Skip to main content

Social media

 Social media 

Social media is a fast-growing circuit. It helps to connect people from one corner to another. Social media not only helps to connect but it helps people to gain some new knowledge as well as shop online in the new era with technological advancement this has grown leaps and bounds. 

Social media means websites and applications that enable users to create and share content or to participate in social networking. This might be increasing but with this, the crimes related to censorship  

India is facing this situation where there is a lack of technology to find out the culprit. The past few years have seen an explosion in internet usage in India with approximately a tenth of the country's population now considered active internet users.   The problem lies with the legal framework governing the ecosystem in India that has captured public attention over the last two years, with media focusing particularly on censorship and surveillance.

There are some social media laws, that involve legal issues related to the user-generated content and the online websites that host that content. Corinne Chen an attorney in New York, explained that it is an expansive terrain since it covers the internet and social media.

Social media law can be both criminal and civil law at the state and the federal level. eg; to prohibit the posting of the content and those that broaden or restrict privacy rights for employees. 

In recent times, many cases have come up related to social media  as the admissibility of social media evidence ;

  1. Social media authentication; when admitting social media as evidence in the court is considered as authenticate or not. 

Case; Maroccanoil  v. Marc Anthon Cosmetics, in this case, the federal court said that Facebook screenshots are inadmissible when the defendant in the trademark infringement action offered the screenshots without supporting circumstantial information.  This showcases that any type of social media evidence isn't admissible in the court as they are not authenticated enough.

  1. Request for production; in the course of proceeding, the parties can ask for the production of some type of account or information. This can be considered against the right to privacy 

Case ;  Thompson v. Autoliv Asp ,INC. in this case, there was a motor vehicle accident. The defense asked for some pages of the plaintiff's Facebook age, to which they only received 51 pages further the defense requested to videotape browsing of the site which was denied by the court. The court held that a lawsuit can not be the ground to cover someone's entire life.

  1. The expectation of privacy; privacy has always been in question when it comes to the admissibility of social media evidence.

Case; Richards v. Hertz, in this case, the plaintiff alleged some personal injuries. The defense saw the picture of the plaintiff skiing and requested urge the court allow access to the site. The court denied such a request.

        Social media have grown leaps and bound. Social media has its way to keep a tap on our regular lifestyle. But still considering them as evidence might be considered as an invasion of privacy.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more