next »

[perkiset]

This is nuts. Can you imagine getting a PM on Facebook that you're being foreclosed on?

http://moneyland.time.com/2011/07/11/social-networking-gone-wild-foreclosure-via-facebook/

[nop_90]

What is nuts is the court saying that it is "proof" that you received the message.

“pleased to see the Australian court validate Facebook as a reliable, secure and private medium for communication.” Notably, the Australian court emphasized the fact that the borrowers had not activated any privacy protections on their account in authorizing the foreclosure notices to be served through the social network.
...
Attorney Archie Tsirimokos, whose firm represented the lender in the Australian case, told Bloomberg that the borrowers tightened their privacy settings within a day of receiving the notice via Facebook, giving lawyers the proof the court required to allow them to repossess and sell the property.


This has serious implications.

[perkiset]

Exactly. Frightening implications, actually.

[Phaëton]

This is why I dont ever 'always allow images' in my emails..
itd be easy enough to link to myimage.php?emailread=222 the images
and keep track of who opened an email... this is as tricky as them
serving you papers, pineapple express style like once I was at a gas
station pumping gas and someone came up behind me and they were
like Phaeton, and I turned around and they had their hand stuck
out for a handshake I instinctively went to shake their hand and they
served me with papers from their other hand shoving them right in to my
open palm. 

With facebook, gps smart phones and completely public socially networked
and reverse traceable lives I wonder how long it will be before a facebook post
or a cell phone gps loc record will be subpoenad to support someones where were
you on the night of the murder story.

[Bompa]

FFS, people are throwing their mail in the trash, not answering
their phone, and not answering the knock on their door to avoid
facing their obligations. (I've done all that.)  Then they open a FB
account with their real name?  WTF?


Anyways, I do not get why anyone is surprised or worried by this. 
Probably I am missing the full weight of the "implications".

Back when everyone was PM'ing spam on myspace, there was a court
decision that private messages are effectively the same thing as email
and so can be held to the same laws.

So why get shook up when a private message on FB is taken
seriously by a court?  It's not new.


imo,
Bompa

[perkiset]

Then they open a FB account with their real name?  WTF?

Back when everyone was PM'ing spam on myspace, there was a court decision that private messages are effectively the same thing as email and so can be held to the same laws. So why get shook up when a private message on FB is taken seriously by a court?

Fair. But email is still not considered "service" - the thought that they can PM you something that significant and its the same (ostensibly) as putting a notice on the front door is disturbing. At least to me.

[Bompa]

Then they open a FB account with their real name?  WTF?

Back when everyone was PM'ing spam on myspace, there was a court decision that private messages are effectively the same thing as email and so can be held to the same laws. So why get shook up when a private message on FB is taken seriously by a court?

Fair. But email is still not considered "service" - the thought that they can PM you something that significant and its the same (ostensibly) as putting a notice on the front door is disturbing. At least to me.

Oh, it's not?  I didn't think of that, but what if the recipient clicked SEND RETURN RECIEPT?

[perkiset]

Oh, it's not?  I didn't think of that, but what if the recipient clicked SEND RETURN RECIEPT?

Heh. Then they deserve what they get

[nop_90]

Fair. But email is still not considered "service" - the thought that they can PM you something that significant and its the same (ostensibly) as putting a notice on the front door is disturbing. At least to me.

According to the ruling, it is not the same as putting a notice on your door.
It is the same as if you where served "live".
So basically it is saying that FB has a higher priority then regular snail mail.
This has all sorts of implications.

A court sends you a court summons. It has to be served "live" as in you have to physically receive the papers.
With all of the above scenarios there is "no physical proof" the guy received the summons.

Even with the click on "SEND RETURN RECEIPT" button that is still BS.
Simplest case, buddy leaves his portable device sitting around, or forgets to lock his work station.
Someone opens his FB/Email clicks on the "send return receipt" button, then deletes the message.

Meanwhile it was a summons because you where being accused of murder.
You did not show up to the court case, and guess what you are not automatically guilty