Photo Credit: TheVerge.com
Often, people ask me why after business school I went on to attend 3 years of law school and take the New York Bar. I had a successful career before my MBA program and post-MBA had options to move forward. The answer is always the same: because I firmly believe that any good digital executive need to possess lack of fear of technology, strong business expertise, expert negotiation skills and a very strong understanding of the law. This is true for marketing, business development general management (GM), and CEO/COO/CMO roles for large and small companies, public or private, who deals heavily in digital.
I feel strongly about having the law degree/license in my tool kit because the digital media industry is evolving so quickly that it’s pushing the boundaries and creating “gray” areas where existing law may not fully address. Digital is moving so quickly that new laws are constantly being create to regulate how companies and individual negotiate and interact with each other in cyberspace.
Typically, the area I deal with most often in law/digital relates to contract law surrounding digital rights management, distribution, e-commerce transactions, marketing. However, I remain extremely interested in the laws governing the behavior of companies and individuals in cyberspace. We have already seen quite a few new interpretations related to how individual behave on Facebook, Twitter, etc.
Quite frankly, I sometimes geek out on law and law review articles. I may not want to be a full-time attorney practicing it day-in, day-out. But I love the process and the beauty of the practice of law and how it impacts how we live. It’s really an amazing thing to read and analyze.
I am currently intrigued and watching closely what is happening in the California Legislation as they look at making “revenge porn” illegal with Senate Bill 255. I’m in full law geek-out mode after work on this.
For those who don’t know what “revenge porn” is, revenge porn is the posting and/or distribution of photos or videos of ex-lovers by jilted exes. The victim had previously given consent to the taking of the photos/videos and or had freely given it to their lover. The law today in California cover some aspects on the posting/distribution of this type of material. If the victim of the photo/video is under 18, they are covered under child pornography laws. If the photo was taken without consent, in secrecy, in areas where reasonable expectations of privacy should be had (in a home, bedroom, private area vs. public park for example), that is covered under the law. Cyberstalking is also covered for “revenge porn” but a pattern must be establish where more than one photo/video is distributed for example but a continued posting/harassment. But because the photo/video was taken between consenting adults when the relations between the individuals were positive, a gray area potentially exists for revenge porn that is not covered by the existing laws.
What California is considering is a very narrow interpretation. If a person takes a “selfie” naked photo or video and texts it to their lover, which is then later posted in revenge, this law might not cover it. It would however cover a situation where the victim’s lover both creates the photo/videos and then also subsequently distributes it in revenge with the intent to harm. Senate Bill 255 would fine a person $1000 for the first offense and $2000 and potential jail time for a second offense. Candidly, I think that the punishment should be much, much higher financially to have real teeth.
This is worth watching because it sets out to govern how digital material is distributed and by whom and under what circumstances after interactions go sour. What the California Legislature decides to do may prompt other states to adapt similar measures.
OK. I’ll stop geeking out on law now. For those who read this blog for more tech oriented posts, I’ll be going back to my normal areas of interest! But for those interested, stay tuned. I’ll be keeping my eye on this and posting as the California Legislature moves Senate Bill 255 along.