How private can you keep your Facebook?
With the mass popularization of Internet use, and our desire for constant information, the notion of privacy has become one of the most important, and most talked about, issues on the table.
With the recent news, met largely with outrage (fake or otherwise), that some employers are requesting social media log-in details from job candidates, we should take a closer look at what privacy rights actually mean between people and private organizations.
The McCourt's in happier times. But, whatever you do, avoid a divorce like this one.
UPDATE 3/28/12: The Dodgers report that former NBA great Magic Johnson’s investment group has just purchased the team from former owner Frank McCourt. The $2 Billion price tag, according to Forbes, qualifies as the biggest profit for an owner on a sale of a team in MLB history. Talk about a turnaround! Read more below to understand what we mean.
People commonly misuse the phrase “divide and conquer.” Often, they use it as “you go one way and I’ll go another,” where one of them goes off to one place and the other person goes separately to another, thereby, theoretically, getting more done.
For the record, what this dangerously misunderstood idiom really means is: “let’s divide our enemies (not ourselves) and conquer their smaller (and thus, weaker) forces.” Coming from the Latin – divide et impera — or divide and rule, the phrase refers to a political, military and economic strategy of gaining (and maintaining) power, by breaking up concentrations of power into pieces that are rendered powerless to the one implementing the strategy.
When lovers and spouses go into business together, they should be especially careful not to divide and conquer themselves. Most couples will not think enough about the possibility of the relationship souring and the implications a romantic break-up has for the shared business. In the most unfortunate of personal and business breakups, the lovers may divide themselves and their business, opening the way for a rival to conquer and destroy the value they created.
Members of the public line up and enter the court house to watch the events of the day
In front of a capacity crowd, and Rick Santorum, yesterday morning the Affordable Care Act finally began its Supreme Court review. Two days in, are events unfolding as expected?
As expected, the justices look set to dismiss the “tax” argument. More surprising, however, is that amid the flurry of constitutional skepticism, Justices Kennedy and Roberts might just swing the other way.
Tax or no tax?
While neither side argued in favor of the 1867 the Anti-Injunction Act — the law that says taxpayers may not challenge taxes until after they become due, the court made sure they heard the argument anyway.
The Anti-Injunction Act says that “no suit for the purpose of restraining the assessment or collection of any tax shall be maintained in any court by any person.” In other words, people who object to taxes must pay first and complain later.
The Justices, however, appeared to agree with the words of Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr: “This case presents issues of great moment…and the Anti-Injunction Act does not bar the court’s consideration of those issues.”
A setting grand enough for the decision of the decade?
As the administration’s Affordable Care Act gets ready for its moment of fame (or infamy) in the Supreme Court, we remind ourselves of the legal arguments at the center of the debate, what’s at stake for government, and more recent predictions of what to expect of the hearing itself.
Here’s just a little of what we read:
The buzz of SXSW in the heart of Austin
Having finally recovered from the madness that consumes the city of Austin during SXSW, we’re back for our roundup of what we saw and who we spoke to. From entertainment lawyers to Startup America, we have a great show — chock full of interviews — in store for you this week.
We begin with David Preston and his views about music as a DIY business — from social media to merch, bands are starting, and should continue, to think like entrepreneurs. Next, Seth Hyman explains the difference between iTunes and Spotify, and why streaming services, while good for promotion, are bad for business. Finally, we interview John Bradley who explains how bands can make money, including a brilliant little idea regarding subscription fan clubs !
After talking about bands as entrepreneurs, we move on to the self-branded entrepreneurs we were lucky enough to meet at the Startup America Start-Up Village. We got a great interview with Scott Case, CEO of Startup America. If you’re at all interested in business, this is one not to be missed.
SXSW round-up done, we briefly discuss some of the other stories that caught our attention this week — from that annoying rule about shutting off electrical devices before take-off and landing, to new Supreme Court guidelines surrounding plea bargaining.
Listen, and please, do tell us what you think.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
The death of teenager Trayvon Martin has provoked a flurry of unanswered questions and calls for a federal investigation
On February 26, unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin was shot by a self-appointed neighborhood watch leader on a suburban street.
Mr Zimmerman, who fatally shot Trayvon Martin, said he killed the teen in self-defense, according to police. Zimmerman, whose family says he is Hispanic, despite being described as white in a police report, has not been arrested or charged in the killing of the black teenager.
The story has provoked a swelling of outrage — especially on social media. Questions have been flying. Most recent is whether or not the justice department can step in and prosecute the killing as a federal hate crime.
The rights of the accused are bolstered in the a contentious 5-4 decision in the Supreme Court
From another 5-4 divided court, it was the liberal arm that this time came out on top redefining the 6th amendment right to counsel. The 6th amendment right to assistance of counsel ” is the right to effective assistance of counsel,” Justice Kennedy said on behalf of the majority.
Legal counsel is required under the rights enumerated in the 6th amendment to the constitution:
The accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial…and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
In this recent ruling, the Kennedy majority ruled that the proper “assistance of counsel” includes the duty of defense lawyers to competently advise and inform their clients of prosecutors’ offers of less prison time for convictions and guilty pleas — in other words, plea bargains.
It may be ok soon to keep your iPad turned on below 10,000 feet
In the New York Times Bits blog, Nick Bolton cheers the hearts of Kindle, iPad and tablet owners who travel (i.e., everyone):
On Monday morning I’m going to drive to the airport, check in for my flight to New York, then head to the airport bookstore for a stack of magazines to read on the plane. I’ll do this reluctantly because I will carry both an Amazon Kindle and an Apple iPad packed full of reading material in my bag.
I need the paper products because Federal Aviation Administration rules state that I cannot use these digital reading devices on an airplane during taxi, take-off or landing.
But this rule might change soon.
The Alabama Shakes at SXSW -- they got rhythm, they got soul, and boy are they doing well this year
At the South by Southwest interactive, music and film festival last week, we saw some lean bands and some lean start-ups. What do we mean?
Everybody who hasn’t been living on Mars for the past ten years knows that the music business has been fundamentally transformed by the Internet — by streams and downloads. For each new way of listening to music on the Internet, there are probably thousands of artists who have seen the livelihood from their art form harder to come by as a result.
So, what can the lean bands learn from the lean start-ups that continue to change the way we consume and pay for musical entertainment? Start-ups like Napster, Pandora, Spotify (and the re-born Apple, of course) brought us free downloads (often pirated and illegal), 99 cent music on iTunes, and free music (with ads) on streaming sites from Spotify to Grooveshark. Yes, the landscape for professional music-makers has changed, and is still evolving rapidly.
With Facebook becoming "Where the world checks in every day," can Yahoo's patent suit change that?
Yahoo shook the tech world this week when it filed a 19 page patent lawsuit against Facebook. Some observers found the timing suspicious, with Facebook on the doorstep of its IPO offering, and the methods repetitive (after all, Yahoo sued Google over a patent dispute in 2004, forcing a settlement to the tune of 2.7 million shares of stock). But suspicions aside, the lawsuit is filed in Northern California, and the business and tech world will be watching closely.
Whether or not this is a legitimate complaint, however, remains to be seen. Certainly, some of the patents described in Yahoo’s suit seem similar to the features Facebook users have long been familiar with. But what exactly is Yahoo alleging here? And what does it mean for investors?
Yahoo alleges that Facebook is infringing on ten patents that deal with social networking and customization. “Facebook’s entire social network model,” the suit suggests, “is based on Yahoo’s patented social networking technology.”
Broken down, nearly half of the patent claims are related to personalized ads, while the rest deal with customization, social networking, privacy, and messaging.
But, it’s the advertising patents that are the most important part of Yahoo’s suit. Although three are described identically in the suit as the “method and system for optimum placement of advertisements on a webpage,” they deal with separate patents held by one of the internet’s oldest giants.
Yahoo’s messaging patent deals with all manner of communication on social networking websites, not simply email in general.
Fundamentally, Yahoo’s concern surrounds Facebook’s ability to generate personalized ads — ads that include which of the user’s friends “liked” the content.
Yahoo alleges that Facebook’s “Like” and “Share” infringe on a pair of existing Yahoo patent that generate a more customized user experience. The social networking claim is similar, with Yahoo alleging that Facebook infringed on a patent which allowed users to share their own information, join groups of like-minded users and share information.
The last claim is about privacy, more specifically privacy controls (an area where Facebook has gotten into hot water before). Yahoo’s existing patent allows users to customize how their information is shared.
Who will stock traders place their bets on?
As far as the timing of Facebook’s IPO, it doesn’t. Nobody is predicting that the world’s most trafficked social network will delay it’s Initial Public Offering in response to the suit. But if Facebook, like Google, settles this suit, we should fully expect the sum to be at least nine digits.
Still, Facebook’s IPO could raise a full 5 billion dollars. So the lawsuit, though serious, will not cripple Zuckerberg who is not backing down.
“We’re disappointed that Yahoo, a longtime business partner of Facebook and a company that has substantially benefited from its association with Facebook, has decided to resort to litigation,” said Johnathan Thaw, a Facebook spokesman.
If history is any guide, the companies will settle this most recent patent-war spat out of court. Yahoo has retained Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, a law firm specializing in tech patent cases who counts Google (ironically) as one of their larger clients, and Facebook’s focus is surely on its IPO, not a long, dragged out patent fight.
What will be interesting is what this suit does to Yahoo’s value with investors. While Facebook’s strategies seem to be working, Yahoo is sometimes seen as rudderless, recently going through multiple CEOs, certainly not growing at the rate of Facebook, Twitter, Google, or other the online behemoths. Will an infusion of cash give them the capability to switch courses and implement new strategies?
That’s a question some investors might answer with their wallets.
Why private companies can — legally — ask for access to your Facebook profileDivide and Conquer: Do Love and Business Mix?Supreme Court Healthcare Debate Shifts from Tax Technicality to Government MandateOpinions Abound as Health Care Prepares for its Supreme Court DebutEpisode 61: The Creepy Apps, Shaky Hands, Music and Start-ups Podcast from SXSW| Home | Privacy Policy | Sitemap | Help | About Us | Careers | Contact Us | Affiliates | ||
|
Copyright 2011 Rocket Lawyer Incorporated RocketLawyer.com™ provides information and software only. This site is not a "lawyer referral service" and does not provide or participate in any legal representation. Use of RocketLawyer.com is subject to our Terms and Conditions. |
 |
|
