We have written previously about the role of traditional discovery roles in “newer” platforms, and how social media content can be discoverable and used in litigation. What about using information from social media in jury selection? U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup says no.
A virtual reality refresher course; Google and privacy concerns; Snapchat visits the dugout; WeChat has some homework for Chinese student; and more …
“Be careful what you post.” This may be the most obvious of social media commandments. Yet, it’s also true that it’s difficult to control the degree of public access to photos and messages posted on a social media platform, and one never knows who may be reading or monitoring your posts.
In their recent Alert on the Senate’s passage of the Cybersecurity Information Sharing bill, colleagues Brian E. Finch, Elizabeth Vella Moeller and Craig J. Saperstein explore and evaluate the U.S. Senate’s approval of legislation (long sought by industry) that would facilitate information sharing (including threat indicators) across government and industry lines in real time, and provide liability protection to companies that participate.
In their recent Client Alert, colleague Catherine D. Meyer examines the prospects of a potential “Safe Harbor 2.0” being hammered out between the EU and United States regarding data transfer schemes.
Additional Source: With Safe Harbor now “Invalid,” Companies Must Change Data Practices
Brand companies have come to view user-generated content as often one of the most effective and authentic ways to advertise their products or services. This is known as “user-generated content marketing.” For example, with the ubiquitous selfie, brand companies have discovered a rich supply of user-generated content. Consider a consumer who takes a selfie wearing a favorite pair of jeans, posts the photo on Instagram, and then tags the photo with #brandname. The jean company sees and likes the photo, re-posting it on the company website. Legal issues? If the consumer or user was hoping to get attention from the brand for the photo and opinions shared online, not at all. This is how many digital influencers get their start. But if the user was not seeking such attention? Then, problems can arise.
We often espouse the value of comprehensive, up-to-date terms of service (TOS) that consistently reflect your current business. And for good reason! Plaintiffs’ attorneys will scrutinize your TOS before helping your users sue your business for “taking advantage” of them without their consent and knowledge. Wilford Raney’s attorneys did the same for Twitter’s TOS before bringing their class action lawsuit against the social media giant for allegedly invading Raney’s privacy (and the privacy of similarly situated individuals) by replacing user-provided hyperlinks with its own “t.co” short link in “private” direct messages.
The decision of Europe’s top court yesterday to confirm that the ruling that the Europe Union(EU)/U.S. Safe Harbor scheme, Commission Decision 2000/520, was invalid has major implications for any businesses transferring data from the EU to the United States.
Your social media content is not only susceptible to hacking; it’s also susceptible to disclosure requests from civil litigants (see our Sept. 14 blog post for more details) and even prosecutors without your consent if they have a warrant. According to a California appeals court, however, federal Internet privacy laws can stop social media companies like Facebook, Twitter and Instagram from disclosing your social media content—at least to criminal defendants during pretrial discovery.
A party’s right to privacy has always been an important and sometimes limiting factor in the resolution of discovery disputes. Social media platforms, which allow users to select the extent with whom they share their network, posts and photos, inevitably create a conflict between what users perceive as “private” content (based on settings used to control who they share information with) and the fact that all content that is relevant to a particular lawsuit may be discoverable. Litigants are finding that in resolving discovery disputes involving social media, the technological platforms may be new but traditional discovery rules still apply. Below are four cases that have helped establish a familiar patch of terrain in a legal landscape that has been remade in so many other ways by social media.
Internet & Social Media Law Blog