Volume 13, Issue 1 (Winter 2012)
Persistent link for this collection
Search within Volume 13, Issue 1 (Winter 2012)
Browse
Recent Submissions
Item Striking a Balance: Revising USDA Regulations to Promote Competition Without Stifling Innovation(University of Minnesota. Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences, 2012) Welters, AmandaItem Expedition E-Recording, First Stop URPERA: How Universal E-Recording Under URPERA Could Revolutionize Real Estate Recording in the United States and Why it Should(University of Minnesota. Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences, 2012) Kranz, Jessica KopplinItem How Can Better Food Labels Contribute to True Choice?(University of Minnesota. Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences, 2012) Horvath, J.C.Item To Track or “Do Not Track”: Advancing Transparency and Individual Control in Online Behavioral Advertising(University of Minnesota. Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences, 2012) Tene, Omer; Polonetsky, JulesItem An Organizational Approach to the Design of Patent Law(University of Minnesota. Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences, 2012) Vertinsky, LizaItem Good Fences Make Good Neighboring Rights: The German Federal Supreme Court Rules on the Digital Sampling of Sound Recordings in Metall auf Metall(University of Minnesota. Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences, 2012) Reilly, TracyItem Forbidden City Enclosed by the Great Firewall: The Law and Power of Internet Filtering in China(University of Minnesota. Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences, 2012) Lee, Jyh-An; Liu, Ching-YiItem Left to Their Own Devices: IOM’s Medical Device Committee’s Failure to Comply(University of Minnesota. Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences, 2012) Stensvad, Eva; Hall, Ralph F.Item The BP Blowout and the Social and Environmental Erosion of the Louisiana Coast(University of Minnesota. Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences, 2012) Farber, Daniel A.Item Writings on the Wall: The Need for an Authorship-Centric Approach to the Authentication of Social-Networking Evidence(University of Minnesota. Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences, 2012) Robbins, Ira P.Item 13.1 Student Masthead(University of Minnesota. Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences, 2012)Item 13.1 Faculty Masthead(University of Minnesota. Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences, 2012)Item Writings on the Wall: The Need for an Authorship-Centric Approach to the Authentication of Social-Networking Evidence(University of Minnesota. Consortium on Law and Values in Health, Environment & the Life Sciences, 2013-04-15) Robbins, Ira P.People are stupid when it comes to their online postings. The recent spate of social-networking websites has shown that people place shocking amounts of personal information online. Unlike more traditional modes of communication, the unique nature of these websites allows users to hide behind a veil of anonymity. But while social-networking sites may carry significant social benefits, they also leave users - and their personal information - vulnerable to hacking and other forms of abuse. This vulnerability is playing out in courtrooms across the country and will only increase as social-networking use continues to proliferate. This Article addresses the evidentiary hurdle of authenticating social-networking evidence, a novel legal issue confronting courts today. The Article explains and critiques four approaches used by different jurisdictions, concluding that each approach fails to adequately address the critical issue of authorship. The anonymous nature of social-networking websites, coupled with the extent of users’ personal information available online, raises serious concerns about the authorship of any piece of evidence posted to one of these sites. Litigants are using social-networking postings in court, attributing authorship to a particular person without demonstrating a sufficient nexus between the posting and the purported author. Absent this nexus, however, the evidence fails to meet even the low hurdle of authentication. To remedy this problem, this Article proposes that courts shift their focus from account ownership and content to authorship of the evidence. Working within the existing rules of evidence, this approach underscores the importance of fairness and accuracy in the outcome of judicial proceedings that involve social-networking evidence.