No, You Don't Get To Sue Facebook Because Your Account Got Hacked

from the sorry,-try-again dept

A guy in Florida has apparently sued Facebook because his account got hacked and started sending out links to a virus. He's claiming that the site failed to protect its users, and he's upset that, even though he got his account back, he lost his photos and had to re-add his friends. He's only asking for $70.50 ($0.30 for every friend he had to re-add), which got a bit of a joking response from Facebook:
"We're very interested to hear how he came up with the figure of $70.50," Facebook spokesman Barry Schnitt wrote in an e-mail to CNET News. "He's not going to get it but we promise to refund all the money he paid to use Facebook. Seriously, we're glad to know how important Facebook is to Mr. Karantsalis but his account was not disabled, is currently active, and he is using it, so I'm not sure what the problem is."
Facebook can afford to laugh since the case appears to have no legal merit. Section 230 clearly protects Facebook from liability in this situation (as it should), and the case law on similar cases backs that up. In fact, Eric Goldman notes that: "If anything, Karantsalis might be on the hook to Facebook for filing such a meritless lawsuit." The guy claims he filed the lawsuit to make a point, but the point he may end up making is that you shouldn't file frivolous lawsuits just because you don't like how things happened.

Filed Under: hacked, section 230, virus
Companies: facebook


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    Anonymous12, 27 May 2009 @ 11:21am

    @Anonymous Coward:
    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" I'm clearly wasting bits of data by doing this,but the text is fairly clear. ESTABLISHMENT. I don't think you've made a good case as to how putting reference to a higher power on money creates a LAW respecting a religion's ESTABLISHMENT. In fact, there is no case, based on the wording of the first Amendment. No offense honestly, but the person making the argument is the one who has to provide a case. This won't be solved in this forum, but your case is severely lacking.

    , and for the record, I never stated that religion and slavery were similar...simply provided an example of where 'traditional' is very clearly not a good thing...

    Right. Well in context, it sure looks the way I said it does. You could have picked any tradition, but slavery is really your first choice? As for your assertion that you didn't intend the comparison as you did, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. You do yourself a disservice however, when feigning ignorance that the comparison might be seen.
    In other words, if you didn't think from the wording that the conculsion I drew would be drawn, you've got some pretty big blinders on. Generally, when making comparisons, a person would choose examples they felt were equal or related. At best, you made a really bad analogy. At worst, you're full of it. Either way...not good.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: I Invented Email
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.