140

You say: the school expects him to create a public Twitter account, with his real information, in order to promote the program & the results of the program. This is a cut-and-dried case of compelled speech. Your son is being required to say certain things in public in order to pass this course. The Supreme Court has decided that students do not "...


49

I think some of the answers are good but taking a long approach. Much easier approach: Student: "I can't do the assignment." Teacher: "Why?" Student: "Twitter won't let me sign-up" Teacher: "Why?" Student: "I don't agree to their Terms of Service" Teacher: "You have to agree to it to use the site and will need to do that to pass" Student: "Will ...


29

I would suggest reaching out to the ACLU in addition to the EFF on the matter as the school could be in violation of multiple constitutional rights by compelling the student's participation on Twitter. There are two notable First Amendment violations, the first in the government compelling speech in the public forum with his personal information available (...


10

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 ...


8

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 ...


8

This will be a very likely legal victory, but a potentially hard legal path. This is wrong for a bunch of factors. The downside is there's a lot of interesting legal exploration to do here, and some "new law" has a chance to emerge (i.e. influential case law), and it would take years to litigate it all. The good news is, you only have to win on ...


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 have personal experience dealing with something similar. What I found was that the school district has policies, which are usually drafted from a boiler plate (which often originates from a subscription service) and then perhaps tweaked before being adopted by the Board of Education. There is generally an IT consent form (e.g. “Student Acceptable Use ...


4

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 ...


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. ...


4

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.


4

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.


4

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.


4

A school district can have a policy requiring students to sign up for computer accounts of some ilk. There is no constitutional right to be free of Twitter. Schools have broad latitude to require students to do things that some parents do not like, in aid of some stated educational goal. Generally, your recourse is political (lobby against the program, vote ...


4

The First Amendment states Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. It thus protects such videos. An analogous situation is ...


3

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 ...


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

“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

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

You can be fired in Canada for criticizing the employer, or even complaining about the weather. There is a distinction between Termination Without Cause and Termination With Cause. In the latter case, which requires a serious reason related to the employee's conduct, you can be fired without advance notice and with no severance pay. If the employees actions ...


3

In a democratic country, they cannot be sued successfully. Freedom of speech is for the citizens, not the government. And it is a company doing the banning, not the government. So the situation is totally different in two significant ways. (That assumes laws not too different from the USA. Obviously a country might have laws that make it illegal for ...


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

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'...


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

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

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

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 ...


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