Twitter TOS: Does It Apply To Celebrities?

Hello Everyone!

I hope all is well.

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote a post on Black Web 2.0 about Twitter's Terms of Service Agreement and whether it applied to Celebrity Twitters. The article spread like wildfire on the web and I was kind of surprised. Read the full article below and tell me what do you think.



Over the past week Hip-Hop artist, 50 Cent, took control of his Twitter account and went on a tweet rampage. He threatened to kill people, posted pornographic images, issued defamatory statements against other artists, and also made racist statements. His Twitpic account was suspended due to the pornographic images. But his Twitter account is still up and running.

If that weren’t enough, last Sunday, Denver Nuggets forward, Carmelo Anthony and his wife Lala got into a Twitter fight with exhibitionist Kat Stacks. Allegedly, Carmelo offered $5000 cash to anyone who would physically harm Kat Stacks. He also allegedly threatened her with physical harm. As a result Stacks has filed charges against Anthony.

Is Twitter becoming the wild, wild west of social networks? Twitter does have “Twitter Rules” in their Terms of Service Agreement that outlines Rules of Content for posted content. Specifically Twitter prohibits:

1. Impersonation

2. Trademark Infringement

3. Violation of Privacy

4. Violence and Threats

5. Copyright Infringement

6. Promotion of Illegal Activities

7. Spam Abuse

But considering 50 Cent’s Twitter account is still up and running and other Tweeters are also guilty of violating Twitter’s Rules of Conduct, does Twitter actually enforce these rules? Twitter states “we do not actively monitor user’s content and will not censor user content, except in the above limited circumstances.” Twitter basically covers themselves with this statement and considering the millions of users on Twitters, it makes sense. But is Twitter motivated to take action against violaters, especially if they are celebrities and have millions of followers like 50 Cent? The rapper even bragged that @ev (Evan Williams), co-founder of Twitter, gave him a call and said he was the best thing that happened to Twitter. This may or may not be true, but it is an interesting statement.

Carmelo Antony’s Twitter account was deleted but we don’t know if Twitter deleted his account or the NBA forced him to delete his account. His statements to Kat Stacks are a federal crime and if proven he did in fact make the statements from his computer or mobile device, he could potentially face jail time and suspension from the NBA. Carmelo and his wife are now claiming his Twitter account was hacked and he did not send the criminal tweets.

Whether Twitter enforces its Rules of Conduct are debatable. However, when Tweets are written and sent, they are forever in cyberspace regardless of whether the user deletes the tweet or their Twitter Account. Tweets are public records and can be used as evidence in any civil or criminal litigation. I previously wrote a post on the Do’s and Dont’s of Twitter. Many of those Do’s and Dont’s included several of the above Twitter Rules. But regardless if Twitter kicks violators off Twitter or not, engaging in “Dont’s” can get you sued, jail time, and fines.

So be careful what you tweet. When in doubt, just don’t.
Category: Featured, Social Networking | Tags: 50 Cent, black web 2.0, Civil Litigations, Criminal conduct, Defamation, Federal Crimes, IPLAW101, Kat Stacks, La La and Carmelo Anthony, NBA, Phillips Givenslaw, Pornography, terms of service agreements, Threats, twitter, Twitter Rules of Conduct, Violence

Blogher 2010: Mastering Intellectual Propery Law on the Internet Session Recap

Hello Everyone:

As some of you know, I co-presented a presentation at Blogher 2010 entitled Mastering Intellectual Property Law on the Internet and other legal issues in cyberspace. My co-presenter was Wendy Seltzer of the blog ChillingEffects.org. She is a Berkman fellow and law school professor. She specializes in copyright, fair use, and other legal issues in cyberspace such as first amendment and privacy issues.

We covered four main topic areas. They were: Protecting your own Intellectual Property, Respecting others Intellectual Property, Privacy, and Defamation on the Internet. We tag teamed all topics and had so many detailed questions we actually ran over our allotted time. Apparently this is a much needed topic for social media enthusiasts.

When discussing protecting intellectual property, we specifically covered how to protect copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets. We also discussed why owners of these types of intellectual property should protect them. One reason is because owners of intellectual property can lose out on valuable royalty or licensing income if not protected. No one wants to lose money!

Next we discussed how to respect others intellectual property and not infringe their works. We explained when it is permissible to copy without permission in certain Fair Use circumstances. Wendy explained in detail proper linking, the DMCA take down procedure, and creative common licenses.

I then gave a general overview of Privacy issues. I explained the need for every website or blog to have a basic privacy policy which is a disclosure document. A privacy policy protects the owner of the site and the user. Read my article on Privacy policies here.

Lastly, we both touch on Defamation and how to avoid defamation on the Internet. We also discussed the Communications Decency Act which states website owners or internet service providers are not liable for defamatory statements left by visitors.

If you are interested in seeing the notes or hearing the audio from this presentation, please click here.

The Importance of a Website Compliance Program

Hello Hello!

I have been somewhat absent on this blog but that is going to change. My goal is to recommit to posting weekly on this blog. Thank you for continuing to read and visit this blog.

Today I am going to discuss the importance of an effective website compliance program. Website owners should ensure employees and users of their websites are not exposing them or their companies to liability by posting items that are illegal, defamatory, or infringing. A perfect example of a website that did not have an effective website compliance program is Blogetery.com. Two weeks ago, web host, Burst.net, shut down the Blogetery website, a platform that hosted 70,000 blogs. Why? The FBI contacted Burst.net and informed the company that an FBI investigation revealed the site's server contained terrorist threats and Al-Queda activity. There was only one blog in the platform that engaged in the illegal activity, but Burst.net chose to shut down the entire site because it violated the Terms of Service Agreement. Blogetery.com could have avoided termination of its services/website if they were ensuring all blogs posted on the blog were complying with applicable laws and Terms of Service.

What does a website compliance program look like?

A website compliance program involves content scanning and analysis to help ensure compliance with privacy rules, industry regulations, (such as HIPAA) as well as internal Web quality standards such as defamatory statements and infringing activity. A company can hire one or two people dedicated to ensuring all content posted is in compliance or a company can purchase website compliance software that will do the job.

For example, a website such as Blogetery.com, which hosted 70,000 blogs, should install website compliance software to ensure compliance. It would take an army of individuals to effectively ensure a site that large was in compliance. However, a smaller website or blog, can simply have one person dedicated to identifying potential liable information and removing it immediately. This person may also have the authority to issue the offender a warning and/or permanently block the offender from the site.

There are several website compliance software programs available. They can be programmed and tailored to fit each website's needs. Here are a few:

IBM Rational Policy Tester

Trace Security, Website Compliance Audit

Does your website have some sort of compliance program or procedure in place?

Twitter "Moldy Apartment" Libel Lawsuit

Hello Everyone!

I have been very busy traveling and speaking on protecting IP assets and legal issues in new media. This week I wrote an article on the Twitter "Moldy Apartment" lawsuit. If you have not heard, a Twitter user stated on Twitter that a management company had moldy apartments. The management company sued for libel and of course this story received massive attention. The issue here is whether the statement was factual or false. Read my take on this lawsuit here. If you like please join the discussion.

Have a great day!

Defamation and Social Media

Hello!

Defamation is becoming a huge issue on social media sites such as Blogs, Twitter, and Facebook. Recently there have been some notable cases involving defamation litigation. Specifically, Courtney Love is being sued for making an alleged defamatory "tweet" about a famous designer.

What is a defamatory statement? The law defines defamation as spoken or written words that are false and or misleading that gives the defamed a negative image and or hurts their reputation. The defamatory statement must be made to someone other than the person subject to the defamation. The law also differentiates between written and oral defamatory statements. Written statements are called libel and oral statements are slander.

Who is liable for libel statements made on blogs or social networks? Are owners of these sites liable for defamatory statements made by users of their sites? Or is the person who made the defaming statement solely liable?

Under the Communications Decency Act, an owner of a social networking site is not liable for the defamatory statements made about another on their site unless the site owner actively engages in the gathering of information from the user that leads to the defamatory statement. An example of this type of behavior is a blog owner soliciting comments from users on whether they dislike Celebrity X and why? The comments leads to defamatory statements about the celebrity and the blog owner supports, encourages, and endorses the libel statements.

Of course, anyone who makes a defamatory statement about another on any social network is personally liable for his or her statements.

How can owners of social networking sites and users of these sites protect themselves from defamation liability?

Owners should discourage and immediately remove potentially defamatory or libel statements from their sites. Owners should never enter into any dialogue with a user concerning a person's reputation. In addition, including a disclaimer or statement regarding your removal of any defamatory statements on your site, may potentially discourage users from engaging in such behavior. Plus it puts the public on notice that you do not endorse defamatory conduct.

Users of social networking sites should avoid personal opinions or negative comments that are not 100% factual and or statements that may harm a person's image or reputation. The best advice I have ever received is "if you don't have anything positive to say, then don't say nothing at all." One negative comment could cost you tons of money and heartache.

I welcome your thoughts!