Conviction in Cyberbulling, Not a Surprise but What’s the Impact?

28 November 2008 Internet, IT & e-Discovery Blog Blog
Authors: Peter Vogel

What a sad story that an email sent by Josh Evans (who did not exist) led to the suicide of Morgan Meier (a 13 year old). Actually Josh Evans’ emails were sent by Lori Drew, the mother of a former friend of Morgan, who “cyberbullied” Megan with a make-belief identity. How tragic for Morgan’s family and after a trial, a federal court jury found that Lori Drew committed a crime, but it will not end here. In December the federal judge will consider motions to set aside the verdict. Depending on what the federal judge does, this may continue in the appellate courts for some time to come.

Will Failure to Read the Terms of Service be a Defense?

Lori Drew’s attorney has filed motions to set aside the verdict because she did not read the MySpace Terms of Service which obligates users to provide “truthful and accurate” registration information. Prosecutors alleged that Drew’s phony profile was unauthorized access and a violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986. That law was created to protect violations of federal and bank computers, and has been expanded to include most computers and the Internet.

How do Courts View Terms of Service?

Generally most courts tend to accept the Terms of Service (or Terms of Use) for a website as a binding agreement even though few individuals ever read them. Terms of Service are most often found below the fold of the front page of most websites...Google does not even have a Terms of Service on its front page. But courts rely on the fact that users have a choice to use the website and so should realize they are bound to whatever the website says the Terms of Use are. As we all know many websites also require a “Browse-Wrap Agreement” which asks the user to “Click Agree.” Virtually everyone does “Click Agree” without reading a single word of the “Browse-Wrap Agreement.” So it will be interesting to see how Lori Drew’s failure to read MySpace’s Terms of Use will be any kind of defense.
 

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Authors

Related Services

Insights

CMS Proposes Enhanced Scrutiny over Medicaid Supplemental Payments
20 November 2019
Health Care Law Today
The Purpose of a Corporation
November 2019
Legal News: Business Law
Should This Be a "Mobility" Industry Blog?
19 November 2019
Dashboard Insights
Data Processing Patent Eligibility: Federal Circuit Finds Claims Eligible in KPN v. Gemalto
19 November 2019
IP Litigation Current
PATH Summit 2019
18-20 December 2019
Arlington, VA
Madison CLE Days
18-19 December 2019
Madison, WI
MedTech Impact Expo & Conference
13-15 December 2019
Las Vegas, NV
HFMA MA-RI Annual Compliance Update
12 December 2019
Boston, MA