Social Networking Law

Background Everyone is a member of a social

network these days.But what are the legal obligations

that arise out of the use of social networks?

precedent, and legislation in motion promises to keep things interesting for the foreseeable future.

Laws to knowThe two most important statutes

to consider when discussing the legal liabilities and obligations of the social networking sites are:◦Section 512(c) of the Digital

Millennium Copyright Act◦Section 230 of the Communications

Decency Act.

Section 512 (C)It removes liability for copyright

infringement from websites that allow users to post content, as long as the site has a mechanism in place whereby the copyright owner can request the removal of infringing content.

The site must also not receive a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity.

Problems with itFor instance, several content

owners have sued YouTube, the video sharing site, for copyright infringement, and YouTube has claimed a 512(c) defense. Since YouTube is a subsidiary of Google, its future business plan most likely involves serving advertisements according to the kind of video that users view or search for.

Section 230Section 230 of the

Communications Decency Act immunizes website from any liability resulting from the publication of information provided by another. This usually arises in the context of defamation, but several courts have expanded it to cover other sorts of claims as well.

So What? If a user posts defamatory or

otherwise illegal content, Section 230 shields the social network provider from any liability arising out of the publication. Websites that, in whole or in part, create or develop contested information, on the other hand, are deemed "content providers" that do not benefit from the protections of Section 230.

State LawsIn addition to these federal

statutes, several states have enacted or proposed laws that would create requirements for social networking sites, particularly in regards to monitoring the presence and activities of sexual predators using the sites.

ExamplesVirginia, for example, has

enacted a law requiring sexual offenders to register their email addresses and IM screen names, and allows police officer to create mechanisms for web sites to check user information against the resulting database.

Examples (Con’t)The North Carolina state senate

passed a bill requiring that parents and guardians register with a social networking site and verify their ages before their children can sign up for an account. This is to counter the difficulty in verifying the ages of minors, who usually lack credit cards or other sources of information concerning their ages.

More ExamplesConnecticut legislators have also

proposed a bill that would require social networking sites to verify the ages of their users and obtain parental permission for users under 18. Under the proposed law, sites that failed to comply would be subject to fines of $5,000 per day.

Government LawsStatutes:

◦ 17 USC 512(c): a website isn't liable for hosting user copyright-infringing content unless the website receives a notice from the copyright owner and fails to promptly remove the content.

◦ 47 USC 230(c)(1): "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."

◦ Virginia HB 2749/SB 1071 (enacted April 10, 2007): sexual offenders must register their email addresses and IM screen names, and the police may set up a mechanism for online businesses to check these registries.

Important Court CasesCourt Cases:

A.B. v. State, 863 N.E. 2d 1212 (Ind. Ct. App. April 9, 2007) (student posting obscenity-laden comments to a fake MySpace page isn't guilty of criminal harassment because comments were protected political speech).

Doe v. MySpace, Inc., 474 F. Supp. 2d 843 (W.D. Texas Feb. 13, 2007) (due to 47 USC 230, MySpace isn't liable for sexual assaults committed by users against other users).

The Football Association Premier League Ltd v. YouTube, Inc., 1:07-cv-03582-UA (S.D.N.Y. complaint filed May 4, 2007) (can copyright owners bypass the 512(c) notification scheme?)

J.S. v. Blue Mountain School District, 2007 WL 954245 (M.D. Pa. March 29, 2007) (school principal can suspend eighth grader who posted obscenity-laden fake MySpace page in the principal's name).

Layshock ex rel. Layshock v. Hermitage School District, 412 F. Supp. 2d 502 (W.D. Pa. January 31, 2006) (school can punish student for creating a fake MySpace page in the principal's name).

Viacom International, Inc. v. YouTube, Inc. (S.D.N.Y. complaint filed March 13, 2007) (does YouTube qualify for 512(c) safe harbor for user-posted copyright infringing material?).

People’s Rights

#1: The Right to Informed Decision-Making Users should have the right to a clear user interface

that allows them to make informed choices about who sees their data and how it is used.

Users should be able to see readily who is entitled to access any particular piece of information about them, including other people, government officials, websites, applications, advertisers and advertising networks and services.

Whenever possible, a social network service should give users notice when the government or a private party uses legal or administrative processes to seek information about them, so that users have a meaningful opportunity to respond.

#2: The Right to ControlEnsure that users have control over the use of

their data. When the service wants to make a secondary use

of the data, it must obtain explicit opt-in permission from the user.

Users' right to decide whether their friends may authorize the service to disclose their personal information to third-party websites and applications.

Social network services must ask their users' permission before making any change that could share new data about users, share users' data with new categories of people, or use that data in a new way.

#3: The Right to LeaveA user should have the right to delete data

or her entire account from a social network service.

One of the most basic ways that users can protect their privacy is by leaving a social network service that does not sufficiently protect it.

And we mean really delete. It is not enough for a service to disable access to data while continuing to store or use it. It should be permanently eliminated from the service's servers.

The ProblemSocial networking sites enable

users to publish content. Users may not consider

themselves content publishers.Publishing content can create a

number of legal issues.

?? -Questions to Consider- ??

Assume that most users don't know the laws applicable to publishing content. Should they be less liable for their publication choices than more knowledgeable content publishers, like newspapers or magazines?

EULAEnd-User License Agreements -

The End-User License Agreement (EULA, often labeled the site Terms of Service or Terms of Use) sets forth the terms and conditions of Web site use and acts as a Web site's first line of defense to end-user-related claims.

Do you really Read it?

Copyright ViolationsThe owner of a copyright has the

exclusive right to do and authorize any of the following:◦ Reproduce the work, prepare

derivative works, distribute copies of the work, perform the work publicly, and display the work publicly.

◦In the event that any one of a copyright owner's rights is infringed, the law provides for criminal sanctions and civil liability against the direct infringer.

Trademark ViolationsA trademark includes virtually anything—

word, number, name, nickname, phrase, symbol, device, logo, color, sound, scent, or design.◦ that is used by a company to identify its goods

or services, and to distinguish them from goods or services manufactured by others.

The owner of a trademark may generally exclude subsequent users from using that mark or a confusingly similar mark for the same or related products or services.

How does that help?If another company uses a similar

mark on the same products or services, the trademark owner can file a claim for trademark infringement

An owner of a "famous" trademark also has the ability to protect against the use of his mark on any product or service that dilutes its distinctive quality either through blurring or tarnishment of the mark - This is called trademark dilution.

DefamationThe publication of a false

statement about another that causes harm to reputation.

Users may be directly liable for the comments they post, but absent statutory immunities, social networking Web sites could be held liable for publishing those defamatory comments.

??Solution??

Bibliography http://articles.technology.findlaw.com/2007/

Sep/18/10966.html

http://articles.technology.findlaw.com/2007/May/15/10830.html

http://www.ericgoldman.org/Resources/socialnetworkingsitesandthelaw.pdf - Social Networking Sites and the Law

Professor Eric Goldman (egoldman@gmail.com) Santa Clara University School of Law May 2007

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/05/bill-privacy-rights-social-network-users

http://www.w3.org/2011/track-privacy/papers/GagnierMargossian.pdf