LEGAL IMPLICATIONS for chatting with “friends” on social networking sites?

What do you think of a recent court ruling that forced a man suing over injuries from a car accident, to answer questions about the content on his Facebook page that is off limits to the public?

I was just reading Toronto Star legal writer Tracey Tyler’s article Facebook user poked – by the courts, that said that Justice David Brown of Ontario’s Superior Court of Justice did just that.

Leduc (the man sueing) must now answer questions about what his Facebook page contains, because…

“Facebook profiles are not designed to function as diaries; they enable users to construct personal networks or communities of `friends’ with whom they can share information about themselves, and on which `friends’ can post information about the user”

It will be interesting to see how this turns out.Will the decision be overturned? Did Leduc or his friends post pictures that prove that “accident in Lindsay in 2004 lessened Leduc’s enjoyment of life”? Is it right to use his (or his friend’s) pictures against him? What do you think?

One thought on “LEGAL IMPLICATIONS for chatting with “friends” on social networking sites?”

  1. Privacy or justice?

    We all know that once you publish something in print or more so electronically, you have ZERO control over who sees it and acts on it. If he's proved to be a liar, never mind the moral issue, isn't he going to feel stupid for publishing something that incriminates him… or is one of his 'friends' squirming in their seats right now?

    Electronic privacy law is a hot topic now, but in my mind anyways, justice was served by allowing this woman to prove this man a liar – if in fact he is, and isn't that what it's all about?

Comments are closed.