Life was Easier Before the Digital Era...

In the days prior to the evolution of the Internet, planning and administering an estate was relatively simple as the physical belongings of the deceased could be carefully sorted through, packaged, and divided according to the Deceased’s testamentary document or the applicable legislation.

In the days since the  Internet has become a common household tool, planning and administering an estate has not been so easy. In a study commissioned by Remember A Charity, The Dying in a Digital Age, it was discovered that four in five people own digital assets, but only nine per cent have considered how these will be distributed upon their death.

According to the study, the nation's digital music collection is worth an estimated £900 million alone.

Three quarters of those surveyed for the study indicated that their digital music and photo collections had strong sentimental value, while eight out of ten said their digital assets were financially valuable.

Rob Cope, director of Remember A Charity said: ''Bank accounts, music and photograph collections are increasingly stored online…meaning families will wave goodbye to a small fortune if details are not passed on.”

There is now an entire cyber existence that both the Deceased and Trustees need to turn their mind to when planning or administering an Estate. For instance, what will become of Facebook, Twitter, Flickr and PayPal accounts? One easy solution is to subscribe to a website called Legacy Locker. Legacy Locker was created in 2009 and it maintains a master list of user names and programs for online bank accounts, social networking sites and document repositories. 

In the digital era, it is important that we consider and make arrangements for how our digital assets will be distributed, and for estate planners, it may be just as important that you consider including in your questionnaire or checklist, a question that forces a client to turn their mind to consider their digital assets. 

Thank you for reading, and have a great weekend.

Rick Bickhram - Click here for more information on Rick Bickhram.

Tweeting in Court and other Socially Acceptable Behaviour

Given the prevalence of scepticism amongst lawyers (see my earlierblog), it is entirely in keeping with character for lawyers to be slow to openly embrace social media.

Judging from a recent study, it would seem that this might be doubly so for Canadian lawyers. In this article about Digital Life, the world's largest study into consumers' digital behaviours and attitudes ever conducted, the following observations were made about Canadians’ online activities:

  • Canada lags in digital engagement.
  • Canadians aren't much for blogging.
  • Canadians are average picture-sharers.
  • Canadians do less social networking, more email.
  • Canadians spend less time on social networking sites on their mobile devices.
  • Canadians will be slower to transition social networking on mobile phones.
  • With an average of 150 friends in our social networks, Canadians are not as "friendly" as consumers in some other countries. 

If the President of the United States can win an election based in part on social media strategy, then even the most sceptical of lawyers cannot deny there just might be something to it.   Barack Obama has so many friends on facebook and contacts on LinkedIn that even I am a 3rd level connection.     

We have also seen this week much texting and tweeting from the courtroom during the sentencing hearing of Russell Williams. Justice Robert Scott agreed to allow the media to use electronic devices for the purpose of taking notes but said any use of laptops, handheld communications or recording devices must be done an a way that was not obtrusive to the court process.

Social media is a pretty big wave. It is changing our behaviour and it is here to stay. Whether you are a Canadian, a lawyer, or both, you might as well just hang on and enjoy the ride!

Sharon Davis - Click here for more information on Sharon Davis.

 

Judge doesn't like juror's facebook post during trial

Serving on a jury is one of our most fundamental civic duties. It can, however, pose hardships on those individuals summoned to the jury box, particularly when one considers the financial impact of giving up your income while acting as a juror.

Despite the financial hardship associated with jury duty, it is a serious undertaking and should be seen as such. As a juror, you are required to play an active role in the administration of justice and, together with other citizens, you will be required render a verdict of guilt or innocence in a criminal matter.  

A recent article in the Globe & Mail with the above captioned-title underscores the importance of taking jury duty seriously. 

A Michigan woman, summoned to be a juror, posted on her Facebook page that it was “Gonna be fun to tell the defendant they’re GUILTY”

Alarmingly, her post was found by the defence team BEFORE it had even started its case.

The next day, the juror found herself removed from the jury. Judge Druzinski told the Michigan woman that it did not matter whether she used Facebook to express an opinion or simply spoke to a friend about the case.

“You violated your oath. ... You had decided she was already guilty without hearing the other side”

By October, 1, 2010, the Michigan woman must submit an essay about the 6th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and pay a $250 fine.

Have a great weekend!

Kathryn Pilkington - Click here for more information on Kathryn Pilkington.

Deceased User Policies: Twitter and Facebook

Social Media is not a fad and is fundamentally changing the ways we interact and communicate with others.  Two of the more popular social networking websites, Twitter and Facebook, recently implemented policies that set out guidelines regarding a user’s account once they have died.

Under Twitter’s policy, a person can either request that the deceased user’s account be removed entirely or receive an archive of all the deceased user’s tweets offline once they have provided Twitter with the following information:

1.                  Your full name, contact information (including e-mail address), and your relationship to the deceased user; 

 2.                  The username of the Twitter account, or a link to the profile page of the Twitter account.  

 3.                  A link to a public obituary or news article.

By comparison, Facebook provides two options: either removing the deceased’s account, or "memorializing" it.

Memorializing a person’s account “means the account lives on in Facebook's system, and other Facebook members can interact with the deceased member's wall. What’s interesting about what Facebook put into place, compared to Twitter, is that there’s still a great deal of emphasis put on privacy and what can be done with the information that user has posted to the service. For instance, only that user's friends can still visit the profile or find it in Facebook's public search tool. And Facebook goes so far as to remove all status updates and contact information.”

It is hard to imagine that Facebook and Twitter will remain an important part of our lives many years from now, but Facebook has grown from 300 million to 500 million users in less than a year, with few signs of that slowing down. This is an indication that “policies about a user's death can end up being just as important as those you agree to when you first sign up.”

Thank you for reading, and have a great day.
 

Rick Bickhram - Click here for more information on Rick Bickhram.

 

Elections and Social Networks

Even as Canadians, we cannot help but get caught up in the media frenzy surrounding the U.S. Presidential State Primaries. In the last couple of months, the dominating story has been the campaign between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for the Democratic Party nomination.

Last week, Michael Geist, noted technology law professor, columnist, and blogger wrote an interesting article about how Barack Obama has courted the youth vote by embracing technology, especially social networks, like Facebook, MySpace, and YouTube. Obama’s approach appears to have worked as a social networking tool. The official Obama Facebook support page has over 500,000 friends versus Hillary’s 100,000 friends.

Aside from using technology to reach voters, Obama has also taken positions on issues that are important to young voters, such as net neutrality legislation and digital copyright, subjects most politicians, including Canada’s mainstream political parties fail to address.

From the sidelines, it will be interesting to see how the primaries work out and if more Facebook friends results in more delegates. I would encourage anyone interested in technology, privacy law, and social media to regularly read Mr. Geist’s blog.

Thanks for reading,

Diane Vieira