My Blog About Cyber Laws

Bail bond, also known as surety bond, is the financial incentive given to the court for an arrested defendant in order to procure his release while he awaits the court date to be presented before the judge. If you have been wrongly accused of something and arrested in a place where you have no family or friends, you don't need to panic because you can get help from a bail bond agent. There are several bail bond agencies and companies that can help you regardless of whether you have just being arrested or you are in the court.

When you are arrested in a different country or state, the bail bond agencies provide the money and assistance required to help you get out of the degrading situation. Hence, you must know how an agent works to be able to make the most of the situation. If you have been arrested for no fault of yours or for some reason that you were absolutely unaware of then you must immediately contact an agency.

You will be required to sign a legal contract with the agency, based on which the agent will help you get out of the situation. The agent will pay the amount of money required for your release from the jail and this process usually takes a few hours after the contract has been signed. These agents do not simply provide bail bonds with basic circumstances, but also when there are unforeseen problems the agent is liable to pay the fine on behalf of the individual.

The blanket bail bond usually includes any additional costs and fine that cannot be afforded by those who are arrested. This is pretty similar to the insurance policies that are used for security and protection against unforeseen events in life. Furthermore, if you need some extra cover from the court then you must consider getting an agent help you with your requirements. The services offered by agents will help you find the perfect solution to steer clear of any monetary difficulties or other problems with the court.

Besides arranging for the amount of money to help you get out of the jail, the agents also assist in preparing the legal documents for your case, and after the paper work has been completed, a professional agent posts the bail. This process results in the release of the main suspect after some minor proceedings at the court. A reputable agency takes care of every minute detail from the start to finish, and makes sure that the suspect is released at the earliest.

If you look online, you will find many agencies and companies offering bail bond assistance. When choosing an agency to help you, make sure that it has been in business for long and has a good reputation. You can check the online reviews and testimonials to make sure that you hire true professionals who are well versed with the legal proceedings of the state to help you get out of the problem without any delay.

If you are looking for reliable bail bond agent then visit http://www.abbabailbonds.com/. For more information regarding bail bonds check out Abba Bail Bonds.

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

View the Original article

There is a lot of confusion that exists about assault and battery. Most people are under the impression that both of these are the same thing and the aggravated classification is simply a more serious form of the crime. However, this is not so. Assault and battery are two distinctly different crimes.

Assault V/S Battery

Criminal law defines assault as a deliberate act that causes the victim to believe that they are about to be physically harmed. If you threaten another person and you are obviously capable of carrying out that action, then you can be charged with assault. You need not have actually made any physical contact or carried out your actions. Just making the threat is sufficient to get you charged.

What this means is, if you are threatening another person, a police officer can intercede and arrest you for it without actually waiting for you to physically inflict any harm on your victim.

On the other hand, when there is actual physical contact, the crime is classified as battery.

The main difference between the two is the absence of physical contact in one and the definite occurrence of physical contact in the other.

What is Aggravated Assault?

While a simple assault involves just making a threat, there are several different factors that can change the level of danger involved. For example, holding a gun or a knife in your hand while making the threat, raises the act to an aggravated assault, even if you do not make use of the weapon. Just holding it in your hand while making the threat shows intent to cause grievous harm and can put your victim in serious fear for their safety.

Some crimes are classified as aggravated because of the victim's status. These include threats that are carried out on teachers, fire fighters and police officers or any threat made while the person was carrying out their duty.

The assailant's mental state of mine can also play a role in categorizing an aggravated assault as such. For example, if the threat was made with the intention to cause fear of severe harm of if the person was acting irresponsibly with absolute indifference to human life.

In some states, a sexual assault is classified under a separate category, whereas in other states it could be charged as aggravated, assault/battery, sexual assault or rape depending upon the state and the nature of the crime itself.

When you are charged with a crime, knowing the difference between an assault, aggravated assault and battery can make all the difference. At times like these, it is important to have a skilled and experienced criminal lawyer like Law Office Of Philip Averbuck at your side. Call him today to get the best defense possible. Also check out our new page on Assault and Battery.

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

View the Original article

If you are facing an unfamiliar situation where you have to help a friend in getting out of jail, you will probably need a concise explanation of how bail bonds work. Bail bonds, also known as Surety bonds, are legal contracts that can be used to release someone from jail. If you are helping a friend or a relative out of jail using a bond, you must understand that your job does not end here. This contract is a legal binding between the agent and the signer, which states that it is the signer's responsibility to ensure that the defendant will appear in court for the scheduled hearing.

While the procedure may seem rather straightforward, it so happens that it is not easy to handle it alone. You must, therefore, hire a bail agent to help you with it. Here are some reasons you should consider hiring a bail agent:

Different types of bonds involved - The bail process involves bonds, which are of different types. There are, for example, Immigration Bonds, Cash Bonds, Federal Bonds and Surety Bonds. All of these have different uses and conditions. For example, if the crime is categorized as a federal one, you need to use Federal Bonds. Using other types can lead to a rejection of the bail application and, thus, delay the process. By hiring an agent, therefore, you can make sure that you choose the required type of bail bond.

Different types of bails - The bail process can be complex. There are, for instance, police and court bails. A police bail is a conditional one that requires an application to the Magistrate's Court. For a court bail, you can apply to the Magistrate's Court for variations in the conditions. The guarantee and conditions vary in both types. If you are not familiar with these legal proceedings, you must hire an agent to help you out.

Complicated documentation involved - The bailing procedure is a detailed one and needs a lot of legal paperwork. If you are not familiar with these documents, it would be unwise to handle them on your own. These documents usually include a Bail Bond application, a Bail Indemnity Agreement and a receipt. Hiring a bail agent will make it easier for you to comprehend these documents.

Several details needed - The bailing process requires you to provide detailed information. Since you may not know which information to share, your bail agent will help you out with it. Usually, an agent will require you to answer some specific questions. They would want to know about the nature of the crime your defendant is charged with. You will also need to provide information regarding your relation with the defendant and the period of time you have known them for. You must, therefore, be ready for providing personal details of your link with the defendant.

Dealing with the release - Once your documents are approved, you will need to go to the jail and process these. Hiring a bail agent will help you by eliminating this hassle. It will be your agent's responsibility to drop the bail bond at the detention facility, requesting the release of the defendant. During this, you will be charged a bail fee, which is mandated by the law.

In order to be able to handle the process effectively, therefore, you must make sure that you find a great bail agent.

If you are looking for bail bonds in Los Angeles, you can find these at Abba Bail Bonds.

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

View the Original article

So lets say that you have been arrested for a crime. You have never been in trouble before, and this is your first experience with the criminal legal system. Now you have seen courtroom drama television series, and your favorite movie is, "My counsin Vinny." But there is completely different and its real life. One of the questions you have is what you should do when a Judge directly addresses you and asks you a question? How should you act, how should you respond, should you stand or sit? This article was address the last question, whether you should sit or stand.

Should you sit down or stand when addressing a Judge in a criminal case. The answer is absolutely you should always stand when addressing the court. In my opinion there are three main reasons to do this. And it is not just for exercise.

The first reason to always stand when addressing a Judge in a criminal case is it's a sign of respect. The most often heard complaint from Judges about defendants is they dont show any respect for the process. Remember this is a criminal case. The Judge is the individual who will ultimately decide your fate should be you convicted or enter into a plea deal. By standing when addressing the Court you are showing a sign of respect to that Judge and the process. Trust me when I say it will carry a lot of weight.

The second reason to always stand in this situation is it allows the Court recording device to record you better. Remember everything that is said in open court is recorded. It is important to speak up and annunciate clearly. If you don't understand something, or if you don't acknowledge something that can be raised later on in the proceedings. And guess how that will be done. Through the courtroom recording device. So remember to stand and pronounce your words clearly for the recording device.

Lastly the reason to always stand when addressing a Judge is acknowledge the court. At sentencing one of the most important aspects is the right to allocution. Meaning you have the right to tell the Judge anything you want regarding sentencing. Often times these hearings can become very streamlined, and if you don't stand up right away and start talking the Judge is likely just to pass over your remarks and finish up the sentencing. If you stand, even if the Judge is looking down at the paperwork it will force the Judge to acknowledge and give you the right to allocution.

Matthew Leyba is a Seattle DUI Lawyer in Washington State. He represents those accused of DUI and other serious traffic offenses in his Seattle DUI Lawyer practice.

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

View the Original article

Since getting arrested and tried isn't an annual occurrence for most people, defendants often have little idea what to expect from their criminal defense lawyer. Unfortunately, this knowledge gap leaves a lot of room for incompetent lawyers to make a fine living failing their clients. Since it can be difficult to look up a lawyer's track record (and the results can be misleading in any case), any particular defendant may feel in the dark when it comes to evaluating their attorney's worth. If you are currently in the hunt for a lawyer or want to determine whether or not you are being represented well, here are some things you should expect.

An Ethical and Aggressive Criminal Defense

While you can find plenty of ethical public defenders, you may find it a bit harder to come across one who meets the "aggressive" standard. This is because most public defender offices are overtaxed, to put it mildly. When you have many, many clients heading to court in a single day, there is only so much personal attention you can give to each one. A private attorney doesn't have this excuse, but they can still let down their clients. It's all the more inexcusable, considering how much they are paid for their services. If you feel that your lawyer could be doing much more for you, don't hesitate to let him know.

Giving Options

You should never feel as though your criminal defense lawyer is keeping you in the dark. Different defendants will have different relationships with their representation. Some prefer to collaborate on every aspect of their strategy, while others throw up their hands and let their lawyers handle every detail of the case. No matter which side you lean to, however, you deserve to have the options. Make sure your lawyer is giving them to you, along with his recommendations. While his input is important, it should ultimately be up to you which strategy you choose to pursue.

Developing a Coherent Strategy

While collaboration isn't a bad thing, it is a criminal defense lawyer's job to take the sketch of a strategy and flesh it out into a full scale theme. This theme could include rights that have been trampled on, police incompetence, or fighting to prove that you had nothing to do with the crime in question. While it isn't always necessary to put on a formal defense in front of the jury, this strategy should still be clear simply through the cross examination of the state's witnesses.

A criminal defense Baton Rouge lawyer can help you to build a proper case when you go to court. Find the assistance you need at http://josephkscott.com/

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

View the Original article

Defending those accused of DUI is a very complicated process. The competent DUI Attorney needs to be familiar with constitutional issues, scientific theories, and trial techniques. However in addition to those basis issues, the experienced DUI Attorney should also be qualified and certified to administer the standardized field sobriety testing. In other words they need to take the same course the law enforcement does, and learn the proper procedures for administering the standardized field sobriety testing.

In order to accomplish this the attorney should know how to administer the horizontal gaze nystagmus test, the walk and turn test, and the one leg stand test. These are the field sobriety tests that have been standarized by the national highway safety administration. In my opinion this is important for several reasons.

Verify whether the arresting officer administered correctly: In many DUI cases the arresting officer administers the standardized field sobriety tests to the defendant. And in all of those cases the officer will say they are trained to administer these tests, and they were done according to their training. In order to verify whether these tests were done correctly or not, the DUI Attorney needs to know who to administer the tests themselves. If they know exactly how to do it, and they took the same course as the arresting officer they will be in a better position to identify any issues with the administration of the tests.

Help to separate yourself from all the other DUI Attorneys: In every jurisdiction there are attorneys that say they exclusively practice in the area of DUI Defense. But what separates the good ones from the pretenders is the level of experience and knowledge. By taking the time and expense to take this NHTSA course, and learn exactly how to administer the field sobriety tests it will show a level of commitment and experience that will help you get clients.

Know the instructors and use them as experts: Many of the instructors of these NHTSA courses are former law enforcement. Sometimes in a DUI case it is necessary to hire an expert to counter what the Prosecutions witnesses are saying. Having an ex law enforcement officer who is also an instructor for the field sobriety testing and really helpful, and comes across very credible in the eyes of a jury. By taking the course, and getting to know the instructors you will be in a better position to ask them to help you out on a case.

Matthew Leyba is one of the premiere Seattle DUI Lawyers in Washington State. If you have been charged with a DUI don't wait contact a Seattle DUI Lawyer ASAP!

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

View the Original article

Companies are using email disclaimers in many instances, the most common reason is to attempt to safeguard confidential information. This may be information that a company holds or information that is intended to be sent to a particular recipient, for a specific purpose or even just information about the company itself.

Similarly, these disclaimers are used when any type of advice is being given for a specific purpose through electronic means. For example, a disclaimer may be used to limit liability where the information should not be passed on to a third party and relied on but there is potential it may be. By using a disclaimer for the transmission of this type of information it lets the recipient know the extent to which it can be used and when it may not be. In many instances a standard email disclaimer will state that if an email was sent to the recipient in error, that person is required to delete the email and not use or pass on any of the information contained in the email. This is used to avoid and safeguard against the wrongful dissemination of confidential information.

Another important reason to use email disclaimers is that a company will not be able to control what is sent by their employees; therefore a disclaimer should appear at the bottom of every email to try to protect the company for emails sent by their employees. An email disclaimer is a standard inclusion on emails for most companies and will outline that the contents of the email are not necessarily the views of the company. This essentially tries to distance the company from the sender, even if it is an employee and means that if there is a misrepresentation or any other type of inappropriate conduct, it is the sender whom is personally liable and not the company.

In other situations an email disclaimer may be used to ensure that the recipient knows the extent of the authority that a company provides to the employee as sender of the email. For example a disclaimer can state that any emails sent by a specific person cannot form a contract. From this, email disclaimers can be very broad or customized for specific purposes. Employers and companies can tailor email disclaimers to specific employees, specific information provided, who may rely on the contents of the email, how it may be used, and many other caveats rather than having a general disclaimer for all employees. The nature of the employee's role and risk involved in emails will determine whether the use of a unique or general disclaimer is appropriate. Lastly, the nature of the company and what is communicated by email will also determine how the email disclaimer is framed and what it needs to contain to be tailored and effective for its particular use.

Want to know more? Click here for Free information on Email Disclaimer. Australian legal agreements and forms from http://Legal123.com.au.

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

Victims of online reputation attacks and online intimidation should take their cases to the High Court instead of reporting them to the police.

In a recent court case where a hospital administrator became the first man in the UK to be jailed for stalking a woman by blogs, the authorities have sent a strong message to all those who wrongly believe that the internet is a lawless land where stalking, bullying, harassment, defamation and blackmail are a fair game and have demonstrated that online harassment shall not be tolerated in our society.

In a case which was heard by a Magistrate Court in Manchester it was alleged that a 38 year old man continuously attacked his female victim by using no less than 35 website blogs in which he repeatedly insulted her, causing her upset and reputational damage. The man also used emails to harass his victims as well as social networking sites such as Facebook.

It is not surprising at all that it took the authorities 18 months before the man was finally jailed. By this time, his victim must have been completely destroyed mentally and emotionally. Her confidence must have been shattered and her trust in people would have been replaced with cynicism and weariness. Had this hate campaign been conducted offline, I have no doubt that the authorities would have acted much quicker to bring it to a halt.

By the time the offender was jailed, he had already appeared in court on a number of occasions. On one occasion, after he admitted harassment, an order was made against him to refrain from mentioning his victim's name on any websites. Again, it appears it took some time before this very limited court order was made and even longer, before breaches were dealt with.

It is very likely, that had this been a case of domestic harassment, where more traditional methods of harassment were being used, the victim would have been relieved from her pain much, much earlier. It seems that the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and the Magistrates' Courts are not yet ready to effectively deal with these sorts of online harassment cases. The civil courts however are much quicker to act in response to online harassment cases with injunctions being granted within days rather than months and years. Victims of online harassment should be wise to take their cases to the High Court where solicitors can obtain a much more comprehensive injunction on their behalf within 48 hours. There is no need for victims of online harassment to suffer for such a long time before the harassment is stopped.

Despite him being jailed, large number of the defamatory blogs that the offender had created against his victim still remain active and is visible to the entire world to view. It is likely that a properly prepared High Court injunction would have ensured that the blogs and websites were removed by the internet service providers and that once such an injunction was granted, it could last for life, preventing anyone from taking part in the publication of material which is prohibited by the court order.

During his online campaign of harassment, the offender boasted of being so skilled in IT that he could set up and manipulate blogs about his victim quicker than they could be deleted.

It is not unusual for IT skilled individuals to blackmail their victims by making threats to destroy their victim's reputation unless certain demands being met. The police have seemed to so far, failed to recognise the fact that this form of blackmail is a criminal offence, mainly out of ignorance and lack of resources. These sorts of threats should be taken very seriously and perpetrators of such online threats should be told about the civil as well as the criminal implications of their actions.

Yair Cohen is a leading online defamation solicitor in the UK - http://www.BainsCohen.com.

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

Cookies have attracted lots of attention recently. I mean the tracking kind, not the edible kind in Christmas patterns and colors.

ScanScout, an on-line advertiser, recently settled a FTC enforcement action regarding the language in their privacy policy ("PP") about cookies. ScanScout's PP claimed that users could configure their browsers to block the cookies they use to gather information about users in order to send them targeted advertising. Turns out, however, the tracking cookies they were using were flash cookies that could not be blocked as stated. FTC found this to be deceptive and the enforcement action ensued.

What does this mean to you or your business?

Use of cookies

Consider not using flash cookies if you are currently doing so or considering so. Many people consider flash cookies deceptive and invasive. In fact, a primer on flash cookies by the Electronic Privacy Information Center shows that the breadth of information gathered by these cookies to probably be beyond the comfort zone of today's privacy-conscious consumers.

Have a Privacy Policy

Yes, it might be tempting to resolve this issue by simply not having a PP. After all, if you don't have a PP, you can't be found to be violating it right? Maybe, but you create other risks by deciding not to have a PP. First, consumers have increasingly shown themselves to be skeptical about having anything to do with websites that do not have privacy policies, so you might be losing business. Second, not having a PP will prevent you from using certain useful services (such as Google Analytics, which requires users to post a privacy policy) and conducting promotions or contests using many social media platforms.

Reference cookies practices in your Privacy Policy

Make sure that you have a full understanding of your cookies practices and that of any third party (such as Google Analytics) who provides apps or tools you use in your interface with users. Your PP should spell out exactly what cookies are used, whether they are persistent, whether you use flash cookies, how you use information gleaned from cookies (e.g. do you utilize information for targeted internal or external marketing), whether you share gathered information with third parties, and how users can block cookies (including providing a mechanism to block flash cookies - a key requirement of the ScanScout consent decree). Finally, if you use third-party services that utilize cookies, consider referencing the third-party service's cookies policy in your PP.

Finally, if you are going to be making any changes to your website privacy policy, make sure it is properly publicized to your clients, customers and/or users, ideally with a click-through mechanism where they must accept the new privacy policy before accessing your site.

What are your thoughts on use of cookies for marketing?

ERIC HSU is a Legal Success Strategist, accomplished speaker, and owner of Clear Focus Law.

The mission of Clear Focus Law is to show entrepreneurs, small biz and social marketing professionals how to use the law as a tool for empowering innovation and achieving success, both by building strong legal foundations to support the innovation and by establishing an effective and legally successful social media and web 2.0 presence to grow their business.

In addition to advising clients, Eric also speaks on social media legal topics, writes legal guides and blogs, and provides on-going training solutions.

Visit Clear Focus Law's website to learn how you can start to get a handle on how social media law affects your business.

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

Socrates once said that the virtue of goodness comes from knowledge. The counter to that is ignorance, or lack of knowledge, which is considered "evil." In modern terms this means the ability of the media to withhold information in a way that alters its meaning. Censorship, propaganda, conspiracy, these are the worst case scenarios that can result from the power of the media which would be considered immoral. But perhaps we should look at it in a different light. Instead of knowledge being purely goodness and ignorance being purely evil, we should consider instead how that knowledge or ignorance is being used. For example, the Department of Home Security usage of social media monitoring as a means of assessing public belief and sentiment towards certain "sensitive" topics. This isn't immoral because of the government withholding information from the people but rather the accessibility of information about the people by the government.

The Social Networking/Media Capability was officially announced in a Privacy Compliance Review on November 15th of 2011 but was formulated as early as June of 2010. According to the review, this capability was meant to allow the government to utilize the openness of the web's social media for early identification of possible threats and "collect information used to provide situational awareness and establish a common operating picture." The problem is that, like in many government documents, the words are rather ambiguous and noncommittal. What types of threats are they looking to identify? What kind of "common operating picture" are they trying to create? They make it seem like these monitors have a specific purpose, but the extent to which they use them in pursuit of that purpose is not stated.

Here's what we do know: The government has implanted monitor accounts in multiple forms of social media including top sites Facebook, Twitter, and Wikileaks but the full list of monitored sites is unknown. The privacy and civil rights ethics of this is obviously questionable but in light of the SOPA/FIPA backlash and controversy it seems we've reached a double edged sword. If the internet is free to access the way that it is then we must also allow the ability to monitor sites. It's not just the government with the ability to do this but really anyone with a computer and internet access. Saying the government can't do this is directly contradicting our belief in the freedom of the web. So which is worse, too much information or not enough?

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

Companies are using email disclaimers in many instances, the most common reason is to attempt to safeguard confidential information. This may be information that a company holds or information that is intended to be sent to a particular recipient, for a specific purpose or even just information about the company itself.

Similarly, these disclaimers are used when any type of advice is being given for a specific purpose through electronic means. For example, a disclaimer may be used to limit liability where the information should not be passed on to a third party and relied on but there is potential it may be. By using a disclaimer for the transmission of this type of information it lets the recipient know the extent to which it can be used and when it may not be. In many instances a standard email disclaimer will state that if an email was sent to the recipient in error, that person is required to delete the email and not use or pass on any of the information contained in the email. This is used to avoid and safeguard against the wrongful dissemination of confidential information.

Another important reason to use email disclaimers is that a company will not be able to control what is sent by their employees; therefore a disclaimer should appear at the bottom of every email to try to protect the company for emails sent by their employees. An email disclaimer is a standard inclusion on emails for most companies and will outline that the contents of the email are not necessarily the views of the company. This essentially tries to distance the company from the sender, even if it is an employee and means that if there is a misrepresentation or any other type of inappropriate conduct, it is the sender whom is personally liable and not the company.

In other situations an email disclaimer may be used to ensure that the recipient knows the extent of the authority that a company provides to the employee as sender of the email. For example a disclaimer can state that any emails sent by a specific person cannot form a contract. From this, email disclaimers can be very broad or customized for specific purposes. Employers and companies can tailor email disclaimers to specific employees, specific information provided, who may rely on the contents of the email, how it may be used, and many other caveats rather than having a general disclaimer for all employees. The nature of the employee's role and risk involved in emails will determine whether the use of a unique or general disclaimer is appropriate. Lastly, the nature of the company and what is communicated by email will also determine how the email disclaimer is framed and what it needs to contain to be tailored and effective for its particular use.

Want to know more? Click here for Free information on Email Disclaimer. Australian legal agreements and forms from http://Legal123.com.au.

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

Victims of online reputation attacks and online intimidation should take their cases to the High Court instead of reporting them to the police.

In a recent court case where a hospital administrator became the first man in the UK to be jailed for stalking a woman by blogs, the authorities have sent a strong message to all those who wrongly believe that the internet is a lawless land where stalking, bullying, harassment, defamation and blackmail are a fair game and have demonstrated that online harassment shall not be tolerated in our society.

In a case which was heard by a Magistrate Court in Manchester it was alleged that a 38 year old man continuously attacked his female victim by using no less than 35 website blogs in which he repeatedly insulted her, causing her upset and reputational damage. The man also used emails to harass his victims as well as social networking sites such as Facebook.

It is not surprising at all that it took the authorities 18 months before the man was finally jailed. By this time, his victim must have been completely destroyed mentally and emotionally. Her confidence must have been shattered and her trust in people would have been replaced with cynicism and weariness. Had this hate campaign been conducted offline, I have no doubt that the authorities would have acted much quicker to bring it to a halt.

By the time the offender was jailed, he had already appeared in court on a number of occasions. On one occasion, after he admitted harassment, an order was made against him to refrain from mentioning his victim's name on any websites. Again, it appears it took some time before this very limited court order was made and even longer, before breaches were dealt with.

It is very likely, that had this been a case of domestic harassment, where more traditional methods of harassment were being used, the victim would have been relieved from her pain much, much earlier. It seems that the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and the Magistrates' Courts are not yet ready to effectively deal with these sorts of online harassment cases. The civil courts however are much quicker to act in response to online harassment cases with injunctions being granted within days rather than months and years. Victims of online harassment should be wise to take their cases to the High Court where solicitors can obtain a much more comprehensive injunction on their behalf within 48 hours. There is no need for victims of online harassment to suffer for such a long time before the harassment is stopped.

Despite him being jailed, large number of the defamatory blogs that the offender had created against his victim still remain active and is visible to the entire world to view. It is likely that a properly prepared High Court injunction would have ensured that the blogs and websites were removed by the internet service providers and that once such an injunction was granted, it could last for life, preventing anyone from taking part in the publication of material which is prohibited by the court order.

During his online campaign of harassment, the offender boasted of being so skilled in IT that he could set up and manipulate blogs about his victim quicker than they could be deleted.

It is not unusual for IT skilled individuals to blackmail their victims by making threats to destroy their victim's reputation unless certain demands being met. The police have seemed to so far, failed to recognise the fact that this form of blackmail is a criminal offence, mainly out of ignorance and lack of resources. These sorts of threats should be taken very seriously and perpetrators of such online threats should be told about the civil as well as the criminal implications of their actions.

Yair Cohen is a leading online defamation solicitor in the UK - http://www.BainsCohen.com.

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

Cookies have attracted lots of attention recently. I mean the tracking kind, not the edible kind in Christmas patterns and colors.

ScanScout, an on-line advertiser, recently settled a FTC enforcement action regarding the language in their privacy policy ("PP") about cookies. ScanScout's PP claimed that users could configure their browsers to block the cookies they use to gather information about users in order to send them targeted advertising. Turns out, however, the tracking cookies they were using were flash cookies that could not be blocked as stated. FTC found this to be deceptive and the enforcement action ensued.

What does this mean to you or your business?

Use of cookies

Consider not using flash cookies if you are currently doing so or considering so. Many people consider flash cookies deceptive and invasive. In fact, a primer on flash cookies by the Electronic Privacy Information Center shows that the breadth of information gathered by these cookies to probably be beyond the comfort zone of today's privacy-conscious consumers.

Have a Privacy Policy

Yes, it might be tempting to resolve this issue by simply not having a PP. After all, if you don't have a PP, you can't be found to be violating it right? Maybe, but you create other risks by deciding not to have a PP. First, consumers have increasingly shown themselves to be skeptical about having anything to do with websites that do not have privacy policies, so you might be losing business. Second, not having a PP will prevent you from using certain useful services (such as Google Analytics, which requires users to post a privacy policy) and conducting promotions or contests using many social media platforms.

Reference cookies practices in your Privacy Policy

Make sure that you have a full understanding of your cookies practices and that of any third party (such as Google Analytics) who provides apps or tools you use in your interface with users. Your PP should spell out exactly what cookies are used, whether they are persistent, whether you use flash cookies, how you use information gleaned from cookies (e.g. do you utilize information for targeted internal or external marketing), whether you share gathered information with third parties, and how users can block cookies (including providing a mechanism to block flash cookies - a key requirement of the ScanScout consent decree). Finally, if you use third-party services that utilize cookies, consider referencing the third-party service's cookies policy in your PP.

Finally, if you are going to be making any changes to your website privacy policy, make sure it is properly publicized to your clients, customers and/or users, ideally with a click-through mechanism where they must accept the new privacy policy before accessing your site.

What are your thoughts on use of cookies for marketing?

ERIC HSU is a Legal Success Strategist, accomplished speaker, and owner of Clear Focus Law.

The mission of Clear Focus Law is to show entrepreneurs, small biz and social marketing professionals how to use the law as a tool for empowering innovation and achieving success, both by building strong legal foundations to support the innovation and by establishing an effective and legally successful social media and web 2.0 presence to grow their business.

In addition to advising clients, Eric also speaks on social media legal topics, writes legal guides and blogs, and provides on-going training solutions.

Visit Clear Focus Law's website to learn how you can start to get a handle on how social media law affects your business.

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

Socrates once said that the virtue of goodness comes from knowledge. The counter to that is ignorance, or lack of knowledge, which is considered "evil." In modern terms this means the ability of the media to withhold information in a way that alters its meaning. Censorship, propaganda, conspiracy, these are the worst case scenarios that can result from the power of the media which would be considered immoral. But perhaps we should look at it in a different light. Instead of knowledge being purely goodness and ignorance being purely evil, we should consider instead how that knowledge or ignorance is being used. For example, the Department of Home Security usage of social media monitoring as a means of assessing public belief and sentiment towards certain "sensitive" topics. This isn't immoral because of the government withholding information from the people but rather the accessibility of information about the people by the government.

The Social Networking/Media Capability was officially announced in a Privacy Compliance Review on November 15th of 2011 but was formulated as early as June of 2010. According to the review, this capability was meant to allow the government to utilize the openness of the web's social media for early identification of possible threats and "collect information used to provide situational awareness and establish a common operating picture." The problem is that, like in many government documents, the words are rather ambiguous and noncommittal. What types of threats are they looking to identify? What kind of "common operating picture" are they trying to create? They make it seem like these monitors have a specific purpose, but the extent to which they use them in pursuit of that purpose is not stated.

Here's what we do know: The government has implanted monitor accounts in multiple forms of social media including top sites Facebook, Twitter, and Wikileaks but the full list of monitored sites is unknown. The privacy and civil rights ethics of this is obviously questionable but in light of the SOPA/FIPA backlash and controversy it seems we've reached a double edged sword. If the internet is free to access the way that it is then we must also allow the ability to monitor sites. It's not just the government with the ability to do this but really anyone with a computer and internet access. Saying the government can't do this is directly contradicting our belief in the freedom of the web. So which is worse, too much information or not enough?

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

Cookies have attracted lots of attention recently. I mean the tracking kind, not the edible kind in Christmas patterns and colors.

ScanScout, an on-line advertiser, recently settled a FTC enforcement action regarding the language in their privacy policy ("PP") about cookies. ScanScout's PP claimed that users could configure their browsers to block the cookies they use to gather information about users in order to send them targeted advertising. Turns out, however, the tracking cookies they were using were flash cookies that could not be blocked as stated. FTC found this to be deceptive and the enforcement action ensued.

What does this mean to you or your business?

Use of cookies

Consider not using flash cookies if you are currently doing so or considering so. Many people consider flash cookies deceptive and invasive. In fact, a primer on flash cookies by the Electronic Privacy Information Center shows that the breadth of information gathered by these cookies to probably be beyond the comfort zone of today's privacy-conscious consumers.

Have a Privacy Policy

Yes, it might be tempting to resolve this issue by simply not having a PP. After all, if you don't have a PP, you can't be found to be violating it right? Maybe, but you create other risks by deciding not to have a PP. First, consumers have increasingly shown themselves to be skeptical about having anything to do with websites that do not have privacy policies, so you might be losing business. Second, not having a PP will prevent you from using certain useful services (such as Google Analytics, which requires users to post a privacy policy) and conducting promotions or contests using many social media platforms.

Reference cookies practices in your Privacy Policy

Make sure that you have a full understanding of your cookies practices and that of any third party (such as Google Analytics) who provides apps or tools you use in your interface with users. Your PP should spell out exactly what cookies are used, whether they are persistent, whether you use flash cookies, how you use information gleaned from cookies (e.g. do you utilize information for targeted internal or external marketing), whether you share gathered information with third parties, and how users can block cookies (including providing a mechanism to block flash cookies - a key requirement of the ScanScout consent decree). Finally, if you use third-party services that utilize cookies, consider referencing the third-party service's cookies policy in your PP.

Finally, if you are going to be making any changes to your website privacy policy, make sure it is properly publicized to your clients, customers and/or users, ideally with a click-through mechanism where they must accept the new privacy policy before accessing your site.

What are your thoughts on use of cookies for marketing?

ERIC HSU is a Legal Success Strategist, accomplished speaker, and owner of Clear Focus Law.

The mission of Clear Focus Law is to show entrepreneurs, small biz and social marketing professionals how to use the law as a tool for empowering innovation and achieving success, both by building strong legal foundations to support the innovation and by establishing an effective and legally successful social media and web 2.0 presence to grow their business.

In addition to advising clients, Eric also speaks on social media legal topics, writes legal guides and blogs, and provides on-going training solutions.

Visit Clear Focus Law's website to learn how you can start to get a handle on how social media law affects your business.

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

Companies are using email disclaimers in many instances, the most common reason is to attempt to safeguard confidential information. This may be information that a company holds or information that is intended to be sent to a particular recipient, for a specific purpose or even just information about the company itself.

Similarly, these disclaimers are used when any type of advice is being given for a specific purpose through electronic means. For example, a disclaimer may be used to limit liability where the information should not be passed on to a third party and relied on but there is potential it may be. By using a disclaimer for the transmission of this type of information it lets the recipient know the extent to which it can be used and when it may not be. In many instances a standard email disclaimer will state that if an email was sent to the recipient in error, that person is required to delete the email and not use or pass on any of the information contained in the email. This is used to avoid and safeguard against the wrongful dissemination of confidential information.

Another important reason to use email disclaimers is that a company will not be able to control what is sent by their employees; therefore a disclaimer should appear at the bottom of every email to try to protect the company for emails sent by their employees. An email disclaimer is a standard inclusion on emails for most companies and will outline that the contents of the email are not necessarily the views of the company. This essentially tries to distance the company from the sender, even if it is an employee and means that if there is a misrepresentation or any other type of inappropriate conduct, it is the sender whom is personally liable and not the company.

In other situations an email disclaimer may be used to ensure that the recipient knows the extent of the authority that a company provides to the employee as sender of the email. For example a disclaimer can state that any emails sent by a specific person cannot form a contract. From this, email disclaimers can be very broad or customized for specific purposes. Employers and companies can tailor email disclaimers to specific employees, specific information provided, who may rely on the contents of the email, how it may be used, and many other caveats rather than having a general disclaimer for all employees. The nature of the employee's role and risk involved in emails will determine whether the use of a unique or general disclaimer is appropriate. Lastly, the nature of the company and what is communicated by email will also determine how the email disclaimer is framed and what it needs to contain to be tailored and effective for its particular use.

Want to know more? Click here for Free information on Email Disclaimer. Australian legal agreements and forms from http://Legal123.com.au.

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert

Victims of online reputation attacks and online intimidation should take their cases to the High Court instead of reporting them to the police.

In a recent court case where a hospital administrator became the first man in the UK to be jailed for stalking a woman by blogs, the authorities have sent a strong message to all those who wrongly believe that the internet is a lawless land where stalking, bullying, harassment, defamation and blackmail are a fair game and have demonstrated that online harassment shall not be tolerated in our society.

In a case which was heard by a Magistrate Court in Manchester it was alleged that a 38 year old man continuously attacked his female victim by using no less than 35 website blogs in which he repeatedly insulted her, causing her upset and reputational damage. The man also used emails to harass his victims as well as social networking sites such as Facebook.

It is not surprising at all that it took the authorities 18 months before the man was finally jailed. By this time, his victim must have been completely destroyed mentally and emotionally. Her confidence must have been shattered and her trust in people would have been replaced with cynicism and weariness. Had this hate campaign been conducted offline, I have no doubt that the authorities would have acted much quicker to bring it to a halt.

By the time the offender was jailed, he had already appeared in court on a number of occasions. On one occasion, after he admitted harassment, an order was made against him to refrain from mentioning his victim's name on any websites. Again, it appears it took some time before this very limited court order was made and even longer, before breaches were dealt with.

It is very likely, that had this been a case of domestic harassment, where more traditional methods of harassment were being used, the victim would have been relieved from her pain much, much earlier. It seems that the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and the Magistrates' Courts are not yet ready to effectively deal with these sorts of online harassment cases. The civil courts however are much quicker to act in response to online harassment cases with injunctions being granted within days rather than months and years. Victims of online harassment should be wise to take their cases to the High Court where solicitors can obtain a much more comprehensive injunction on their behalf within 48 hours. There is no need for victims of online harassment to suffer for such a long time before the harassment is stopped.

Despite him being jailed, large number of the defamatory blogs that the offender had created against his victim still remain active and is visible to the entire world to view. It is likely that a properly prepared High Court injunction would have ensured that the blogs and websites were removed by the internet service providers and that once such an injunction was granted, it could last for life, preventing anyone from taking part in the publication of material which is prohibited by the court order.

During his online campaign of harassment, the offender boasted of being so skilled in IT that he could set up and manipulate blogs about his victim quicker than they could be deleted.

It is not unusual for IT skilled individuals to blackmail their victims by making threats to destroy their victim's reputation unless certain demands being met. The police have seemed to so far, failed to recognise the fact that this form of blackmail is a criminal offence, mainly out of ignorance and lack of resources. These sorts of threats should be taken very seriously and perpetrators of such online threats should be told about the civil as well as the criminal implications of their actions.

Yair Cohen is a leading online defamation solicitor in the UK - http://www.BainsCohen.com.

Article Source:http://EzineArticles.com/?expert