Category: Internet law

• Lawsuit Filed to Unmask Anonymous Penis Sender

  

  Last week, Melody Lenox filed a lawsuit in Dallas County, Texas for a court order to determine who sent her a penis-shaped gummy candies via Dicks By Mail.

  At first, this sounded like an extreme reaction. If someone spent $15 to send me candy via mail with a note that says “Eat a Bag of Dicks,” I’d probably laugh, and then eat them – because gummy candies are delicious. However, learning about the larger context of the situation, Lenox’s reaction seems reasonable.

  The Bigger Story
  Lenox is the head of human resources at Axxess Technology Solutions, a position that requires her to be the bearer of bad news to some employees. Prior to this unsolicited dick package, she allegedly had her car keyed and was the target of fake posts on Craigslist. She asserts that these acts are related.

  In this context, pursuing a harassment lawsuit against the sender of these candies (assuming the same person(s) are committing these acts), makes sense. Ongoing acts like this are unacceptable.

  What I suspect is happening in this case is Lenox filed a lawsuit against John Doe and then requested a court order to get the purchase information from Dicks By Mail. (Many companies have privacy policies that state they’ll protect your information unless they are required to provide it in response to a court order.) While it’s easy to key a car or post a fake Craigslist post anonymously, sending candy by mail requires a credit card, which will eventually lead to a real person – the suspected harasser.

  Unmasking the Anonymous
  Anytime you do something anonymously, be prepared to be unmasked. When you act anonymously online, there’s always a digital paper trail that shows the IP address of the internet connection used, the GPS location of your smartphone, the profile information of an anonymous website or social media profile, and in this case, the credit card information used for the transaction.

  There have been plenty of situations where a person lost their job or found themselves in a lawsuit when their anonymous persona was unmasked. Using the internet is not an effective way to maintain your anonymity – unless you have mad skills in this area. (And if you have to question whether you have mad skills, you don’t.)

  More about Dicks By Mail

  

  Dicks By Mail is a hilarious way to send a light-hearted sugar-filled message. The company does not endorse the use of their service to threaten or bully someone. If you receive Dicks By Mail it should only be for two reasons: “[S]omeone thinks you’re either a dick or wanted you to laugh!”

  And they do caution people who come to the site with vindictive intent: If you are sending this with the intent to ruin someone’s day, then maybe it’s you who needs to eat a bag of dicks.”

  In case you were wondering, yes, Dicks By Mail is a U.S.-based business, so if you want to stimulate the economy while telling your elected officials what you think of them, this may be a creative way to send a message (though, it may not be effective since they won’t know it came from a constituent).

  The laws that apply to the internet are constantly evolving as the courts are encountering more internet-based problems. If you want to connect with me to keep up with my thoughts about social media law, you can contact me directly or connect with me on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, or LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that is available only to people on my mailing list, by subscribing here.

  January 3, 2017

  •

  Ruth Carter

  •

  Internet law

  Arizona social media attorney, being anonymous online, Carter Law Firm, Court order for personal information, Dicks by Mail, internet harassment, internet privacy, Melody Lenox, Penis candy, Phoenix internet lawyer, Ruth Carter, Suing John Doe, Unmasking the anonymous, VenJuris

• Using Movie Clips in your YouTube Videos

  

  Some people incorporate clips from mainstream movies into their YouTube videos. Depending on the circumstances, it may or may not be legal.

  Movie Studio’s Rights
  Whoever owns the copyright in the movie has the exclusive right to control where the work can be copied, distributed, displayed, performed, and what derivative works can be made from it. This applies to the whole film and clips of it. The copyright owner is also the only one who can come after someone for copyright infringement. So, if they don’t know or don’t care about what another person is doing with their work, that person will never get in trouble.

  What about Fair Use?
  The powers that wrote the Copyright Act understood that existing artwork inspire other artists to create new works. To that effect, they created the fair use provision of the copyright law (17 U.S.C. § 107 if you want to look it up).

  The fair use law allows a person to use another’s work for the purpose of criticism, commentary, research, and teaching – often in ways that thoughtfully add to the existing work. The law provides four factors that the court may consider in determining whether a use is copyright infringement or fair use (which I turned into the handy mnemonic device PAIN), but these are merely points of consideration.

  The fair use factors are not a mathematical equation to use to get a definite answer. The only way to know for certain if a use qualifies as fair use would be if there’s a lawsuit and the court makes a ruling on the matter. However, if the use of another’s work is transformative and doesn’t become a substitute for the original work in the market, there’s a good chance it’s fair use.

  One way to avoid the issue about whether using a clip is copyright infringement or fair use, would be to get permission to use the clip by purchasing a license. Without this permission, there’s a risk that the copyright owner will order your video to be removed until the offending clip is removed.

  Using a Movie Clip – Good Idea or Bad Idea?
  If a client asked me about using a movie clip for a purpose other than criticism, commentary, as a teaching demonstrative, or an original compilation with other works, I’d challenge them to explain why they want to use that clip and what value it adds to their work. I’d also encourage them to at least do their homework on the copyright owner to see if they have a track record of going after people who use clips of their work without permission.

  Ultimately, I respect my clients’ choices, but I try to help them make informed decisions about the risk they’re accepting when they use another’s work. Copyright and fair use situations are always complicated and always depend on the specific circumstances. If you want to connect with me and hear more thoughts about copyright, you can contact me directly or connect with me on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, or LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that is available only to people on my mailing list, by subscribing here.

  December 20, 2016

  •

  Ruth Carter

  •

  Intellectual Property, Internet law

  Arizona intellectual property attorney, Carter Law Firm, Copyright infringement, Fair Use, Internet Law, movie clips, PAIN, Phoenix copyright lawyer, Ruth Carter, social media law, VenJuris, YouTube rules

• Should your Child have a YouTube Channel?

  

  I recently spoke at a family law conference on how to get usable evidence from social media. Afterwards, a woman approached me and said her 11 year-old child asked to have YouTube channel and several his friends already had channels. She wasn’t sure if she should let him and asked for my input.

  Google Says No
  The easy and obvious surface-level response to this question is Google (which owns YouTube) doesn’t allow anyone to have an account that is under 13 years old. (That’s the rule for all social media accounts in the U.S., by the way.) However, there’s nothing wrong with a parent creating a separate Google account to use with their child to create content for a YouTube channel.

  Teachable Moments and Skill Development
  My first response to the idea of a child having a YouTube channel, is that it’s a great opportunity to develop their skills – both as a content creator and as a person interacting with others online. Before letting the child create video content, have a serious planning discussion with them about what they want to create, their motivations for creating it, and what topics/language are off-limits. All these things should be written down; it’s good practice for creators to have a thoughtful for plan for what they want to create. You can help your child develop their video editing and copyright writing skills, as well as learn the rules about using others’ content and doing product reviews online that comply with the federal rules.

  The parent(s) should review the child’s final draft of a video before it is uploaded to their channel to make sure they’re following the rules. This is an ideal opportunity to talk with your child about the potential long-term effects of a piece of content, and how they would react if they receive feedback from peers or teachers about it at school. Also, you want to decide in advance whether you will allow comments on your child’s videos. It may be prudent to turn these off, at least at first. Allowing your child to post content online comes with the responsibility of being mindful about who is trying to interact with them – either through comments, email, or direct messages.

  Safety First
  If you let you child have a YouTube channel, regardless of their age, be sure you’re monitoring both what they’re communicating to others (publicly and privately) and what others are saying to them. If they are under 18 years old, you should have the passwords to all their accounts and their phone so you can effectively and closely monitor what they’re doing online. The younger they are, the more oversight they need. Use effective software to monitor and protect your kids. Here’s some real-life advice from geek parent Susan Baier about her experience raising a geek child:

  I also strongly recommend that you read the books by security expert Gavin de Becker, especially The Gift of Fear and Protecting the Gift. If you want a resource about the legal dos and don’ts about social media for yourself and your children, I suggest you read The Legal Side of Blogging: How Not to get Sued, Fired, Arrested, or Killed. The lessons in there apply to all social media platforms, including YouTube. If you want to connect with me and my thoughts about children using the internet, you can contact me directly or connect with me on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, or LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that is available only to people on my mailing list, by subscribing here.

  November 20, 2016

  •

  Ruth Carter

  •

  Internet law, Legalities of Blogging

  Arizona internet attorney, Carter Law Firm, children making videos, Children on social media, children on the internet, Children on youtube, Gavin de Becker, Ignite Phoenix, internet predators, internet privacy, internet safety, kids creating videos, kids on YouTube, phoenix social media lawyer, Raising geek kids, Ruth Carter, Susan Baier, YouTube rules, YouTube safety

• FTC Compliance Friendly Reminders

  

  Bloggers, vloggers, and other social influencers frequently asked me about the rules regarding disclosure when partnering with companies and using affiliate links. With holidays (and therefore holiday gift guides) on the horizon, it seemed apropos to share some helpful reminder for how to comply with the FTC’s disclosure rules when you get free product or are compensated for providing a review.

  It’s All About Transparency
  The purpose of the FTC’s disclosure rules is transparency. When people consume content, they have a right to know whether the creator has a relationship with the company or product or whether it is 100% their independent opinion. Knowing that a person has a relationship with a company, which may or may not include financial compensation, will impact whether a person reads or view a post and how much weight or credibility to give it.

  To comply with the transparency requirements of Federal law, social influencers must clearly and prominently label the content they were compensated to make as advertising to avoid misleading consumers.

  Disclosure First
  Many influencers put their notice that they were compensated for doing a post or that a post has affiliate links at the end of the content. This is likely insufficient to comply with the rules because consumers need to be informed before they form an opinion about a product that they’re reading a sponsored post or an ad.

  In general, you should make a disclosure in the post itself and shortly before the reader receives the advertising message. The FTC recommends putting it in front of or above the ad’s headline. Additionally, the notice need to be clear and unambiguous language. To determine whether your disclosure complies with the FTC, consider your notice from the perspective of the reasonable consumer who’s seeing your content for the first time. Will he/she notice the disclosure statement and understand that they’re reading or seeing an ad?

  The FTC says terms like “ad,” “advertisement,” or “sponsored advertising content” are likely to be understood but terms like “promoted,” or “sponsored by [XYZ]” don’t comply with the disclosure requirement because they could be interpreted as merely underwriting the content without influencing the statements made in it.

  So what does this mean? If you write a review of a product that you got for free or got paid for writing the post about it, you have to disclose at the top of the post that you have a relationship with the company. If you use affiliate links, you have to clearly disclose those relationships as well, prior to posting the link. (In some circumstances, using the term “affiliate link” may be insufficient if the average consumer doesn’t know the difference between links and affiliate links. Yes, this happens – I recently attend a blogging conference where an attendee assumed that the terms “link” and “affiliate link” were interchangeable.)

  Every Post, Every Platform
  When you have a relationship with a company or are compensated for writing about a product, you have to disclose it to your audience every time you write about it – regardless of the platform it’s on or what device people use to access it. Every single time. (Yes, I know this is annoying, but it’s what the FTC requires.)

  Disclosure is Everyone’s Responsibility
  Everyone who is involved in the creation or distribution of native advertising should review the content to ensure that the required disclosure is present and that the material does not mislead the audience about the product or the relationship between the writer and the company. This includes middle men like ad agencies. If anyone is found to be in violation of the FTC rules about native advertising, they could be fined by the FTC – the company that created the product or service, the writer, and anyone in between who was involved – up to $16,000. That’s a stiff penalty for forgetting or refusing to disclose a relationship.

  If you want to learn more about this topic, I recommend the FTC’s article, Native Advertising: A Guide for Businesses. If you want to chat with me about these issues, like how to incorporate these requirements into website terms of service or contracts with third party content creators, you can contact me directly or connect with me on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, or LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that is available only to people on my mailing list, by subscribing here.

  October 18, 2016

  •

  Ruth Carter

  •

  Featured Post, Internet law

  Arizona internet attorney, blogging about free products, Carter Law Firm, disclosure rules, Federal Trade Commission, FTC fines, FTC rules, native advertising, paid blogger, paid vloggers, phoenix social media lawyer, product reviews, Ruth Carter, social influencers, VenJuris

• Someone Posted a Photo of Me Online Without Consent

  

  People come to this site almost every day with questions about whether someone can post their picture on the internet without obtaining consent. Some people even ask if it’s a crime or whether they can sue.

  Sue for what? Which of your rights have been violated?

  Of course, each situation must be evaluated on its merits. It’s possible that a person is concerned with an intimate photo, a photograph that was taken in a bathroom, or circumstances where they are being harassed. I’m not saying that there aren’t situations where a person’s rights may have been violated; however, the frequency with which I get these questions makes me wonder whether most of these people have a legitimate legal concern or merely hurt feelings.

  No Expectation of Privacy in Public
  Remember, in the U.S., there is no expectation of privacy in anything you do in public (exceptions of course for places like bathrooms, confessionals, etc.). So, if someone snaps a photo of you that is less than flattering, and they post it on the internet, as long as they are not violating your rights, there’s nothing you can do about it.

  Maybe they took a photo of you not putting your shopping cart away, walking around with your skirt tucked into your underwear, or texting while driving. I think there are much more important things to talk about in general and definitely that are worth of documenting permanently online; however, it’s not illegal. Just like it is not illegal to be stupid, it is not illegal to post stupid things online. The internet is full of stupid.

  So What Do You Do?
  Well, if you truly believe that you’ve been the victim of a crime or that your rights have been violated, contact the police or buy an hour with a lawyer to review your situation. You may be in a situation where your legal rights have not been violated but the posting itself and violates the terms that apply to the site where it was published. In that case, reporting the image to the website administrators may be sufficient to get it removed.

  If it is purely a situation where you are merely angry or upset, and the person won’t remove the image when asked, let it go. If you’re embarrassed by your behavior, don’t do it again. If you’re in a situation where the image shows up if someone Googles your name, you can try to bury it by manipulating the search algorithm. Hopefully it’s not a situation where you screwed up so badly that the image or situation is going to dominate the search results for years to come.

  On the Flip Side
  If you’re thinking about snapping a picture of someone, check your motives. If you’ve taken a picture and you have the impulse to share it online, double and triple check your motives. What are the benefits of sharing this image? Are you being vindictive? If the situation were reversed, would you want an image of you in a similar situation posted? What if the person in the picture was your parent or significant other – would you post it then?

  The person in the photo isn’t the only one at risk of losing face. Do you want to be the jerk who not only took this photo, but also shared it? You could harm yourself as well as the other person.

  What is socially inappropriate and what is illegal are often two drastically different standards. My rule of thumb for this situations is the same: Think before you act. Think before you post. If you want to talk more about internet privacy or social media law, you can contact me directly or connect with me on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, or LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that is available only to people on my mailing list, by subscribing here.

  September 27, 2016

  •

  Ruth Carter

  •

  Internet law, Photography & the Law

  Arizona internet attorney, can I take a picture of someone and post it online, Carter Law Firm, internet privacy, is it a crime to post a photo online, phoenix social media lawyer, post pictures of people online, posted a photo online without consent, posting photos on Facebook without consent, Ruth Carter, Someone Posted a Photo of Me Online Without Consent, VenJuris

• What’s Up with YouTube Pulling Ads from Videos?

  

  In the last week, several people have posted that YouTube pulled the ads from their videos because their content wasn’t “advertiser-friendly.”

  What’s Advertiser-Friendly Content?
  According to YouTube policies, ads can only be run on content that’s all-ages appropriate. “It has little to no inappropriate or mature content in the video stream, thumbnail, or metadata (such as in the video title). If the video does contain inappropriate content, the context is usually newsworthy or comedic and the creator’s intent is to inform or entertain (not offend or shock).”

  According to YouTube, you can’t run ads against content that contains the following:

  • Sexually suggestive content;
  • Violence
  • Profanity or vulgar language
  • Harassment
  • Promotion of drugs
  • Sensitive subjects – including, war, political conflicts, natural disasters, and tragedies

  If a user repeatedly posts videos that violate this policy, YouTube may suspend monetization on your whole channel. This could be problematic for content creators who make a living in part from their YouTube channel(s).

  Their Site, Their Rules
  Reading the YouTube rules, it’s ok to create and post content that violates some of its advertiser-friendly guidelines, but not make money from it.

  And don’t even think about trying to argue that YouTube is violating your First Amendment right to free speech. It’s their site so they make the rules. They’re not stopping you from creating and publishing content on your own forum, just setting the rules for their platform.

  Compare this to a shopping mall. They control who can sell wares and what behavior is appropriate. If you break the rules – by screaming or walking a body bag through the food court (not that I’ve done that) – you can be asked to leave or even banned for a period of time. Likewise, if you scream obscenities on the street, the police might be called and you could get a ticket for disturbing the peace.

  So, What’s Changed?
  It appears that not much has changed on YouTube. The policy regarding advertiser-friendly content hasn’t changed, but rather how it’s enforced. Before, if a video violated this rule, they would merely turn off the monetization feature, and you may not notice the difference unless you checked your Video Manager. Now, YouTube is sending an email notice when they turn off monetization.

  I went back and reviewed the law firm’s YouTube channel. I run ads on most videos, but I haven’t made a cent from YouTube. There’s only one video on which monetization was turned off. My other videos where I may occasionally swear and/or mention sexual content like “revenge porn” are still monetized. (Not that I expect to make money from my videos, but you never know.)

  If you have an internet-based business that relies on another platform to make money, be sure you read the site’s terms of service before you design your business model around it. (Remember, there’s a good chance the site can change the rules at any time.) If you want to talk more about internet or social media law, you can contact me directly or connect with me on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, or LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that is available only to people on my mailing list, by subscribing here.

  September 4, 2016

  •

  Ruth Carter

  •

  Internet law

  advertiser-friendly content, Arizona social media attorney, Carter Law Firm, First Amendment, free speech, Freedom of Speech, Internet Law, Phoenix internet lawyer, Ruth Carter, VenJuris, YouTube ad rules, YouTube monetization, YouTube rules, YouTube terms of service

• Typical Sex Video Email Conversation

  

  I regularly receive emails from people asking questions about the legalities related to intimate photos and videos – particularly situations when a third party has possession of them. Sometimes the third party allegedly obtained them nefariously and sometimes the people emailing me voluntarily sent the person photos or video and now they have concerns about what said person will do with them.

  Now they have concerns?! These are questions they should have asked themselves before they sent the photos/video to begin with!

  Here’s an example of how these conversations typically go. The text in italics are things I usually think, but don’t share with the other the person in the moment.

  Prospective Client (PC): I made a video with my boyfriend and his ex got a hold of it. His ex is threatening to send it to my parents and post it. What can I do about this?

  How did his ex get access to your sex video? This sounds like someone neither of you should have contact with.

  ME: How old are you?

  Please don’t be a child . . . please don’t be a child . . . please don’t be a child . . . (Yes, sometimes it’s a minor – or so they say.)

  PC: 24.

  ME: Thank goodness this isn’t a potential inadvertent kiddie porn situation.

  You’re an adult. Besides being embarrassing, who cares if this person shows the video to your parents? (I’ve also had people email me claiming the third party is threatening to send it to the PC’s employer.)

  ME: Where do you and the ex live?

  In Arizona, merely threatening to post revenge porn is a felony.

  PC: Nebraska.

  Ok, well that’s outside the limits of my law license and revenge porn legal knowledge.

  ME: Here’s the list of the current revenge porn and related laws in all 50 States. This will tell you how the laws in your State apply to these situations.

  PC: I don’t know what to do. I want to go to the police but I don’t know if I can do that.

  ME: Of course you can go to the police! Give them a call, explain your situation, and ask if there’s anything they can do to help you. They may be the best ones to know if this situation violates your State’s criminal law.

  And maybe some local resources too that help people in these types of situations.

  I get questions and hits on my site every day from people asking about intimate photos and videos, not all of which were taken with consent, and how to keep them from getting out. Unfortunately, I also get hits from people who want to post revenge porn without repercussions – which is disgusting.

  When in doubt – don’t. Don’t create intimate photos or videos, don’t share them with others, and don’t post them online. What seemed like a good idea in the moment, may create long lasting regret, especially if it shows up when someone Googles your name. However, if you choose to create this type of material, do it with your device, keep it under password, and never let the files out of your control. Once this material is released, it’s hard to get it back or verify that every copy has been destroyed.

  We’re still in the infancy of how we’re going to deal with intimate photos and videos from a social and legal perspective. If you want to chat with me about revenge porn, privacy, or any related topics, you can contact me directly or connect with me on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, or LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that is available only to people on my mailing list, by subscribing here. If you think you’re the victim of revenge porn or threatened revenge porn, contact your local law enforcement agency.

  July 26, 2016

  •

  Ruth Carter

  •

  Cyberbullying & Cyberharassment, Internet law

  Arizona social media attorney, Carter Law Firm, internet privacy, Phoenix internet lawyer, posting intimate photos online, revenge porn, revenge porn law, Ruth Carter, threatening to post sex tape, VenJuris

• Where to Put “#ad” on Instagram Posts

  Last month, Rosie and I attended BlogPaws – a conference for pet bloggers – where I taught a workshop with Chloe DiVita and Tom Collins on the Legal Dos and Don’ts of Blogging and Social Media.  We did a three-hour presentation that focused on copyright and the federal rules that apply to product reviews, campaigns, and promotions.

  We reminded the audience that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) requires people to provide their honest and accurate opinions when writing product reviews. If you have a relationship with a company – whether you got free product, you have a contract with them, or even if you have personal relationship with someone in the company, you always have to disclose these relationships – clearly and succinctly – in every post and platform you mention them. We also reviewed the Lord & Taylor fiasco. This was a good reminder for social media influencers not to assume the companies they work with will know these rules or provide proper guidance

  After the workshop, I did one-on-one sessions with attendees. Per the conference organizers, each person only got 10-minutes, so it was like a legal information kissing booth – sit down, ask one question, and get out. One attendee asked, “I understand that I have to put #ad on all Instagram posts when I have a relationship with a company, but are there rules about where I have to put it?”

  Hmm . . . that’s an interesting question, and one I’ve never heard before.

  

  The purpose of the FTC rules is transparency. The law requires posters to inform others of potential bias due to a relationship with company so whomever reads the post can consider this in conjunction with the content of the post. This disclosure must be clear and conspicuous,  you can’t put it behind a link. The easiest way to make this disclosure is to include “#ad” on each applicable post.

  I grabbed my phone and scrolled through my Instagram feed. Each post cuts off after the first three lines until you click on it to read more. Based on this, it appears the prudent place to put “#ad” on an Instagram post is to put it in the first three lines so anyone looking at their feed on their will know when you have a relationship with a company.

  After the conference, I looked at Instagram’s Terms of Use. Although their terms are impressive and thorough, there are currently no provisions explicitly about when and where to use “#ad.”

  The law is constantly trying to keep up with technology, including the internet. If you’re a social media influencer, keep up with changes in the FTC rules regarding disclosures on product reviews and promotions. and other rules that apply to your posts. If you have questions about internet law, you can contact me directly or connect with me on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, or LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that is available only to people on my mailing list, by subscribing here.

  Hat tip to Rosalyn of Golden Woofs and Sugar the Golden Retriever for this question.

  July 7, 2016

  •

  Ruth Carter

  •

  Internet law

  #ad, Arizona social media attorney, BlogPaws, Carter Law Firm, Chloe DiVita, FTC disclosure, FTC rules for promotions, Instagram, Phoenix internet lawyer, Ruth Carter, Silver Paw Studio, Tom Collins, VenJuris

• Creeper Cosplay Video | Is That Legal

  

  A contact at Phoenix Comicon sent me a link to an amateur video from this year’s event. Apparently it’s fueled quite a bit of discussion regarding the legalities of shooting video at pay-to-attend events.

  My initial thoughts about this video: It’s creepy.
  This guy knowingly and intentionally videorecorded women without their consent and posted the compilation online in a way that objectifies them. It’s all about their bodies. Did you notice he taped at least one woman while she was walking away from the bathroom? Eww! And what’s with that disturbing music with women crying on it? This guy is right up there with creepy yellow coat man from the 2010 No Pants Light Rail Ride.

  What made this video so disturbing? Greg Benson of Mediocre Films does videos of women in cosplay at San Diego Comic-Con and I’ve never had an issue with it. I watched one of his videos from last year for comparison:

  I don’t have an issue with this video for several reasons:

  • He obviously gets consent from the women to film them. There’s no hidden agenda.
  • He interacts with these women. Even when he’s enjoying the beauty around him, Greg treats these women like people, not a peep show.
  • The video has a dual purpose – one of which is showcasing these stunning costumes. (Hey Greg – if you do another video like this, would you please call it “Women of Comic Con” instead of “girls?” It’s a better embodiment of these women’s badassery.)

  So is Creeper Guy’s video from Phoenix Comicon illegal?
  Probably not – at least based on the footage posted. It’s not illegal to be a jerk.
  If he had a ticket to the event, he wasn’t trespassing. The polite thing to do at a con is to ask permission before taking photos of attendees, but it’s not required.  He could have been a guy walking around looking like he was shooting general footage of the event, which lots of people do.

  So far he’s not running ads on the video in question, so he’s not publicizing anyone’s image without permission. Phoenix Comicon is an event that’s open to the public to attend so there’s no expectation of privacy on the expo floor.

  Is what this guy did vile? Yes.
  Should he be banned from future Phoenix Comicon events? Perhaps, but that’s not my call to make. With a crowd of over 80,000 in attendance, it would be easy for someone to slip in.

  However, instead of dealing with this situation from purely a legal perspective, I encourage the community to be aware of creepers at events like Phoenix Comicon. If you see someone leering at others or doing vulgar things like filming people’s asses as they walk, call them out and/or report them to event security. If you see someone being harassed, report that too and support that person. We have an obligation to keep an eye on each other.

  There’s nothing wrong with enjoying the view, as long as you can do it appropriately. Remember, cosplay is not consent.

  This is an issue impacting the entire geek/con community. If you believe you are the victim of a crime at a con, contact law enforcement for assistance. If you have questions about social media law or internet privacy that you want to discuss with me, you can contact me directly or connect with me on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, or LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that is available only to people on my mailing list, by subscribing here.

  June 12, 2016

  •

  Ruth Carter

  •

  Internet law

  Arizona internet attorney, Carter Law Firm, Cosplay is not consent, cosplay photo rights, Creeper cosplay video, Greg Benson, internet privacy, Mediocre Films, Phoenix Comicon, phoenix social media lawyer, Ruth Carter, VenJuris

• Checklist for Social Media Influencers

  

  Some people, including a lot of average joes, have such a strong social media following that brands want to send them free products to review or to partner with them for a native advertising campaign. If you are lucky enough to get such an offer, you need to understand the rules and read the fine print closely to make sure you’re not setting yourself up to be accused of an FTC violation. Don’t count on the other side to educate you. As we saw in the Lord &Taylor situation, companies who seek to partner with social media influencers don’t always know and follow the rules themselves.

  If I were presented with an offer to do a product review or be part of a native advertising campaign, these are some of the questions I would ask in regards to the offer.

  Influencer-Company Relationship
  What is the company asking me to do?
  What is the company giving me in return?
  Is there fair give-and-take between both sides? (If not, it’s not a valid contract.)
  Are expectations and deadlines clear?
  Who is my point person at the company if I have any questions?

  FTC Compliance
  Does the offer require that my review be truthful?
  Does the offer require me to give an accurate review of the product? (Bonus points for companies that require reviewers to write what they like and dislike about the product.)
  Does the offer require that me to disclose my relationship with the company – both in my review itself and also any promotions I do about the content on social media (i.e., use #ad or #sponsored)? (The FTC requires this so if the company doesn’t want you to do this, turn and run. They don’t know the basic rules about native advertising.)

  Intellectual Property
  Does the offer clearly state who owns the copyright in what I create under the agreement?
  By accepting the offer, do I grant the company certain rights to use my work?

  General Legal Provisions
  Is there a written contract? (It’s avoids confusion when all the provisions are in a single document and has  provision that states, all the terms of this agreement are in this contract.)
  Is there a severability clause so if one provision is illegal, the rest of the contract remains in place?
  What are the rules for modifying the agreement?
  Which state law governs the agreement?
  If there’s a problem between the company and me, how will we resolve it?
  Under what circumstances will the agreement be terminated?

  Final Words of Wisdom
  Contracts are relationship-management documents, ideally written to protect both sides. If a company offers me a contract with provisions I dislike, I request changes. (I’m the queen of changing liability waivers.)

  And if there’s a word or provision you don’t apprehend, ask! Don’t sign a contract that you don’t understand, because as long as it’s legal, you’re stuck with it.

  If you are a serious influencer and get offers to do product reviews or participate in campaigns, treat your social media activities like a business. Consider hiring a lawyer to create a contract template for these situations when the other side doesn’t have a written contract. At the least, use this checklist to do a preliminary review of the offers you receive.

  If you want more information about the legal rules regarding your blog and social media, please check out The Legal Side of Blogging: How Not to get Sued, Fired, Arrested, or Killed. If you want to chat with me about social media law, you can contact me directly or connect with me on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, or LinkedIn. You can also get access to more exclusive content that’s shared only with my mailing list, by subscribing to the firm’s newsletter.

  May 29, 2016

  •

  Ruth Carter

  •

  Education Law, Featured Post, Internet law, Legalities of Blogging

  affiliate links, Arizona internet attorney, Carter Law Firm, disclose relationships, FTC rules, Influencer checklist, native advertising rules, phoenix social media lawyer, Ruth Carter, social media campaign, VenJuris