C. The right of privacy
1. An example of a legal right developed by courts
2. Provides protections against unreasonable searches and seizures
3. Privacy affords protection against intrusion by others
a. Educational privacy on grades – Buckley Amendment
b. Abortion stems from privacy right
c. Banking privacy rights
D. Privacy and technology
1. New rules are needed as technology evolves
2. E-mail, EDI
3. Some criminal sanctions
CASE BRIEF: Fawcett v. Altieri
960 N.Y.S.2d 592 (2013)
FACTS: Gina L Fawcett (plaintiff) and her then-minor son, John, sued Sea High School and the parents of
Nicholas Altieri (defendants) to recover damages for John’s eye injury that he sustained in an
altercation with Nicholas during a tennis match with St. Joseph High School. The defendants made
a discovery request for access to John’s social media accounts, including Facebook, MySpace,
Friendster, Flickr, and others. Ms. Fawcett moved for protective order to prevent discovery of the
information on these sites because John’s sites were not publicly available.
ISSUE: Are social media accounts discoverable?
HOLDING AND
REASONING: The court held that a variety of factors must be considered before granting broad access to social
media accounts, including privacy settings by the holder of the account, relevancy of the
information to the litigation, and protections afforded by the various social media sites. The court’s
decision provides the guidelines for determining whether the litigants in such cases will be able to
have discovery access to each other’s social media sites. The parties will have to do depositions
and then renew the request once more factual information is available for the analysis of the
request for access.
DISCUSSION POINTS: Ethics & the Law
Maybe a Little Too “LinkedIn”
This feature will generate great discussion among students. Most of them are encouraged by their colleges and
universities to get on LinkedIn in order to establish connection and have a network of support. LinkedIn can be a
great resource, but what is on the page is publicly available and, for free. The premium service allows potential
employers to get unvarnished information about applicants by checking with others who worked at the company at
the same time. Some interesting questions to think about are the fact that we have to resort to such means to get the
truth because we cannot get the truth from the references that applicants provide. Is this more of a question of
solving a problem with references vs. whether employers should be permitted to use the information posted on the
site?
All LinkedIn users have agreed to have their profiles available. The information is there – users are trying to hone its
use or perhaps require notification when others are accessing information not generally available through the use of
the site.
For employers, there is the issue of possibly tainting the hiring process – they find out more information on some
applicants and not on others, which is disparate treatment and could result in inaccurate information and perhaps
charges of discrimination because of different scrutiny given to different applicants.
As usual, the law on privacy has not yet caught up to the nuances of information use and refinement on the Internet.