CLBR Today: Right to be Forgotten and Facebook Revenge Porn Suit

 

PROMO VIDEO

SEGMENT 1:  Jules Polenetsky and the Right to be Forgotten

Privacy rock star Jules Polenetsky returns to discuss the EU’s recent right to be forgotten ruling.

See separate post here.

SEGMENT 2:  A NEW TWIST IN REVENGE PORN SUIT AGAINST FACEBOOK

REVENGE2Houston attorney David Altenbern talks about his multi-million dollar revenge porn lawsuit against Facebook which alleges, in part,

By this action, Plaintiff seeks to expose the frailties and failures of the falsely advertised, and falsely promoted privacy mechanisms of Defendant Facebook the largest social network in the world, and the significant damages that result to innocent individuals like Plaintiff as a result of those frailties and failures that Defendant Facebook’s upper management, officers, directors and key employees have long known about and essentially concealed.

Danielle Citron wrote on the suit in Slate

Facebook could have alleviated a lot of Ali’s frustration by actually responding to her when she first made contact. With great power comes great responsibility, and Facebook needs to improve its terms-of-service enforcement process by creating an official means of review that includes notifying users about the outcome of their complaints. (Right now, Facebook sends an automated message to policy transgressors notifying them that their content has been removed because it “violates Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities” without saying more, and, as Ali’s case shows, those reporting abuse do not necessarily hear back from Facebook about its decisions.) Facebook can also improve the enforcement process by ensuring that reports of certain abuse—like harassment, nude images, and bullying—get priority review over others, such as spam. When users are filing complaints, they should be prompted to provide information that would better help staff identify those requiring immediate attention.

 

Voting Rights Act Turns 49

The Voting Rights Act was enacting in 1965 after the brutal attack of civil rights marchers in Selma, Alabama in what became known as Bloody Sunday spurred President Johnson into action.

Today is the 49th anniversary of the signing of the Act, but a recent Supreme Court ruling has curtailed its enforcement.  The act was reauthorized in 2006 by a vote of 390-33 vote in the House and 98-0 vote in the Senate, but the Supreme Court held that the reauthorization failed to make sufficient findings to justify continuing the restrictions imposed.  As soon as the Supreme Court decision both the Democrats and Republicans behind the 2006 bill said they would work to pass a new amendment that would satisfy the Supreme Court’s standard, but nothing has been done and efforts to suppress the African-American vote are on the rise.

 

 

Advertisements