Social media is posing problems for ensuring fair trials in other countries. Currently, Australia has formed a working group to study the issue. The group was formed after some Facebook pages caused concern over an on-going trial. Jane Lee and Dan Oakes examine the issue in “States to Tackle Social Media Laws After Alarm Over Fair Trial for Accused.”
The Cybercrime Prevention Act may have far reaching negative effects on free speech on social media networks. While the new law is meant to be “a measure against hacking, identity theft, spamming, cybersex and online child pornography”, there are fears that it will be used in libel cases which are a criminal offense in the Philippines. For the full story read, “Media Groups, Filipinos Protest Tough Cyber Law” by Hrvoje Hranjski.
While states are busy passing legislation to protect your passwords from employers and schools, Americans still have little in the way of guaranteed privacy on social media sites. The police can rely on a 1986 law that was extended to the internet by the Patriot Act to conduct surveillance on social media sites without a warrant. Declan McCullagh provides more details in his article “Feds Snoop on Social-Network Accounts Without Warrants.”
First responders and law enforcement can find valuable and helpful information on social media. Information from social media can be used in conjunction with other sources of information to help gauge a situation before law enforcement or first responders are actually at the site. New tools are also allowing agencies to sift through the mountain of postings to identify social media posts that may indicate a threat to an individual or society at large. As always, the interest from these “agencies” raises questions of free speech and privacy. Dale Peet’s article “Social Media Analytics Can Aid Law Enforcement, First Responders In Civil Unrest, Disasters, Investigations” provides a thorough look at the benefits to such agencies in maintaining an active role in social media.
Law firms can use social media to gain client insight, to maintain competitive analysis, to gauge their own online presence, and to gain insight into trends and changes in practice and industry. Client and competitive information are the focus of larger firms while smaller firms and sole practitioners tend to focus on information about the practice of law. The wealth of information available makes the use of listening platforms particularly helpful for law firms. Mark Hinkle explains how “Listening Platforms Provide Competitive Intelligence for Law Firms.”
Robbie Farrah is the latest celebrity to receive a tweet from a follower that has been widely labeled as abusive. The attack on the Australian sports figure has sparked a call for a review of current social media laws. Britain has already prosecuted a number of social media cases in which abuse has been directed at an individual through social media. Here are two articles from AAP on the Farrah incident:
“Barry O’Farrell Calls for Review of Social Media Laws”
“Twitter ‘Trolls’ Should Be Punished”
Ever wonder what makes a social media lawyer different from any other lawyer? “What the Heck Does a Social Media Lawyer Do Anyway?” gives a thorough overview to the major issues that a social media lawyer might be involved in. It’s not surprising that in a fast-paced and ever changing environment like social media, a social media lawyer can expect a great deal of variety to come their way.
The Fourth Circuit reports that “the Judicial Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case Management… has proposed model jury instructions regarding electronic technology use during trial.” This is an attempt to give concrete guidelines to jurors in regards to the use of social media during trial. Robyn Hagan Cain’s article “Will Proposed Model Jury Instructions Combat Social Media in Court?” looks at the issue.
The UK High Court recently stated in Chambers v Director of Public Prosecution[2012] that the Internet was a “public electronic communications network.” One of the possible ramifications of this decision is that tweet that you thought was private, is now subject to a much wider range of regulation. This decision underscores that when considering social media, you need to be aware of the global reach and context of your engagement. “United Kingdom: The Twitter Judgment: The Law With Unintended Consequences?” by Chris Watson, Joanne Wheeler and Bailey Ingram looks at the issue in greater depth.
Because Facebook is a US based company, other countries have had difficulty in applying their own laws to disputes over content posted on the social media site. A recent controversy over The Aboriginal Memes Facebook page saw the Australian poster using US free speech protections to avoid Australian anti-discrimination laws. For the full story, read Rod McGuirk’s article “Facebook Pressured to Remove Page Deemed Racist.”