States Look to Take Lead in Tackling Social Media Cyber Harassment
Some states are updating their cyber harassment laws to specifically include social media, but in the end it might still be an uphill battle for victims seeking remuneration from social media companies.
January 09, 2019 at 10:30 AM
3 minute read
At least there's some legal recourse for sticks and stones. Words—at least when it comes to cyber harassment—might pose a more difficult challenge.
Last week, Illinois tweaked its stalking law to specifically include messages sent over social media, allowing businesses, schools and places of worship to ask for a restraining order in the face of online harassment. The move potentially gives the state's beleaguered Internet denizens a leg up over those in North Carolina, where a similar stalking law prohibits stalking by electronic messaging but does not mention the phrase “social media.”
It might sound like a distinction without a difference, but with federal laws shielding social media platforms from liability for third party posts, a series of updated and highly specific state laws might be a victim's best chance at gaining relief or protection.
Ed McAndrew, co-practice leader of the Privacy and Data Security Group at Ballard Spahr, thinks laws like the one in Illinois could at least help clear up any jurisdictional issues states might encounter with regards to cyber harassment. He said while most states do typically have some kind of cyber harassment laws, local police aren't aware that they exist.
“These changes make clearer that technology-facilitated harassment of this type is a violation of the state laws. I think that will hopefully encourage people to come forward,” McAndrew said.
If they do, it probably should not be with hopes for a big win over one of America's towering social media giants. Last year, Matthew Herrick of New York City sued Grindr, alleging that the app is a flawed product that allowed his ex-boyfriend to impersonate him and send strangers to his home and workplace. A court in the Southern District of New York tossed the case out on the basis of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which holds that platforms are not liable for content created by their users.
According to NBC News, the case is scheduled to appear before a federal appeals court, but McAndrew isn't optimistic about its chances. Opening up web platforms to product liability-style suits creates too much liability to go around, he said.
Still, McAndrew does think that a similar approach focusing on flaws inherent to the construction or design of the device itself could be applied to the Internet of Things.
In September, California Governor Jerry Brown signed Bill SB-327, which requires devices that connect to the Internet to posses reasonable security features. It's the first law of its kind in the United States.
“We're actually starting to go down this road of product liability for cybersecurity,” McAndrew said.
If that's the case, then there might still be some crossover into cyber harassment law. Digital threats have begun to extend beyond words, facilitated by the ability to hack someone's thermostat and crank the heat to 100 degrees or turn on someone's bedroom lights in the middle of the night.
“[Internet of Things] devices are now the weapons of choice for domestic abuse,” McAndrew said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1As 'Red Hot' 2024 for Legal Industry Comes to Close, Leaders Reflect and Share Expectations for Next Year
- 2Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 3Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 4Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 5Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250