- Michigan sex abuse prosecution of dad falls apart; it was premised on ultra-controversial technique of “facilitated communication” with autistic daughter [Detroit Free Press; Ted Frank/Point of Law]
- Do demagogy and hardball work as trial techniques? [Steve McConnell vs. Ronald Miller and Max Kennerly]
- When lawyer-pundits consent to chase cameras [Scott Greenfield]
- Lawyer dad sues middle school girls over Facebook video [Houston Chronicle]
- So-called Precautionary Principle slipping into Restatement (Third) of Torts? [David Oliver]
- U.S Attorney in Maryland didn’t think Lauren Stevens case was strong enough to indict [Sue Reisinger/Corporate Counsel, White Collar Law Prof, Legal Ethics Forum, my Cato take]
- “The SLAPP-Happy Story of Rakofsky v. Internet” [Citizen Media Law, Atlantic Wire (“Meet the Lawyer Who Sued the Internet”), Popehat, earlier here and here]
Posts Tagged ‘Facebook’
Will California regulate social networking?
State Senator Ellen Corbett (D-San Leandro) has vowed to press the idea, the apparent idea being that the government is a better guardian of privacy interests than Facebook and similar services [Jacqueline Otto, CEI “Open Market”] Meanwhile, Geoffrey Manne reports that the feds are itching to start an antitrust or unfair competition case against Google [Main Justice via Truth on the Market]
Federalist Society podcast on Schools for Misrule
Just out: one of the most serious and wide-ranging podcasts yet on my new book, Schools for Misrule: Legal Academia and an Overlawyered America. I’m interviewed by James Haynes of the Society’s Professional Responsibility & Legal Education Practice Group Executive Committee and Baltimore Federalist Society Lawyers Chapter. It’s 53:25 minutes in length and you can listen here. Thanks also to the 100+ Facebook users so far who’ve “liked” the podcast.
Class action lawyers pursue Facebook, Twitter
They’re suing Facebook for allowing minors to “like” products without parental permission, and Twitter over its alleged sending of confirmatory “we won’t send you any more texts” texts.
April 11 roundup
- “Teacher threatens student with defamation suit for complaining about her grades” [Bassett, Calif.; San Gabriel Valley Tribune via TortsProf]
- Rolls-Royce case: “Judge Posner Provides Preview of Wal-Mart v. Dukes Ruling?” [Trask]
- But note Davidoff comments: “Plaintiffs Lawyers Eyeing Marcellus Shale Work” [Legal Intelligencer]
- Massachusetts: for its 85-year-old administrator, is an anti-poverty empire forever? [Lawrence Eagle-Tribune via Zincavage]
- Senate Judiciary advances Rhode Island nominee Jack McConnell by 11-7 vote [PoL, earlier]
- Bonuses for arrests? Way to disgrace a law enforcement system [Greenfield, related]
- “Insulting Your Boss Online Is Now Protected Speech” [AtL, earlier]
- Treasury’s Do Not Shop list [five years ago on Overlawyered]
Murder victim’s parents “would like to move on”
But suing a variety of “nontraditional defendants,” including the City of New York and the owners of the apartment building where the victim’s body was found, may not be a sure-fire formula for doing that. Among the defendants is Facebook, on which a paramedic improperly posted pictures of the victim’s body; while the pics were quickly taken down, the suit demands that Facebook take further remedial steps such as identifying who may have “downloaded” (i.e. viewed?) the images. [CNN]
More courts ordering access to Facebook posts
One judge found it “unrealistic to expect that such disclosures [of personal and private information on Facebook] would be considered confidential.” But does a litigant’s use of smiley faces in online communication really contradict her claims to have suffered loss of enjoyment of life? [Reuters/MSNBC]
“The Facebook deal moves offshore”
“Do we really want to exclude Americans from investing in high-flying American companies?” [Larry Ribstein, Truth on the Market]
“Yes, you should be fired for that Facebook post”
Suzanne Lucas takes a position that may be unpopular but, as I argue at Cato at Liberty, has much logic to it.
Back to the campus speech code wars?
According to FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, an “anti-bullying” bill lately introduced in Congress would alter the definition of harassment in such a way as to give university administrations a strong incentive to punish many forms of controversial student speech, and also press those administrations to monitor students’ use of Facebook and other social media in intrusive ways. I’ve got a new post at Cato at Liberty relaying some of the warnings (welcome Instapundit and Fark readers).