Enter to open, tab to navigate, enter to select
Friend's Access to Facebook User's Wall Posts Buries Privacy Claims: DNJ
Practical Law Legal Update 4-539-1765 (Approx. 4 pages)
Friend's Access to Facebook User's Wall Posts Buries Privacy Claims: DNJ
by Practical Law Intellectual Property & Technology
| Published on 27 Aug 2013 • USA (National/Federal) |
On August 20, 2013, the US District Court for the District of New Jersey in Ehling v. Monmouth-Ocean Hospital Service Corp. held, among other things, that a user's non-public Facebook wall posts are covered by the Stored Communications Act but that the statute does not apply where the Facebook user distributes her wall posts to her friend who then copies and forwards the posts to others.
The US District Court for the District of New Jersey issued an opinion in Ehling v. Monmouth-Ocean Hospital Service Corp. on August 20, 2013 holding, among other things, that a user's non-public Facebook wall posts are covered by the Stored Communications Act (SCA) but that the statute does not apply where the Facebook user distributes her wall posts to her friend who then copies and forwards the posts to others.
This case arose out of an employee-employer dispute. The plaintiff worked for Monmouth-Ocean Hospital Service Corp. (MONOC) as a registered nurse and paramedic.
The plaintiff had a Facebook account and a number of Facebook friends including many MONOC coworkers though none of them were MONOC management. One of her Facebook friends was Tim Ronco who also had a Facebook account. Plaintiff posted on Ronco's wall and Ronco had access to plaintiff's Facebook wall. Without plaintiff's knowledge, Ronco took screenshots of plaintiff's Facebook wall and printed them or emailed them to a MONOC manager. The manager never asked for the information and never requested that Ronco keep him apprised of plaintiff's Facebook activity.
One of plaintiff's posts resulted in MONOC taking disciplinary action against her. Plaintiff ultimately sued MONOC based on a number of claims, including:
- Violation of the SCA.
- Invasion of privacy.
The district court granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing these claims.
The district court held that the SCA covers non-public Facebook wall posts because Facebook wall posts are:
- Electronic communications.
- Transmitted via an electronic communication service.
- Electronically stored since they are not held in temporary intermediate storage but are saved and archived indefinitely.
- Configured to be private when the user makes their wall posts inaccessible to the general public.
Having determined that the SCA covers non-public Facebook wall posts, the district court then evaluated whether the SCA's statutory exceptions applied. Specifically, the district court considered whether the conduct was authorized by either:
- The person or entity providing a wire or electronic communication service.
- A user of the service with respect to a communication of or intended for that user.
The district court concluded that the user exception applied because:
- Access to the communication was authorized since plaintiff's Facebook friend Ronco, voluntarily provided the posts to MONOC management without coercion or pressure.
- Ronco was a Facebook user.
- Plaintiff's Facebook wall post was intended for Ronco.
The district court also brushed aside the plaintiff's invasion of privacy claim because:
- MONOC were passive recipients of the information that they did not seek or request.
- Plaintiff voluntarily gave the information to her Facebook friend.
- The Facebook friend voluntarily gave that information to someone else.
Court document: