RSS
If Sarah Palin Has Someone Else Doing Her Facebooking, Is She A Criminal?
from the according-to-facebook dept
The EFF has been working to make people aware of the ridiculous consequences of the really ridiculous stretching of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act to make such things as violating the terms of service on a website a criminal offense. As part of this, they're now pointing out that rumors that Sarah Palin doesn't write her own Facebook messages and Tweets could mean that Palin is violating the law and criminally liable, since it goes against Facebook's terms of service:
The problem is that Facebook's terms of use prohibit several things that Palin and her ghostwriter may have done. Specifically, it forbids users from:The point, of course, is not to accuse Sarah Palin of criminal behavior, but to point out the ridiculousness of saying that terms of service violations are a criminal offense, as many have been doing (including Facebook) in various lawsuits.
- accessing someone else's account
- sharing their passwords to let someone else access their accounts
- transferring their accounts to someone else (without Facebook's written permission)
- providing false personal information
- "facilitating" or "encouraging" someone else to violate the terms of use
If Palin and her ghostwriter are in fact violating Facebook's terms of use, that probably doesn't seem like a big deal to most people. Just by surfing around the internet, we "agree" to dozens of website terms of use every day, usually before we even read them. These terms can say anything a website operator wants, and often specifically note that they can be changed at any time without notice (or with minimal notice).
But violating a website's terms of use is a big deal, according to Facebook. In fact, Facebook says it's a federal crime.
I have an idea...
From Noodles And Hot Sauce To Funding In 9 Weeks, With Oomf Founder Mikael Cho
5 Things You Should Know About Crowdfunding For Startups
I have a business...
The Talent Wars: Today's Toughest Startup Challenge
Why 50,000 Monthly Active Users Weren't Enough To Stop This Company From Pivoting, With Spun Co-Founder Scott Lindenbaum
I’m looking for policy...
Developers On Patents: Ron Garret of Awun
Policy Resources: Data Privacy & Security
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Where do a website's 'Terms of use polices' being enforced by the federal goverment collide with the government's enforcement of the Americans with Disabilities Act?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
oh...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Are you saying Palin has a disability ?
I'd argue she does but it's a cognitive thing...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Are you saying Palin has a disability ?
I'd argue she does but it's a cognitive thing...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"Let's assume that Palin created her own Facebook account, and then hired Mansour to manage it. So what, right? Lots of high-profile people probably don't update their own Facebook pages. In fact, President Obama's Facebook page explicitly says that it's maintained by Organizing for America."
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
But is that page actually registered to Obama or Organizing for America? If the latter, then wouldn't it be within Facebook's terms and thus within the law?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Srsly!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Srsly!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Not if the actual updating was done by someone inside the company. You think maybe Palin's page is being updated by someone while they're "inside" her (shudder)?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
I'd write more about this, but I'm going to go rewrite the terms of use for my blog so that anyone who even clicks on the url owes me a million dollars.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
@2
THERE'S no excuse and politicians that use facebook er should i say there "staff" should get the boot.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
power of attorney
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
@12
please read the first billion things and bugger off you troll
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Incorrect - Their actions (likely) comply with the Facebook TOS
Sarah Palin's public face on Facebook is a "Page", which by definition can be handled by multiple users. As long as they're not logging into her personal account, which they'd have no need to do, I don't see how this would break the TOS. They can log into Facebook as "Bob" and "Judy", and as long as they have admin rights on her Page then it's not a problem.
If you want to find violators, just look for any small business or church that's on there as a user profile (rather than a Group or Page), which is a clear TOS violation.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Suddenly reminded.
I'm suddenly reminded of an old story mike. Though I don't recall hearing anything. So here ya go. 7,500 Online Shoppers Unknowingly Sold Their Souls Published April 15, 2010 | FOXNews.com
Always been a fav story of mine to share.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Wait a minute....
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
obession
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Shows you how stupid the laws that our country are passing are, doesn't it?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
This article is the "REAL CRIME".
The only CRIME here is mike attempt to gain some more FUD for his adjenda.
The 'other' 'crime' here is mikes ability to say whatever he wants and things to try to confirm his side of the story.
The real crime here is how stupid it is to claim that this is an any way a crime...
Terms of use are not the law, and mike if you do not know that allready, then you im sorry to say has a zero grasp on the real world..
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This article is the "REAL CRIME".
- This topic has been headline news and was discussed on this site at length. If you are interested, read up on it.
http://www.infoworld.com/d/adventures-in-it/criminalizing-tos-violations-519
"The only CRIME here is mike attempt to gain some more FUD for his adjenda."
- And that agenda is ... ?
"The 'other' 'crime' here is mikes ability to say whatever he wants and things to try to confirm his side of the story."
- Exercising ones first amandment rights is now a crime? What a bizarre thing to say.
"The real crime here is how stupid it is to claim that this is an any way a crime...
"
- Agreed
"Terms of use are not the law, and mike if you do not know that allready, then you im sorry to say has a zero grasp on the real world.."
- I think most people agree that TOS should be a contract issue rather than a criminal offense. In addition, I think that Mike has a much better grasp on things than yourself, but that is just my opinion. I suggest that you try to keep up on current events, that way you might avoid looking ignorant.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This article is the "REAL CRIME".
As in the thing that they tried to go after the mother who drove the girl to suicide for!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Add Your Comment