Lawsuit: Smartphone and Memory Card Seized from Man Recording Police

A Washington D.C. man has sued two police officers for seizing his smartphone with which he photographed a police officer engaging in allegedly “aggressive conduct toward members of the public” after another officer hit a man on a motorbike with a squad car.  His smartphone eventually was returned, but was allegedly missing its memory card.

“Citizen journalism” is on the rise due to easy access to recording equipment afforded by smartphones combined with the ability to instantly broadcast observations via social media.  Courts have recognized this trend and protected individuals’ rights to record matters of public interests like law enforcement officers in action.  Still, those attending protests or other events where they are likely to record police officers should take precautions.  Particularly during mass arrests, officers may not be able to separate bystanders and journalists from rioters.  Some helpful measures include backing up the phone’s memory and labeling phones and memory cards with the owner’s name and contact information and, if applicable, an indication that the owner is a member of the media.   Continue reading

Posted in Blogging, First Amendment | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Online Discussion Sites as Public Forums

Two recent cases deal with whether online discussion sites constitute “public forums” qualifying for additional speech protections.

In Backlund v. Stone, Stone, a website host, first allegedly posted lewd pictures of a teenage girl who he falsely claimed was Backlund.  Later, he tweeted a threat to Backlund (by then an adult) to post actual nude photos of her if she continued talking to a friend of his.  She sued him, and his defense that the lawsuit was a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (“SLAPP”) failed because California’s anti-SLAPP lawsuit “does not apply to indisputably illegal communications” like child pornography.

He then filed a cross-complaint for defamation based on comments Backlund made to an online magazine about the experience.  Continue reading

Posted in Defamation, First Amendment | Leave a comment

New Illinois Laws Affect Online Privacy

Recently enacted Illinois laws are intended to protect the online privacy of both public and private employees in the state.

The Judicial Privacy Improvement Act (JPIA) is a legislative response to the 2005 shootings of relatives of a federal judge based in Illinois.  Authorities believe that the shooter was seeking revenge after the judge dismissed a lawsuit.   The statute allows judges to request that their personal information – defined as home addresses, telephone numbers, personal email addresses, Social Security numbers, federal tax identification numbers, checking and savings account numbers, credit card numbers, marital status and the identification of minor children – be removed from websites and public documents.   Those who fail to comply with such requests are subject to civil and criminal penalties.  The statute also exempts such information from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.

Statutes restricting the publication of information regarding public figures always raise First Amendment concerns. Continue reading

Posted in Employment, First Amendment, Privacy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Music Publisher Seeks Removal of Campaign Ads

Music publisher BMG Rights Management has reportedly filed a notice under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) leading YouTube to remove video of a Mitt Romney campaign ad featuring President Obama’s rendition of Al Green’s “Let’s Stay Together”.  BMG is also seeking removal of other clips of Obama singing the 1972 hit.

The Romney campaign has reportedly re-posted the ad to YouTube competitor Vimeo.

The ad features Obama’s singing in the background while displaying headlines from articles alleging that he “stayed together” with campaign contributors by rewarding them once in office.

As Ars Technica notes, the ad’s use of the song is likely a “fair use” exempt from liability under the Copyright Act.  The political ad uses only the small part of the tune that Obama famously sang during a speech earlier this year and is highly unlikely to affect the market for Green’s original recording.   Continue reading

Posted in Advertising, Intellectual Property | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

IL High Court Shoots Down “Deadwood” Fraud Claim Based on Chat Room Romance

A woman who frequented a chat room devoted to the HBO show Deadwood claimed she found herself caught up in her own fictional western drama when another female fan drew her into a long distance relationship while posing as a man named Jesse James and a cast of several other fake acquaintances of Jesse who corroborated “his” story.  The Illinois Supreme Court, however, recently held that the woman could not recover damages suffered from the alleged “fraud”.

The ordeal allegedly led to significant distress, particularly when a “friend” of Jesse told the woman, Paula Bonhomme, that Jesse had attempted suicide and then that Jesse had died of cancer, halting her plans to move in with Jesse in his supposed Colorado home.  After that, Bonhomme visited Jesse’s friend (actually Jesse under her real name, Janna) in Colorado to see Jesse’s favorite sites, followed by a return visit to Bonhomme’s home.

Expenses allegedly incurred by Bonhomme include thousands of dollars in therapist bills, gifts for Jesse and friends, and expenses related to making her home handicap-accessible for Janna’s visit.  The relationship and particularly Jesse’s tragic death – complete with a final love letter to Bonhomme – also led to Bonhomme’s severe depression.

As we previously discussed, the Illinois appellate court upheld Bonhomme’s claim against “Calamity” Janna for fraudulent misrepresentation. The appellate judges debated whether reliance on a chat room user’s representations regarding her identity can be justifiable (justifiable reliance is a key element of the tort) with the majority holding that Bonhomme was entitled to rely on Jesse’s elaborate story.

The reprieve was short lived, however, because the Supreme Court sent the case on to the last roundup. Continue reading

Posted in Defamation, Fraud, Privacy | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Plug or Perish

Entrepreneur Magazine’s Daily Dose recently spoke with Damon Dunn about two recent cases on First Amendment protection for public employees’ Facebook “likes”.  We previously discussed the cases here.

Should a “Like” be protected as freedom of speech? Damon E. Dunn, a partner in the law firm Funkhouser Vegosen Liebman and Dunn Ltd., says public employees can bring retaliation claims based on First Amendment rights because the government employs them. Maybe not when speaking on behalf of their employer as part of their job duties, but certainly when speaking as private citizens.

. . . .

In the sheriff’s department firings, the judge found that the “Like” button was too generic to constitute expressive speech. Had it qualified as speech, the judge still might not have had enough context to ascertain whether the workers expressed an opinion qualifying for protection, Dunn says.  The Library of Congress employee, Dunn says, might be able to show that the page he “liked” was sufficiently specific so that one can infer his opinion involved a matter of public concern.

In cases involving private employees, Damon notes, “likes” may turn isolated statements into protected concerted activity protected by the National Labor Relations Act.

You can read the full Entrepreneur article here.

 

 

Posted in Employment, First Amendment | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Public Employees Sue After Being Fired for Facebook “Likes”

A federal judge in Virginia recently held that “liking” a Facebook post is not sufficiently expressive to warrant First Amendment protection.  One of the plaintiffs in Bobby Bland et al. v. B.J. Roberts alleged he lost his job with a sheriff’s department for liking a Facebook page belonging to the sheriff’s political opponent and characterized the “like” as a “statement of support”.  The court disagreed

[I]n cases where courts have found that constitutional speech protections extended to Facebook posts, actual statements existed within the record . . . Simply liking a Facebook page is insufficient.  It is not the kind of substantive statement that has previously warranted constitutional protection.    Continue reading

Posted in First Amendment | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Prosecutors Entitled to Occupy Protester’s Twitter Account

In a hashtag-heavy opinion, a New York judge “#denied” an Occupy Wall Street protester’s motion to quash a subpoena to Twitter for his account records.

Twitter informed the protester, Malcolm Harris, upon receiving the subpoena and, once he filed his motion to quash, said it would not comply with the subpoena until the motion was decided.

The judge focused on whether Harris – who was arrested during a protest in Brooklyn – had standing to quash a subpoena to a third party, either with or without being granted leave to intervene.  He analogized to cases holding that an individual has no right to challenge a subpoena issued to a bank or telephone company for its records because such records belong to the company, not the customer.  The court also quoted from Twitter’s terms of service Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, Privacy | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Toll of “Facebook Victims” Mounts

Although social media is no longer a new phenomenon, evidently even people who should know better still have not grasped that nothing on the Internet is confidential.  What’s more, there is no sure demarcation between private postings and those that spill over onto your resume like an indelible coffee stain.

Exhibit A is a high level General Services Administration official who recently made news (and got suspended) after pictures of his family’s taxpayer-funded “business trips” to Hawaii and Las Vegas showed up on Facebook.  A post by his daughter reportedly included comments like “The number one BEST part of the vacation. AMAZING.  Snorkeling at Black Rock in Maui” and photos of the official, Jeff Neely, grinning from a hot tub.  Emails also have emerged where Neely referred to a government-funded trip as his wife’s birthday present.  Neely has since developed an intimate acquaintance with the Fifth Amendment.

Next up is the school board member who, when contacted by a reporter about a racist post on his Facebook page, blamed his teenage son.  Continue reading

Posted in Employment, First Amendment | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Maryland Takes Lead in Banning Employers from Demanding FB Access

Maryland recently became the first state to ban employers from requiring prospective employees to let them access their social media accounts.  The law was passed in response to protests after the state demanded corrections officers’ social media passwords to search for gang affiliations.

Even in states where reviewing prospects’ Facebook accounts remains legal, employers may want to think twice before incorporating the practice into their hiring procedures.  Employers who require access to private pages risk losing qualified applicants who have nothing to hide but object to the intrusiveness.

There are also legal risks: for instance, a discrimination plaintiff needs to show that the employer knew he was a member of a protected class.  A potential employer who otherwise would not have known the job applicant’s religion or race is likely to inadvertently find out while scouring social media.  An employer who retains applicants’ or employees’ login information could also be subject to a lawsuit if the information is leaked or used by someone else in the office for improper purposes.   Continue reading

Posted in Employment, Privacy | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Homeless Hotspots Create PR and Wage Controversies

Digital media opens up a world of possibilities for marketers but also can lead to PR nightmares when creative campaigns backfire by losing touch with real-world sensibilities.

The marketing agency BBH recently sparked an online debate by hiring homeless people to carry mobile Wi-Fi devices and wear t-shirts declaring “I’m [name], a 4G hotspot” and listing an access code.

The marketer compared the project – launched during the South by Southwest technology conference in Texas –to street newspapers sold by homeless vendors and said it inspired an “entrepreneurial spirit.”  While critics felt the project “symbolizes everything that’s awful about both South by Southwest and living in America in the 21st century” by turning “people [into] platforms” many of the homeless participants defended it in media interviews.

The New York Times reported that participants were paid $20 per day (as well as the donations they receive from Wi-Fi users) but BBH claims participants were guaranteed a minimum of $50 per day for six hours of work and that, based on the donations so far, the participants’ take will “significantly” exceed that amount.

It is nonetheless questionable whether BBH has complied with minimum wage obligations under the Fair Labor Standards Act.  Continue reading

Posted in Advertising, Employment | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Plug or Perish

The Internet continues to generate localized forums for businesses and professionals to interface with the public and each other.  For example, FVLD Founding Member Vance Liebman was recently profiled by LinkedLocalNetwork, as a “different kind of lawyer”.  Vance also can be viewed discussing recent legal developments on CEOIntroNet.com, a members-only network allowing CEOs to interact with each other online.  The network originated in Philadelphia, expanded into Chicago last year and has other cities planned.  You can watch Vance’s interview here.

Posted in FVLD | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Courts Mull Identifying Anonymous Commenters

Two recent cases deal with the protection of website commenters’ identities, one in a traditional media context and the other dealing with pseudonymous Tweets sought by a grand jury.

In re: Indiana Newspapers Inc. involved a comment to a story titled “Junior Achievement faces questions, audit” regarding financial troubles facing a culinary school construction project. Continue reading

Posted in Anonymity, Defamation, Discovery, First Amendment | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Texas Court: Internet Not Just for Voodoo Anymore

A Texan appellate court affirmed a murder conviction in a 2007 freeway shootout after finding that postings to the defendant Ronnie Tienda Jr.’s MySpace page were properly admitted against him during the trial.   The case shows how far Texas judges have come since the Internet’s early days.  In the infamous 1999 case St. Clair v. Johnny’s Oyster & Shrimp, Inc. a federal judge in the Lone Star State referred to the internet as a source of “voodoo information” and held that

While some look to the Internet as an innovative vehicle for communication, the Court continues to warily and wearily view it largely as one large catalyst for rumor, innuendo, and misinformation. So as to not mince words, the Court reiterates that this so-called Web provides no way of verifying the authenticity of the alleged contentions that Plaintiff wishes to rely upon in his Response to Defendant’s Motion. There is no way Plaintiff can overcome the presumption that the information he discovered on the Internet is inherently untrustworthy. Anyone can put anything on the Internet. No web-site is monitored for accuracy and nothing contained therein is under oath or even subject to independent verification absent underlying documentation. Moreover, the Court holds no illusions that hackers can adulterate the content on any web-site from any location at any time. For these reasons, any evidence procured off the Internet is adequate for almost nothing, even under the most liberal interpretation of the hearsay exception rules . . .

Unfortunately for Tienda Jr., much has changed since Y2K.  Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, Privacy | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Roommate.com Coda: Rabbis Need Not Share Kitchens With Hog Butchers

A federal appellate court held that the roommate matching site Roommate.com is not governed by the Fair Housing Act, disposing of discrimination claims by fair housing advocacy organizations.

The suit alleged that the websites violate the Act by requiring users to create profiles with, among other things, their gender, sexual orientation, and familial status and to provide the preferred characteristics of the roommate they are seeking.  Users could then perform a search that excluded groups that they do not view as desirable roommates.

The website originally sought to have the suit thrown out under the Communications Decency Act, which immunizes it for third party content posted to the site.  In a decision that reverberated throughout the web, at least among lawyers, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that, since the site required users to input the information and then created search mechanisms based on that information, the site itself could be considered a “content provider” and could be liable for its own content.  The ramifications of that decision were still playing out when the case returned to the court on the question of whether the FHA even applied to roommates. Continue reading

Posted in Advertising, First Amendment, Privacy, Section 230 | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment