Love it or hate it, social media is big and set take over our world even further in 2010. Thanks to the continuous influx of Twitter and Facebook applications, not to mention the popularity of highly sought after invitations to Google Wave; we are all, it seems, increasingly living our lives online.
But are there risks to being so open and public with your information?
The ease with which people can see what someone is doing, or where they are, at any given time is leading to an upsurge in harassment cases with jealous ex-lovers and stalkers using social media to continue their persecution campaigns. Users of social networking sites need to realise that they need to protect themselves from unwanted attention.
Social media is not a one-way street though. By using sites such as Twitter or Facebook, a digital footprint is left, which enables the legal system to return the favour. Twitter, for instance, is now being used by the courts as a method of serving injunctions.
Last month a user who had anonymously posted using the same name as political blogger, Donal Blaney was accused of being in breach in copyright. The High Court allowed the injunction to be served back via Twitter, making their digital location as relevant as their physical one.
We are likely to see more injunctions served via virtual means in the coming months. UK law states that an injunction does not have to be served in person and can be delivered by several different means including fax or e-mail.
Even though service may be by, for example twitter, issues may subsequently arise as to whether or not the person injuncted actually read the tweet (injunction or not).
Times are changing and solicitors firms need to accept that threats to clients arrive in all manner of guises. Social media is developing all the time and there will undoubtedly be more news of this kind where comments about a celebrity, business or individual are posted unfavourably.
Then there is the use of social media, such as Facebook and Twitter, as evidence in legal proceedings - increasingly the case in family matters.
I recently dealt with a case where the (now ex-) husband of my client changed his Facebook status to 'single'. This was used as evidence against the husband during the divorce proceedings. Making this information public and with privacy settings temporarily forgotten, the gentleman concerned was clearly unaware of the implications on making such a statement public.
Then there was the wife claiming maintenance from her ex-husband as she was not working. Unfortunately for her, her Facebook page referred to 'having a hard day at work but she had at least been paid' and so was out partying that night. The court ordered maintenance to stop.
In this case the implication is clear; few would argue that maintenance payments were unfairly stopped. But although such cases demonstrate that justice was served, justice which may not have been possible without access to social networking forums, is this a step too far? Should some spaces remain private and away from the law courts?
If the behaviour is then denied the person has a problem in that it is an admittance that they have lied and this raises the question as to whether their denial can be believed. Hoisted by their own petard.
Many online users seem to operate with an entirely different persona - perhaps this is a lesson to us all that our lives online are still our own and as such we are responsible for our actions.
Whilst solicitors themselves may not be in to social media websites their clients may be and, as such, what their clients put "out there" needs to be given serious consideration.
For more information on divorce and family matters please contact Lindsey Canning on 0114 266 6660 or email [email protected].
