Legal Environment of Business
rufgato30
BUS_347_Final_Power_Point_Presentation_Civil_Law_Education.pptxPRIVACY How Protected Are We?
By Robert Felix
Legal Environment of Business
Dr. Chow
PRIVACY How Protected Are We?
1
Is Facebook Providing enough Protection?
With over 2 Billion active Facebook users in today’s world, we now live in an era where information travels instantaneously and is at a constant flow. With so much technological flow and problems that have arised… It is time to ask if Facebook is providing enough privacy protection? Let’s dig into the topic discussion a little more as we continue through each slide.
2
Do Users Take The Time To read The Privacy Policies ?
Do Users Take The Time To read The Privacy Policies or Contracts? Users usually do not take the time to read what they are allowing their electronic devices upload when first adding applications. With applications or website such as Facebook to name one of the top contenders through social media sites, has created controversial debates as to how much protection subscribed users really have; and most likely do not have any clue as to what laws or constitutional rights they have until today…well for the most part to say the least. Little do we know as users that Facebook isn’t really as private as they may promote to be.
3
Recent Cases With Civil Investigations
In recent cases with civil litigations there has been allegations and belief that Facebook has violated state law by engaging in conduct involving …."deception," ….."fraud," or …"unfair practices.“
In more depth of this recent event has led to Users and investors that have filed at least 18 lawsuits since recent month’s revelations about Cambridge Analytica with use of “private information from the Facebook profiles of more than 50 million users without their permission or proper disclosures”. Beyond privacy violations, they are accusing Facebook of user agreement breaches, negligence, consumer fraud, unfair competition, securities fraud and racketeering.
4
Facebook Facing Privacy Lawsuit Over Photo Tagging
A federal judge from San Francisco has recently rejected Facebook’s request to toss a lawsuit alleging the feature of photo-tagging that uses a technological facial recognition feature that invades user privacy and is planned to move forward under an Illinois law that bans collecting and storing biometric data without explicit consent.
The face recognition feature of photo-tagging was launched in 2010 to which automatically matches names to users faces in photos and are uploaded to the Facebook social network.
Google LLC an American multinational technology company to name another relative contender was also recently hit with a lawsuit alleging its photo-tagging system that violates Illinois law.
When users are identified in a picture through Facebook, a facial recognition software memorizes users faces so that the user’s friends can tag them when photos are uploaded. In the case against Facebook, the plaintiffs say they never gave permission for Facebook to use their faces as biometric identifiers. In this case “Biometrics”, would refer to unique physical characteristics used to identify an individual. One of the most prevalent uses of “Biometrics identifiers” (i.e., for example would be details about the face’s geometry as determined by facial points and contours), and comparing the resulting “face template” (or “faceprint”) against the face templates stored in a “face template database.” If a database match is found, an individual may be identified.; Even though Facebook argued that photo-tagging is disclosed in it’s terms of service, it states that users can opt out at any given time. This is something that should only be used upon explicit consent.
5
Many Civil Lawsuit Cases Recently Filed
In recent events, there have been many civil lawsuits filed against Facebook Inc….The cases vary in which type of civil lawsuits were being filed against the social media giant and the variations include….
O'Kelly v. Facebook Inc., et al stating, Accusations with the companies of breach of contract, fraudulent misrepresentation, breach of good faith or fair dealing and invasion of privacy; and another case with…. 2. Malskoff, et al, v. Facebook Inc., et al with suit alleging that the defendants violated the Stored Communications Act in which say that they were targeted with political advertisements while using Facebook during the 2016 election cycle; and another .. 3. Zellmer v. Facebook, Inc. Mentioned in an earlier slide…With allegations that the company violated the Illinois Biometric Information is in facial recognition technology, which works by scanning an image for human faces, extracting facial feature data based on specific “Biometric Identifiers” Privacy Act, which says that a private entity may not have a person's biometrics from things such as finger-scanning without a written release from the individual. And another lawsuit with 4. Bennett v. Facebook, Inc., et al stating allegations that the defendants violated federal securities laws; another class action lawsuit 5. Williams, et al, v. Facebook, Inc., et al with violation of privacy based on Facebooks mobile app and how Android users who download Facebook Messenger and Facebook Lite and allowed the apps to access their contact lists, as well as unauthorized recording of mobile device communications," and or 6. Renken, et al, v. Facebook, Inc., et al who is asking for $500 million for data-scraping; and couple others of the same lawsuits for violation of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and for breach of fiduciary duty which 7. Ocegueda v. Zuckerberg, et al, and 13. Robert Casey v. Facebook, Inc. et al and 14. Hallisey v. Zuckerberg et al; also, another 8. Gennock, et al, v. Facebook, et al that states a violation of the Stored Communications Act; Another with 9. Rubin v. Facebook, Inc., et al Which is a lawsuit alleging that the defendants violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act California Customer Records Act and California's Unfair Competition Law and also accuses the defendants (Facebook Inc.) of intrusion of privacy and negligence, and is also asking for $5,000,000; and accusations that the company of statutory violations of personal privacy 10. Lodowski v. Facebook, Inc. et al, another of conspiracy and negligence as well as accusations that the defendants of breach of fiduciary duty and waste of corporate assets 11. Martin v. Zuckerberg et al; and another lawsuit 12. Comforte et al v. Cambridge Analytica with allegations that the defendants violated the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986, which prohibits collecting or sharing electronic data without permission; and lastly 15. Yuan v. Facebook, Inc. et al alleging that they violated federal securities laws, and 16. Price v. Facebook, Inc. et al Price accuses the defendants of unlawful business practices concerning personal data use and distribution and is seeking $500,000.
All of the recent civil cases mentioned are related or have correlation to privacy laws and constitutional rights. Other considerations of to keep in mind that if users personal information gets in the wrong hands could also lead to violations of Privacy tort laws that may include intrusion of privacy which would include secret surveillance, traditional trespass, or if consent to enter is exceeded; also if public disclosure of private facts and or Publication of private information that is highly offensive to a reasonable person and is not a matter of legitimate public concern; also consideration of false light and the publication of facts placing the plaintiff in a false light that is highly offensive to a reasonable person and if the issue is of public concern, published with actual malice; or appropriation and the right of publicity, right to control the commercial exploitation of your name and likeness. In other words the four types of privacy torts that would consist of a civil wrong that is breach of legal duty owed by the person who commits the tort to the victim of tort. One example would be if a company were to use a persons photo in an ad claiming that he/she endorses certain product/s, which could lead to a person filing for a lawsuit and claiming misappropriation.
6
Ethical Issues Involved?
So much personal information is being inputted through the web, especially through Facebook …
Is it ethical for the recent cases of Plaintiffs earlier mentioned to sue Facebook ?
Is it morally right to seek such large compensations for damages ?
So much personal information is being inputted through the web, especially through Facebook…
Is it ethical for the recent cases of Plaintiffs listed above to sue Facebook ?
Is it morally right to seek such large compensations for damages ?
We humans are basically leaving imprints of information through the web on a daily basis. It is information that consists of our whereabouts, communications that involve personal data (this includes pictures or images and map points/check-ins), online searches, what we purchase, and even DNA. Much of the information includes personal email address, location data, personal phone number, sexual orientation, first and last name, information about any children, names of family members, home address, admission of depression or sadness, birth date and year, hobbies and interests, place of employment, and political views on current affairs or issues and medical information. People are being surveilled and also being studied in such ways that may later be abused in an unethical manner. A study from Scholars have shown that between 2005 and 2011, both total sharing on Facebook and privacy-seeking behavior on the platform increased. When people visit these pages on the web, Facebook may be receiving a significant amount of information, including the amount of time we spend on the page, what we clicked on, and the browser and operating system we use, as food for thought. What’s more, since 2012, Facebook has been collecting data about our internet behavior even from websites that do not have a “Like” button, and Facebook channels that information into user-targeted advertisements.
So does it seem legitimate to question…”How protected are we as Facebook users?”
7
Another Relevant Ethical Question…Does A Person Have The Right To Determine What Sort Of Information About Them Is Collected And How That Information Is Used ?
Another Relevant Ethical Question…Does A Person Have The Right To Determine What Sort Of Information About Them Is Collected And How That Information Is Used ?
Although the right to privacy most often is protected by statutory law, still seems as if there needs to be a balance against the state’s compelling interests and this would also include the promotion of public safety as well as improving the quality of life. As a matter of fact the Privacy Act of 1974 prevents unauthorized disclosure of personal information held by the federal government. It other words it guards records that are accessible by personal identifiers such as a name, social security number, or other identifying number or symbol. Also, an individual is allowed to access and to request modification of their personal records if necessary. The Privacy Act excludes disclosure of these records without the written approval of the individuals to whom the records pertain unless one of the twelve disclosure exemptions enumerated in the Act applies. Also to add, the Fair Credit Reporting Act also protects personal financial information collected by credit reporting agencies. All of users personal data is inputted one way or another and should be kept private and secured from potential misuse or harm. With all of the laws we have in today's society you would think that privacy would be a little more safe. Data breaches seem to be occurring more frequently and appear to be on the rise. Also, in today’s society another privacy concern will be with video cameras and drones to add to the lawful epidemic of privacy concerns.
8
Which Constitutional Right Is Applicable To Privacy? Privacy is an essential tenant to the 4th Amendment
Which Constitutional Right Is Applicable To Privacy?
Privacy is an essential tenant to the 4th Amendment:
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides, in pertinent part: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated ....
What are Constitutional Rights?
Even though Privacy is not mentioned in the constitution, it is something that should be extremely important to everyone. The Fourth Amendment protects the peoples privacy against unreasonable searches.
Several amendments to the U.S. Constitution have also been used in varying degrees of success in determining a right to personal autonomy. The right to privacy most often is protected by statutory law. For example, the Health Information Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) protects a person's health information, and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) enforces the right to privacy in various privacy policies and privacy statements. The people should have the right to determine what sort of information about them is collected and how that information will be used.
9
Amendments That Are Relevant To Privacy And Possible Civil Cases
First Amendment
Third Amendment
Fourth Amendment
Fifth Amendment
Ninth Amendment
Tenth Amendment
Fourteenth Amendment
As already mentioned…Even though there is a broad right to privacy and is not directly mentioned in the Constitution still holds fundamental liberty deserving protection for people in the United States of America as long as they are within its jurisdiction. Starting with a brief introduction to the….
1st Amendment (That Protects The Privacy of Beliefs) in which states that… 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. 3rd Amendment (That Protects The Privacy of the Home against the use of it for housing soldiers) No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. 4th Amendment ( Protects Privacy of the Person and Possessions against unreasonable searches) The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
The 5th Amendment That protects against self-incrimination, all combine to imply the Founding Father's intended to provide for the citizens' privacy from government intrusion. (It Protects against self-incrimination, which in turn protects the privacy of personal information)
9th Amendment (Which Is More General Protection for Privacy?) The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Liberty Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment No State shall... deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.
10th Amendment
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. It was intended to confirm the understanding of the people at the time the Constitution was adopted, that powers not granted to the United States were reserved to the States or to the people.
14th Amendment…. the Bill of Rights Provisions Relating to the Right of Privacy
States that No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
However, the protections have been narrowly defined and usually only pertain to family, marriage, motherhood, procreation and child rearing.
10
Analyzing The Current Situation With Privacy Concerns
Upon all of the recent and past lawsuits against Facebook Inc. that include user agreement breaches, negligence, consumer fraud, unfair competition, securities fraud and racketeering seem to share that there is great concern with the structure and terms of service agreement. It appears that the constitutional amendments in the Bill of Rights seem to also play a role as to not having enough detail on the topic of “Privacy” but rather also has areas that could be revamped.
11
Potential Solutions
Reverting back to Facebook and all of the recent civil cases filed against them. There isn’t much doubt that Facebook Inc. is not securing their network properly. Especially with of the lawsuits that have accumulated through the years in regards to their Privacy regulations. For starters, Facebook Inc. should be following protocol that coincide with laws such as the ones in the constitution. Facebook Inc. would need to possibly place limitations on collection of personal data. Also, none of the personal data should be exposed for any other purpose or outside parties except under the authority of the law. There would definitely need to be a data controller held accountable for safekeeping of the information inputted. Facebook’s terms of service would need updating and place full disclosures so that there aren’t any misunderstandings. Perhaps hiring a group of lawyers could be in the best interest for Facebook Inc. so that they can possibly avoid any more privacy breach’s and class action lawsuits in federal court. It would be Facebook Inc.’s moral duty to do what is best overall and fix the issues promptly before things get out of control. Perhaps adding a contract might be something that could help with stipulations and better to protect users privacy and personal information.
12
Biblography
https://www.classaction.org/media/zellmer-v-facebook-inc.pdf
https://www.l2inc.com/daily-insights/no-mercy-no-malice/facebook-needs-a-contract-with-america
https://www.livescience.com/37398-right-to-privacy.html
https://money.usnews.com/investing/stock-market-news/articles/2018-03-28/facebook-inc-fb-stock
Solove, D. J., & Hartzog, W. (2014). THE FTC AND THE NEW COMMON LAW OF PRIVACY. Columbia Law Review, 114(3), 583-676.
http://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2397&context=utk_chanhonoproj
https://www.usnews.com/topics/subjects/privacy
Waldman, A. E. (2016). PRIVACY, SHARING, AND TRUST: THE FACEBOOK STUDY. Case Western Reserve Law Review, 67(1), 193-233
Webster Jr., W. R. (2000). DNA DATABASE STATUTES & PRIVACY IN THE INFORMATION AGE. Health Matrix: Journal Of Law-Medicine, 10(1), 119.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsdPNL949bY&t=6s
