employer may not find those pictures so amusing. The moral of the story: companies will judge you by what you have posted online, whether it is your stellar grades or pictures of you at an all-night kegger.
Truth or Fiction?
The third way you can get in trouble online is by good old-fashioned lying. In late July, the media first reported a widely publicized case about a person suing a Twitter user over a post (or “tweet”). In Chicago, a renter complained via the service that her apartment was moldy; the landlord filed suit for damages claiming the tweet was defamatory. (It remains to be seen whether the apartment was moldy or whether the tweet was a lie, and thus defamatory, as the case has not gone to court yet.) The moral of the story: if you are posting bad things about a company or person, make sure they are true.
Social networking is fun and exciting. Its use can improve your life, increase the number of friends you have, and bring you more business if used correctly. It can also lead to problems far into the future. Be smart about what you post and if you have any questions about a post: don’t do it until you check with someone familiar with online law!
by eclewis | Jun 21, 2009 | IP Law, Online/Social Media Law
Copyright Infringement – A Song is Worth Three Lives?
I usually try not to bring my own personal opinion on issues to this blog.
However, I recently saw this picture that made me rethink this policy. For those that don’t click on the link, the picture is titled “The cost of piracy.” It isn’t talking about Somalia, but is rather talking about copyright piracy. In the same week that Air France stated it would give the family members of each victim of the recent crash $24,000.00, a court in Minnesota decided to punish a mother it found to be committing copyright infringement $80,000.00 per downloaded song. In other words – one human life = $24,000.00; a copy of a song = $80,000.00.
Now I am all for copyright policies. However, it is time to make sure that copyright is given its proper place in society. The Founding Fathers determined that copyright should be for a limited time. Maybe I don’t know what I am talking about, but considering the chances of me being alive when the copyright expires on Britney Spears’ new album are slim to none, I don’t think that our current policy is anything close to “a limited time”.
People deserve to profit from what they create. However, if copyright exists on a work 70 years AFTER the death of the author of the work, it stifles creativity. One only need to look at works being created on the internet to see that thousands of works have been or could be created which enhance our ideas about humanity, morality, politics, art, and thousands of other areas. Some are as simple as a child dancing to a song in the background (for which under our current law, copyright infringement was alleged) to something like a book adding zombies to Pride and Prejudice (a book which was no longer protected under copyright law).
Copyright policy must weigh the interest of the author and the interest of creativity of the rest of society. It must give authors a way to profit and society a way to incorporate the ideas of those around them during their lifetime.
by eclewis | Feb 26, 2009 | Business News, IP Law, Online/Social Media Law
By reading this series and using this website, you agree to my Terms of Service and acknowledge that this is not legal advice but for informational purposes only. If you are a Colorado business with an online presence, please contact me, Elizabeth Lewis, your online business attorney for more information about how you need to structure your business, what you need to do to make sure your website complies with all the laws and protects you, and for all your business needs at 720-258-6647 or Elizabeth.Lewis@eclewis.com.
The second and third sections of Facebook’s Terms of Service go over the eligibility for using the site, and the registration data you must provide and information about account security. In regards to eligibility, Facebook requires that you be at least 13 years old to use the site. If you are between 13 and 18, you must be enrolled in high school or college to use the site. Not allowing children under 13 is typical for many websites due to the online child protection act that was passed several years ago as it increased the requirements sites must follow if they cater to or allow children under 13 to sign up. If you are a business that caters to individuals under 18, it is essential that you contact an attorney to ensure that your business is protected.
In regards to registration data and account security section, Facebook requires that you provide accurate and complete information on the registration form and continue to keep it up to date. You are also responsible for all use of your account. This means that you have to accurately disclose you name, location, date of birth and other information. If you give your friend access to your account, you are responsible for anything she does with your account. These terms are also fairly typical on TOSs. It is important to contact an attorney if for any reason you feel that you cannot provide accurate info to an online site and the majority require this. If you are a business, if you require registration data, it is important to talk to an attorney to make sure you can ensure that the person using you site is who he or she says they are.
If you think you might have problems with one of these areas, if you need more information about terms of services, or if you need a terms of service written for your company, please contact me, Elizabeth Lewis, your business attorney at 720-258-6647 or Elizabeth.Lewis@eclewis.com.
by eclewis | Feb 23, 2009 | Online/Social Media Law
Introduction to the next forty or so posts on online policies
As more and more businesses start using the web to advertise services, sell products, or just to have an online presence, businesses are entering into a new frontier. While many of the bigger sites such as CNN, Facebook, and Google, have full-fledged policies governing the use of their site, companies just entering the World Wide Web may not have the same policies developed.
For brick and mortar businesses, coming up with and telling customers about policies is usually pretty easy. An owner may post a sign behind the cash register than says “Please turn off your cell phones when at the register” to state the policy on that customers can’t use cell phones when at the register. An owner may have a sign on the door that states “No Checks” to state the policy is cash or credit card only. An owner may print the return policy on a receipt to make the customer aware the returns must be in new condition.
However, when creating a website, the average website owner may not know what types of policies he needs, where to state them, or how to state them. Although I strongly recommend you go to a business attorney such as myself that specializes in working with businesses with an online presence, it is always a good idea to know a little bit before you see your attorney. Therefore, I am doing this series about what online businesses need to know about online policies.
For the next forty or so days on this blog, I am going to look at terms of services, privacy policies, copyright policies, sale policies, and all things pertaining to websites. For the Terms of Service, I will be using Facebook’s TOS to explain the major sections that are in most TOSs and go over the ones that are somewhat unique to Facebook’s, The information I give does not make up for reading Facebook’s TOS as I cannot go into everything that is in their TOS and they can change it at any time. In addition, as I point out in later posts, each site has its own TOS and it may differ from Facebook’s.
If you have any general questions or comments throughout this series of posts, please feel free to post them. I will try to answer general questions; however, if you have a specific question about what your business needs, please contact me personally as I cannot give legal advice over the web and, if you are not located in Colorado, may have to refer you to an attorney in your area that can help you.
Finally, please be familiar with my Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, and Disclaimers.
By reading this series, this bog in general, and using this website, you agree to my Terms of Service and acknowledge that this is not legal advice but for informational purposes only. If you are a Colorado business with an online presence, please contact me, Elizabeth Lewis, your online business attorney for more information about how you need to structure your business, what you need to do to make sure your website complies with all the laws and protects you, and for all your business needs at 720-258-6647 or Elizabeth.Lewis@eclewis.com.
by eclewis | Feb 22, 2009 | IP Law, Online/Social Media Law
Delving into the Facebook TOS – Part 1
Recently, the internet was abuzz with comments over Facebook’s new terms of service. Due to user uproar, Facebook reverted to the terms of service from September 23, 2008. Users were relieved. However, how much of a relief is it really? Over the next few days, I am going to analysis the September terms of service to see whether it is really much better or not.
To begin with, not many people actually read the terms of service. For sites where users upload a lot of content, like Facebook, MySpace, and LinkedIn, this can give a great advantage to the owners of the site because they can put clauses in that affect the ownership rights of their users. This is exactly what Facebook did. Had it not been for other social media sites such as Twitter, this may have gone by unnoticed. So let us go through the September TOS.
The first paragraph states that whether you are a member or not, if you access the site, post information to the site, have a share button to Facebook on your site (i.e. a share button on your blog) you agree to the terms of service. In addition, Facebook reserves the right to change the terms of service at any point in time without notification (other than the posting of a new TOS on their site). If you use the site after the changes, you agree to agree to the changes. Facebook makes it your responsibility to check the site.
So, is this a problem? It depends on what you use Facebook for. I personally use it to keep in touch with friends and some business people. Other than pictures from trips and of my dogs, I don’t post a whole bunch that I worry about sharing the copyright with someone. Whether they want to post the Top 48 things you didn’t know about me on their site or not, I don’t really care. For me, as long as the service remains a way for me to stay in touch with those I want to for free, I am fine with having to check the TOS every now and then.
However, for someone that is posting their portfolio of artwork, be it artistic pictures or website designs, their literary creations, or information they want to remain private on Facebook, a sudden change in the TOS could result in a big problem. If Facebook stated that they were going to sell all the information on the site to commercial groups, this would be a problem. This would mean that someone that was going to sell his or her pictures themselves might not be competing with Facebook to sell the same picture.
The answer to whether this is a problem depends on how you use Facebook. It is always wise, just like with any site, to keep a backup of anything you put on it. It is wise to check the TOS from time to time to see if it has changed. If you are just an average user who uses it like I do, you may decide like I did that the intro to the TOS isn’t that big of deal. However, if you use it for other things, such as showing off your portfolio, it may be wise to consider if you want to keep using it for that reason or not.
Watch for tomorrow’s post where I start to review the meat of the document!
