Michael Scott points us to a story of a woman who not only drove from Maryland to California to go to Facebook’s offices to complain about having her account banned, but (when that didn’t get the account reinstated) then she sued the site for the ban. Facebook says she was banned for harassing others. The woman, Karen Beth Young, says she was just promoting causes she was interested in, and, in doing so, friending lots of people (about 4,000 by the time the account was closed). She claims the ban violated her constitutional rights… and the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The constitutional claim is almost certainly a non-starter. As a company, Facebook certainly has the right to ban pretty much anyone it wants to ban. The ADA claim also seems like it won’t go very far, but as Eric Goldman notes, with so much ADA litigation, there’s always a chance that “a court could have sympathy for the plaintiff.” In this case, she’s claiming that she has a bipolar disorder, and Facebook “does not provide reasonable accommodations to individuals with disabilities,” like her. But that implies the problem was with her mental health issues, rather than her actions on the site. This seems like yet another case of someone saying that if they don’t like something it must be against the law… even when that’s not the case at all.
(And for the record, i made that post BEFORE i knew that her disability was mental.)
Anonymous Cowardsays:
ADA Title III
Facebook is not under any obligation to observe Title II and Title III of ADA because it only applies to Public Facilities.
However, where it gets sticky is if Facebook qualifies under Title III as a “Public Accommodations (and Commercial Facilities)”. It depends if Facebook uses so-called “public data” and has been working to erode the idea of privacy. Is Facebook a “Public Commercial Facility”?
Point is, there have been cases where ADA was interpreted that companies do have to make a reasonable accommodation. Handicapped Parking, at most every store, is a result of some case in the past.
If it really bugs her, she should start a new Facebook using a Facebook Clone Script. If Facebook comes after her for infringement, it would be much more interesting.
As a special educator of 12 years, I’m not aware of any access accommodation for Bi-Polar Disorder. Bi-Polar Disorder does not have access issues, unless she’s arguing that she was banned because she’s Bi-Polar. But it seems she was banned because of her actions, which may or may not have been a result of her disorder, not because of the disorder. Her actions are not covered under ADA.
The rulings that you reference all concern “physical access” to a “brick-and-mortar establishment”. This has nothing to do with that. Ms. Young can access the internet. What Ms. Young is upset about is that Facebook has exercised it’s right, under agreed upon terms and conditions, to ban her for harassment. This has nothing to do with her “constitutional” rights of the ADA
BruceLDsays:
Subject
I know a few people like this…woman.
Having a “mental illness” doesn’t give you the absolute right to harass others. Otherwise, celebrity stalkers would all have the legal right to do so.
Do not be fooled. She thinks she knows precisely what she’s doing. She probably has spent her entire life believing that she knows how to control and manipulate everyone, and she probably also knows exactly how to exploit her “mental illness” in order to try to get the things that she wants. She probably also loves playing the “mental illness” card in order to have her bills paid for by taxpayers. However, the games that she’s playing are not based in reality and are all in her head, and when the “head” world comes in contact with reality she can then conveniently plead “mental illness” card and “oh poor me, I’m sick, boo-hoo. stop discriminating against poor helpless sick me.”
She’s taken it upon herself to wage this manipulation and control game on everyone that she knows and comes in contact with. However, the question remains — she thinks she’s managed to manipulate and control everyone so far, does she have the ability to actually control and manipulate a judge? This is another part of her game.
This is going to be interesting. I’m sure that with all the attention she’s getting, she’s savouring the spotlight and is getting an immense thrill out of believing that she’s controlling and manipulating the public.
BruceLD, do we have the same mother in law? You described her perfectly.
Anonymous Cowardsays:
This is something to watch
No, she may have a claim. Under ADA, she qualifies for protection. The Court needs to determine if it qualifies as a public place, and if Facebook is in effect discriminating by failing to remove barriers, and/or if Facebook qualifies as a “public accommodation” and if the changes are achievable.
….Wow, that broad is just buckets of crazy, isn’t she? Did you see her twenty posts at the bottom of the page? At first I figured there’d be no way to deduce whether that was actually her or not, but no one can fake crazy THAT well.
Bad news: this chick seems like the kind of person who would incessently Google herself. God help us all if she turns up here….
OMG just read the posts you refer to. Have several friends with varying degrees of bi-polar. This one needs to watch her med levels, which is one of the classic stuggles with bi-polar.
IF that Karen Beth Young is the same Karen Beth Young that is in the Google lawsuit… then Karen Beth Young is a freaking lunatic. One can only hope that Karen Beth Young finds the mental health assistance that she appears to need desperately. I hope Karen Beth Young’s lawsuit against Google gets kicked to the curb.
Got to love those who use the “Freedom of Speech” argument. They think it means they can do whatever they want, whenever they want, however they want
And it doesn’t say that whatsoever
Anonymous Cowardsays:
No, it's not a "Freedom of Speech" question.
“Got to love those who use the “Freedom of Speech” argument. They think it means they can do whatever they want, whenever they want, however they want”
Sorry, but this isn’t a “Freedom of Speech” question. She’s petitioned the court for an ADA and accessibility question. And yes, in America you do have the right to petition the court, even for wacky things. Filing pro se for a case like this isn’t too smart.
As for the barriers, I don’t know what she’s asking Facebook to do. But a Forbes article reports “She used the site to help promote her cancer awareness efforts and freely admits that she friended people she did not know in real life but who she thought would be interested in the cancer awareness cause.” This caused her account to be banned. This is weird, because it seems to be exactly how Facebook is used by many PR groups, businesses and bands.
Please ban people with sever bi-polar disorder… even psychiatrists don’t want to deal with them.
Barrysays:
This annoys me and I hope she stays off. Someone hijacked a group that I joined (admin deleted his account presumably) and he started spamming everyone with Scientology-related cause groups. Annoying.
“Someone hijacked a group that I joined (admin deleted his account presumably) and he started spamming everyone with Scientology-related cause groups. Annoying.”
Just forward to 4chan and be done with it….
Anonymous Cowardsays:
“Please ban people with sever bi-polar disorder… even psychiatrists don’t want to deal with them.”
Indeed. I just ran a query against my comment database, and there are no less than 180 comments about something regarding being bipolar. I hope each and every one of those people get banned. Those screwballs. The whole lot of ’em!
Wait, let me revise that to 178. In the 180th comment, someone said that “Kentucky was Bipolar”, and another ass was calling Mike out; saying that he practices “…the usual bipolar claptrap…”.
Let me just say that I have bipolar and I can’t possibly see any need to invoke the ADA with regards to facebook, the thought is ludicrous.
BTW PrometheeFeu, my psychiatrist has no trouble with me and “severe” has two e’s
Anonymous Cowardsays:
Re: 5303 Algonquin Trail
nah, severe’s got 3. sEvErE 😛
Anonymous Cowardsays:
Re: Re: 5303 Algonquin Trail
You guy’s are funny LoL
Anonymous Cowardsays:
What is the real issue?
Hmm. It looks like her main complaint is that she can’t access or export her raw Facebook information.
She has no intent to re-start a new account. I can understand why Facebook would keep that from happening. Still, using ADA as a way to get your information is weird, even a bit wacky. If the nutcases want their info that badly and drive cross-country and then file a case under ADA, there’s a gap. So should data portability be expected and/or legislated?
Anonymous Cowardsays:
A little blurb about ADA in schools vs business
>>As a special educator of 12 years, I’m not aware of any access accommodation for Bi-Polar Disorder.
Special Ed accommodations apply if the school receives federal moneies. Bipolar disorder is considered a disorder and it would need to be documented how it ultimately translates to a learning disability. If your an educator in a charter or private school, it’s possible that ADA accommodations may not necessarily apply. Bipolar disorder is considered a disorder recognized by DSM and it would need to be documented how it ultimately translates into a learning disability for
As for any accommodations in an education environment, it would be worked out in the student’s IEP or Individual Education Plan.
In this situation, it may still fall under Title III. If she has a claim, I believe it would fall under the Office of Civil Rights jurisdiction, and not Ed.gov.
What kind of support/allowances/procedures could facebook make for people with disabilities and how many people with disabilities would tell facebook or want them to know?
What a nutcase. I love the string of comments.. either pure nutcase or well-faked, either way, I can’t wait ’til she finds her way here. You all who mocked her misery and selflessness in turning in that mean and vicious 83-year old man, you’ll get yours. Just wait ’til she’s flooding your inboxes with her vitriol and spite…. oooh, and the lawsuits that’re coming your way! you mean and naughty people.
It is Facebook that is harassing legions of its members. You’re surprised at first that the promoters of a ‘social network’ are so unfriendly. But FB promotes a rigid definition of social on its website. Critical newsletters like this one are unaware of what lengths FB will go to prevent users from assembling friends in the thousands. If you’ve been to the world of serial friend adders, you know this is going on. But to most critics including techdirt, FB is an abstraction, an idea they write about. They’ve never been inside where the FB harassment of its members takes place. Facebook harasses its serial adders by claiming they are harassing other FB members. What form does that harassment take: simply asking to add someone as a friend. Deep in the serial adder universe are thousands with 5,000 friends, but no more than that, many of them from England. When you try to add someone who has asked to become your friend, who is already nearing 5,000, you’re often told “this member already has enough friends!” And thats the end of that. Sometimes you’re told that when the FB member doesn’t have that many friends. New serial adders are finding that since FB allowed all those Brits to reach 5,000, they’ve set a new lower upper limit, at 3,500. FB’s complaints that FB adders are harassing other FB members is a fiction. You ask once, and if there’s no response, that’s the end of it. FB’s charges against serial adders are hypocrisy masking their true intentions. Serial Adders meet other serial adders inside Facebook, reeling from the clubbings meted out by FB. With 500 million members, FB has an interest in keeping the size of each member’s web space, daily keystrokes, and general facilities use within limits. The business about harassing other FB members is a fraud. There’s a critical new film coming out soon based on the minor issue of a contract between the FB Founder and a partner at Harvard. The 26 year old Founder is struggling to keep his own privacy out of bounds in the court case. But the real issue surrounding facebook will gradually become the harassment of members by facebook itself that is going on behind the scenes. FB is already way too big. Facebook has been playing with fire since beginning this venture. The FB management will have to establish more and more limits or their growth will stop. I believe their growth WILL STOP before their numbers reach those of the populations of India and China. Facebook members will grow tired of the growing restrictions. Many of them won’t be marching anymore.
karenbethyoungsays:
Thanks for helping to share a different perspective Jaszmine. This lawsuit was never my intention, but it is important for other issues to be addressed. I will never regret friending a woman who had suicidal thoughts and then turned to hope with the establishment of a mathematical research forum and discussion forum. The contributions on those pages and all of the others included all walks of life. I hope people try to look at things with greater resolve. They should do so, not on behalf of me or anyone else, but on behalf of the children of the next generation. At the very least, they deserve more and they deserve better. We only have one planet and life is way too short.
Best wishes, Karen
Anonymous Cowardsays:
There comes a point where the lyrics
“Always copping my truths
I kind of get the feeling like I’m being used
And now I realize that you never heard
One goddamned word I ever said”
I dont think that anybody can beat facebook in these sues. Facebook has power,but it really not the best social network,there are many others that free of spam and conveniet than facebook,thanks
Comments on “Woman Sues Facebook After Getting Banned”
Facebook banned her for harassing people, so she’s harassing them? She has a sort of a ‘when your only tool is a hammer’ kind of problem.
Re: Re:
When your only tool is a hammer and you yourself have a few screws loose…
Re: Re: Re:
(And for the record, i made that post BEFORE i knew that her disability was mental.)
ADA Title III
Facebook is not under any obligation to observe Title II and Title III of ADA because it only applies to Public Facilities.
However, where it gets sticky is if Facebook qualifies under Title III as a “Public Accommodations (and Commercial Facilities)”. It depends if Facebook uses so-called “public data” and has been working to erode the idea of privacy. Is Facebook a “Public Commercial Facility”?
Point is, there have been cases where ADA was interpreted that companies do have to make a reasonable accommodation. Handicapped Parking, at most every store, is a result of some case in the past.
If it really bugs her, she should start a new Facebook using a Facebook Clone Script. If Facebook comes after her for infringement, it would be much more interesting.
Re: ADA Title III
As a special educator of 12 years, I’m not aware of any access accommodation for Bi-Polar Disorder. Bi-Polar Disorder does not have access issues, unless she’s arguing that she was banned because she’s Bi-Polar. But it seems she was banned because of her actions, which may or may not have been a result of her disorder, not because of the disorder. Her actions are not covered under ADA.
This is not an ADA issue.
Re: ADA Title III
The rulings that you reference all concern “physical access” to a “brick-and-mortar establishment”. This has nothing to do with that. Ms. Young can access the internet. What Ms. Young is upset about is that Facebook has exercised it’s right, under agreed upon terms and conditions, to ban her for harassment. This has nothing to do with her “constitutional” rights of the ADA
Subject
I know a few people like this…woman.
Having a “mental illness” doesn’t give you the absolute right to harass others. Otherwise, celebrity stalkers would all have the legal right to do so.
Do not be fooled. She thinks she knows precisely what she’s doing. She probably has spent her entire life believing that she knows how to control and manipulate everyone, and she probably also knows exactly how to exploit her “mental illness” in order to try to get the things that she wants. She probably also loves playing the “mental illness” card in order to have her bills paid for by taxpayers. However, the games that she’s playing are not based in reality and are all in her head, and when the “head” world comes in contact with reality she can then conveniently plead “mental illness” card and “oh poor me, I’m sick, boo-hoo. stop discriminating against poor helpless sick me.”
She’s taken it upon herself to wage this manipulation and control game on everyone that she knows and comes in contact with. However, the question remains — she thinks she’s managed to manipulate and control everyone so far, does she have the ability to actually control and manipulate a judge? This is another part of her game.
This is going to be interesting. I’m sure that with all the attention she’s getting, she’s savouring the spotlight and is getting an immense thrill out of believing that she’s controlling and manipulating the public.
Blah. I know these types all too well.
Re: Subject
BruceLD, do we have the same mother in law? You described her perfectly.
This is something to watch
No, she may have a claim. Under ADA, she qualifies for protection. The Court needs to determine if it qualifies as a public place, and if Facebook is in effect discriminating by failing to remove barriers, and/or if Facebook qualifies as a “public accommodation” and if the changes are achievable.
There are several cases of interest. One most notable is National Federation of the Blind v Target.
http://www.dralegal.org/cases/private_business/nfb_v_target.php
Re: This is something to watch
What barriers?
Re: This is something to watch
Making a website accessible to the blind is a legitimate ADA issue.
Forcing other users of a website to tolerate the harassment of a bipolar woman is not.
The ADA doesn’t cover giving mentally disabled people carte blanche to harass people and blame it on their condition.
Whew, had to make sure the lady in story wasn’t my mother-in-law!
This appears to the same woman in this story:
http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/news/display_comments.htm?StoryID=97839
Sounds like a common loon with no problem in unfairly attacking anyone she doesn’t like.
Re: Re:
….Wow, that broad is just buckets of crazy, isn’t she? Did you see her twenty posts at the bottom of the page? At first I figured there’d be no way to deduce whether that was actually her or not, but no one can fake crazy THAT well.
Bad news: this chick seems like the kind of person who would incessently Google herself. God help us all if she turns up here….
Re: Re: Re:
Well, we do need a replacement for TAM.
Re: Re: Re:
OMG just read the posts you refer to. Have several friends with varying degrees of bi-polar. This one needs to watch her med levels, which is one of the classic stuggles with bi-polar.
Re: Re:
IF that Karen Beth Young is the same Karen Beth Young that is in the Google lawsuit… then Karen Beth Young is a freaking lunatic. One can only hope that Karen Beth Young finds the mental health assistance that she appears to need desperately. I hope Karen Beth Young’s lawsuit against Google gets kicked to the curb.
Got to love those who use the “Freedom of Speech” argument. They think it means they can do whatever they want, whenever they want, however they want
And it doesn’t say that whatsoever
No, it's not a "Freedom of Speech" question.
“Got to love those who use the “Freedom of Speech” argument. They think it means they can do whatever they want, whenever they want, however they want”
Sorry, but this isn’t a “Freedom of Speech” question. She’s petitioned the court for an ADA and accessibility question. And yes, in America you do have the right to petition the court, even for wacky things. Filing pro se for a case like this isn’t too smart.
As for the barriers, I don’t know what she’s asking Facebook to do. But a Forbes article reports “She used the site to help promote her cancer awareness efforts and freely admits that she friended people she did not know in real life but who she thought would be interested in the cancer awareness cause.” This caused her account to be banned. This is weird, because it seems to be exactly how Facebook is used by many PR groups, businesses and bands.
http://blogs.forbes.com/kashmirhill/2010/09/01/maryland-woman-sues-after-being-banned-by-facebook/?boxes=Homepagechannels
Re: No, it's not a "Freedom of Speech" question.
I agree it is not a ‘Freedom of Speech’ question.
But the complaint is claiming it is (Page 6 line 8)
“Facebook has violated Plaintiffs First Amendment civil rights by …”
Please ban people with sever bi-polar disorder… even psychiatrists don’t want to deal with them.
This annoys me and I hope she stays off. Someone hijacked a group that I joined (admin deleted his account presumably) and he started spamming everyone with Scientology-related cause groups. Annoying.
Re: Re:
“Someone hijacked a group that I joined (admin deleted his account presumably) and he started spamming everyone with Scientology-related cause groups. Annoying.”
Just forward to 4chan and be done with it….
“Please ban people with sever bi-polar disorder… even psychiatrists don’t want to deal with them.”
Indeed. I just ran a query against my comment database, and there are no less than 180 comments about something regarding being bipolar. I hope each and every one of those people get banned. Those screwballs. The whole lot of ’em!
Wait, let me revise that to 178. In the 180th comment, someone said that “Kentucky was Bipolar”, and another ass was calling Mike out; saying that he practices “…the usual bipolar claptrap…”.
In a long list of dumb lawsuits, this might just be the dumbest!
5303 Algonquin Trail
Let me just say that I have bipolar and I can’t possibly see any need to invoke the ADA with regards to facebook, the thought is ludicrous.
BTW PrometheeFeu, my psychiatrist has no trouble with me and “severe” has two e’s
Re: 5303 Algonquin Trail
nah, severe’s got 3. sEvErE 😛
Re: Re: 5303 Algonquin Trail
You guy’s are funny LoL
What is the real issue?
Hmm. It looks like her main complaint is that she can’t access or export her raw Facebook information.
She has no intent to re-start a new account. I can understand why Facebook would keep that from happening. Still, using ADA as a way to get your information is weird, even a bit wacky. If the nutcases want their info that badly and drive cross-country and then file a case under ADA, there’s a gap. So should data portability be expected and/or legislated?
A little blurb about ADA in schools vs business
>>As a special educator of 12 years, I’m not aware of any access accommodation for Bi-Polar Disorder.
Special Ed accommodations apply if the school receives federal moneies. Bipolar disorder is considered a disorder and it would need to be documented how it ultimately translates to a learning disability. If your an educator in a charter or private school, it’s possible that ADA accommodations may not necessarily apply. Bipolar disorder is considered a disorder recognized by DSM and it would need to be documented how it ultimately translates into a learning disability for
As for any accommodations in an education environment, it would be worked out in the student’s IEP or Individual Education Plan.
See:
http://www2.ed.gov/parents/needs/speced/iepguide/index.htm
In this situation, it may still fall under Title III. If she has a claim, I believe it would fall under the Office of Civil Rights jurisdiction, and not Ed.gov.
What kind of support/allowances/procedures could facebook make for people with disabilities and how many people with disabilities would tell facebook or want them to know?
Here’s the correct link
http://www2.ed.gov/parents/needs/speced/iepguide/index.html
get a life lady
move on , not end of the world
Being a moron isn’t a disability.
Yep, she's fekkin' whacked
What a nutcase. I love the string of comments.. either pure nutcase or well-faked, either way, I can’t wait ’til she finds her way here. You all who mocked her misery and selflessness in turning in that mean and vicious 83-year old man, you’ll get yours. Just wait ’til she’s flooding your inboxes with her vitriol and spite…. oooh, and the lawsuits that’re coming your way! you mean and naughty people.
c’mon! thats just ridiculous! Its their site, they do what ever the hell they want to do and ban whoever they want to ban.
ADA
> she has a bipolar disorder, and Facebook
> “does not provide reasonable accommodations
> to individuals with disabilities
Oh, please. The ADA does not require that a company allow mentally ill individuals to harass their other customers.
Harassment
It is Facebook that is harassing legions of its members. You’re surprised at first that the promoters of a ‘social network’ are so unfriendly. But FB promotes a rigid definition of social on its website. Critical newsletters like this one are unaware of what lengths FB will go to prevent users from assembling friends in the thousands. If you’ve been to the world of serial friend adders, you know this is going on. But to most critics including techdirt, FB is an abstraction, an idea they write about. They’ve never been inside where the FB harassment of its members takes place. Facebook harasses its serial adders by claiming they are harassing other FB members. What form does that harassment take: simply asking to add someone as a friend. Deep in the serial adder universe are thousands with 5,000 friends, but no more than that, many of them from England. When you try to add someone who has asked to become your friend, who is already nearing 5,000, you’re often told “this member already has enough friends!” And thats the end of that. Sometimes you’re told that when the FB member doesn’t have that many friends. New serial adders are finding that since FB allowed all those Brits to reach 5,000, they’ve set a new lower upper limit, at 3,500. FB’s complaints that FB adders are harassing other FB members is a fiction. You ask once, and if there’s no response, that’s the end of it. FB’s charges against serial adders are hypocrisy masking their true intentions. Serial Adders meet other serial adders inside Facebook, reeling from the clubbings meted out by FB. With 500 million members, FB has an interest in keeping the size of each member’s web space, daily keystrokes, and general facilities use within limits. The business about harassing other FB members is a fraud. There’s a critical new film coming out soon based on the minor issue of a contract between the FB Founder and a partner at Harvard. The 26 year old Founder is struggling to keep his own privacy out of bounds in the court case. But the real issue surrounding facebook will gradually become the harassment of members by facebook itself that is going on behind the scenes. FB is already way too big. Facebook has been playing with fire since beginning this venture. The FB management will have to establish more and more limits or their growth will stop. I believe their growth WILL STOP before their numbers reach those of the populations of India and China. Facebook members will grow tired of the growing restrictions. Many of them won’t be marching anymore.
Thanks for helping to share a different perspective Jaszmine. This lawsuit was never my intention, but it is important for other issues to be addressed. I will never regret friending a woman who had suicidal thoughts and then turned to hope with the establishment of a mathematical research forum and discussion forum. The contributions on those pages and all of the others included all walks of life. I hope people try to look at things with greater resolve. They should do so, not on behalf of me or anyone else, but on behalf of the children of the next generation. At the very least, they deserve more and they deserve better. We only have one planet and life is way too short.
Best wishes, Karen
There comes a point where the lyrics
“Always copping my truths
I kind of get the feeling like I’m being used
And now I realize that you never heard
One goddamned word I ever said”
Mean something.
Cool quote….
Facebook Account Deletion
Young v. Facebook, Inc.
Account Deletion Lawsuit
Current case pending in California District Court
Write to – mskbyoungblog@aol.com
Current blog information at –
http://facebookaccountdeletion.blogspot.com/2011/02/facebook-account-deletion-lawsuit.html
Facebook Sucks
I dont think that anybody can beat facebook in these sues. Facebook has power,but it really not the best social network,there are many others that free of spam and conveniet than facebook,thanks