9

Is this illegal? No, subject to some possible narrow exceptions discussed below. Do the social media companies have a duty under the First Amendment to not censor users? No. Indeed, usually, there is greater liability exposure for failing to censor content, for example, by failing to honor a "take down notice" under Title II of the Digital ...


6

GDPR compliance is a matter between every customer and the business, not between different customers. How did you get the other customer's contact details? If they were provided or leaked by the business, that might be a failure of the business's obligation as a data controller to protect the personal data they are processing, possibly even a data breach in ...


5

I presume from the fact that you mention "fair use" that you're interested in United States law. In that case, the answer is a clear-cut "no". 17 USC 107: Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that ...


4

TL;DNR: Blackmail seems straightforward, but it's not. It depends so much on the specific facts of the case that we need an expert to find out how this case would turn out. A somewhat longer take: Blackmail is a funny thing. It seems simple and straightforward until you start thinking about it. Take the classic blackmail scheme -- the cheating husband. ...


3

Social media platforms are not publishers under UK law (at present), as such, they are not legally responsible for the content they host providing that there is a mechanism for alerting them to infringing material and that, when alerted, they remove it. As to "why", that is a political question.


3

We don't have a lot of details, but if you're in the United States, the answer is probably yes. There are rarely any meaningful rules of evidence in student misconduct cases, so pretty much anything can come in. There may be some small difference in the answer depending n whether you're dealing with a public university or private, but in either case, I can'...


3

Posting a photo does not require permission of the subject as long as the photo was taken lawfully (i.e. taken with the subject's permission). Was the photo taken with their permission? It probably was taken with their permission, unless a reasonable person would have expected privacy in their position. Some examples of photos taken without the person's ...


3

I can't find any law that would prevent an employer from requiring this. Under current Florida law, an employer can even demand passwords and access to an employee's social media accounts. A bill was proposed to prohibit this, but it hasn't passed. Generally, an employer can require anything they want as a condition of employment, as long as it is not ...


3

“Fair Use” is a (US) copyright concept: it has no relevance to Trademarks. A Trademark may also be subject to copyright, for example, the word Google is a trademark but it is not copyright - the Google logo is both a trademark and subject to copyright. You infringe a trademark when you use it in such a way that people think that your goods and services are ...


3

According to Julian Assange, CNN committed a crime violating § 135.60 of the New York criminal code "coercion". Reddit, while being a private company, is still considered a public forum. Anything said on these sites can be used against you if your actually identity is discovered.


3

You'll note that Maryland governor Larry Hogan was sued and ended up settling over Facebook deleted comments and blocks. And a judge ruled that Trump can't block comments on Twitter. So it seems there's an evolving consensus that politicians can't simply block or delete social media comments for differing viewpoints.


3

Yes. Content not created by a user is not protected by Section 230, and if the platform agents or employees begin to substantively edit content, the platform becomes a co-author rather than merely a platform for that content.


2

Almost every site does this. See, for example, the bottom of your screen and read the terms and conditions linked in this text: user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required


2

Yes, it is fine, but you are required to write down why. I think you can mostly base the processing on Article 6.1b GDPR; b) processing is necessary for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is party or in order to take steps at the request of the data subject prior to entering into a contract; When someone registers there is a mutual ...


2

There is such a law, the Smith Act: 18 USC 2385 (Advocating overthrow of Government), which says in part Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or ...


2

The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act in the us (18 USC 1030) criminalizes unauthorized access to computers. The courts have viewed the statute narrowly, so that violation of Terms of Service when a person is authorized to access does not create "unauthorized access". What you are talking about is probably actual unauthorized access. Breaking into a computer ...


2

When you signed up for an account at Facebook or any of their related companies, you agreed to their Terms of Service by clicking the "accept" button; that's a binding contract. You agreed to their data sharing policies, which are outlined here Data Policy (which can vary due to jurisdiction, i.e. GDPR), and include data collection of IP addresses, device ...


2

I think the above analysis misses the mark in some respects by overplaying the significance of whether you took the picture lawfully and underplaying the significance of what the photo shows. While you're of course in a better position if you didn't commit a crime to obtain the photo, publication could still expose you to a privacy-invasion claim, either ...


2

Impersonating someone else on Facebook is against Facebook's TOS. It could also be a criminal offense, depending on local/national jurisdictions. Someone who is being impersonated on Facebook can file a complaint with Facebook; see How do I report an account or Page that’s pretending to be me or someone else? | Facebook Help Center | Facebook. If it is a ...


2

Twitter, as the owner of the site, can make rules for how users will conduct themselves. It has delegated extensive authority to account holders to moderate comments posted to their accounts, including the ability to delete comments for any reason or none. This effectively allows the account holder to make rules, within the very broad limits of the Twitter ...


2

Is this legal or violating the TOS of instagram? It’s violating the terms. But isn't it implied consent by using our hashtag? First, nobody owns a hashtag. Second, no.


2

A fake post in the sense of one that appears to be a Twitter or Facebook post (or a post on some other well-known social media site) but is in fact nothing of the sort, might be an infringement of trademark rights. Presumably such amn imitation would display the logo and other trademarks of the site being imitated, without permission, and in a way likely to ...


1

In case 1, where the use who posts the image owns the rights to it, s/he has the right to share it with anyone that s/he wishes, and the right to create or publish a modified version, and the right to provide the image to any application that s/he wishes, including a third party application. Nothing in the Instagram Teems of Use purports to restrict these ...


1

In the US, there are no such laws which restrict what a person can see. You have no recourse against the sender. You might be (remotely) able to get the service to expel the friend whom you suspect of being instrumental in the sender seeing your material, if whatever the friend did was contrary to the terms of service. Read the section "How You Can't Use ...


1

You are violating copyright law if your posts include direct copies of the material, and not if you link to the graphics hosted elsewhere, or don't even have pictures. However, you you have permission from the copyright holder to directly post the drawings, that is not a violation. Otherwise, you are free to say whatever you want about the art work, at least ...


1

Obviously I am not the author of these drawings... If you are posting on Instagram creative material by other artists - drawings, photographs, illustrations - that you did not yourself create, then you are 1) violating Instagrams Terms of Service, and 2) infringing on the copyright of the artists of that work. 1) The Instagram Terms of Service says (...


1

The legality of "sharing" ultimately depends on technical details of the platform, but the simplest answer is that sharing a link is not copyright infringement. If all you provide is a link to a file and the platform just distributes that URL (does not copy the content), this is not copyright infringement. This is true even if the file "out there" is ...


1

I'm not a lawyer but pretty sure this is illegal in some countries which is problematic since you said that you plan to operate globally in the future. The first subparagraph of § 87b Urheberrechtsgesetz in Germany is: Der Datenbankhersteller hat das ausschließliche Recht, die Datenbank insgesamt oder einen nach Art oder Umfang wesentlichen Teil der ...


1

It probably has to do with the sophistication and risk tolerance of the organization in question. Larger companies will typically have bigger legal teams that can better identify truly risky behavior. For example, Executive Order 13685 blocks certain trade with Crimea: Section 1. (a) The following are prohibited: ... (iii) the exportation, ...


1

Facebook's Terms of Service states that (my emphasis) 3 Safety You will not collect users' content or information, or otherwise access Facebook, using automated means (such as harvesting bots, robots, spiders, or scrapers) without our prior permission. You say that your App DOES use automation to help real users interact with other people'...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible