A recent New York Police Department attempt to engage with New Yorkers serves as a reminder that crowdsourcing positive feedback doesn't always work quite as well as you may hope, if it works at all. As Ars Technica reported: The Twitterverse was abuzz Tuesday evening after the New York City Police Department made what it... Continue Reading →
Introducing accurate facial recognition into the mix potentially removes the need for you to tell Facebook (or a future Facebook connected site or app) who you are before your data is shared and your experience modified. All you will need to do now is show up and let a camera see you long enough to capture a reasonably clear image of your face. From there you will be identified, placed into a particular context and things will happen. As a brand, there are some interesting opportunities. Imagine your guests arrive at your event and, instead of relying on guests to manually check in, a webcam at the door connected to your Facebook Page recognises the guests as they arrive and posts an update in your stream sharing their arrival. This isn't happening yet but it is very possible.
The Associated Press Twitter profile was hacked yesterday and a fake tweet about a bombing at the White House was published. The result was dramatic, the US stock market plummeted and only recovered about 10 minutes later when AP tweeted that it had been hacked and since locked its Twitter profile down.
If you look to recent cases, you generally see this issue arising in the context of politicians and sports personalities whose indiscretions are published online (usually Twitter) and disseminated rapidly. Embarrassed plaintiffs and applicants approach courts, indignant, and seek to silence the debates and expressions of schadenfreude. The courts, applying the law as they understand it to this new medium, grant orders which sometimes just seem to be out of touch with new realities. What concerns me about these cases is that simply applying these legal principles to this new, unprecedented landscape can, and often does, have a chilling effect on freedom of expression.
Innovative bank, FNB, has a consent problem. Jason Elk published a blog post over the weekend titled "FNB, what on earth are you doing to your customers?" in which he took issue with a consent mechanism FNB has been making use of or some time now. Essentially, this consent mechanism requires that customers agree to... Continue Reading →
I was asked to present at the 2012 VOASA Conference in Durban and I thought I would share my presentation slides and a few other relevant links and materials with you, my readers and clients, as well as the conference delegates in this post. The two other lawyers presenting at the event were asked to... Continue Reading →
I spoke at the Marketing Legislation Seminar in Rosebank this morning. My topic was basically online reputation management and related legal principles and issues. This area seems like something of a fuzzy marketing thing but the more I look into it the more it becomes an organisational imperative with serious legal ramifications. I've mentioned the... Continue Reading →
This week has been a fairly light week from a blog post perspective and I thought I would end off the week with something a little different and which is pretty relevant to most of my clients. This video is of a talk given by Rob La Gesse from Rackspace. La Gesse is pretty forthright... Continue Reading →
The Streisand effect is a primarily online phenomenon in which an attempt to censor or remove a piece of information has the unintended consequence of causing the information to be publicized widely and to a greater extent than would have occurred if no censorship had been attempted. It is named after American entertainer Barbra Streisand,... Continue Reading →