Group items tagged

Cyber bullying conducted at school allows school authorities to more easily impose discipline. The use of school equipment to cyber bully also makes a stronger legal argument for action by the school. And if the student e-mails offensive speech to school or downloads it at school and then distributes it, the school is in an advantageous position regarding disciplining the student. However, speech created at home—such as the creation of a Web site—affords greater legal protection for cyber bullies.

“The problem with the approach that web speech created at home can—if accessed at school—become school speech that can be regulated is the very nature of the Internet. Once something is created and placed on the Internet, the author loses control over who can access the speech and where it can be accessed.”

Many of the most egregious acts of cyberbullying do not take place during school hours or on school networks, a situation that presents a dilemma for public school administrators: If they punish a student for off-campus behavior, they could get hit with a freedom of speech suit.  If they do nothing, students may continue to suffer and school officials theoretically could get hit with failure to act litigation. For school administrators, it appears to be an unfortunate “catch-22.” For lawyers, it’s a “perfect storm,” pitting freedom of speech advocates against the victims of cyberbullying and schools that try to intervene. There are no easy answers in this arena, few laws, and no well-established precedents that specifically deal with cyberbullying.

“School administrators can intervene in cyberbullying incidents, even if the incidents do not take place on school grounds, if they can demonstrate that the electronic speech resulted in a substantial disruption to the educational environment.”

These cases illustrate not only a lack of precedent on cyberbullying cases, but also a dilemma for school administrators on how to handle cyberbullying.  “There are few laws that address how to handle cyberbullying, and many schools don’t have an internal policy to deal with cyberbullying that takes place off-campus,” offers Deutchman.  “It may take an unfortunate and tragic event on school property to get more schools to consider tackling electronic behavior that originates off campus.  It’s only a matter of time before a cyberbully, or the victim of cyberbullying, uses deadly force during school hours.”

Director of Special Programs for Paducah City Schools, Tom Ballowe, says the new law impacts reporting requirements and gives new directives to principals and schools on the reporting of the information.  He says the law also requires the state to send out reports each year on each district and each school in that district, so it’s a reporting issue as well as a policy and procedures issue. Ballowe says people should not be afraid to report bullying to school officials because you should report it and you’ll be protected from retaliation. The school district will then report the incident if it’s serious enough to law enforcement. 

A survey conducted by MSN United Kingdom found that 74% of teens as compared to 80% in this study did not go to anyone for advice when they were cyberbullied (www.msn.co.uk/cyberbullying, 2006). One reason some teenagers are reluctant to tell parents or adults is the fear of retaliation.

Many times parents don't get involved because they are afraid of invading their teen's privacy. Others may feel that as long as they have filtering software their teen is protected from negative material.

Parents need to be educated about cyberbullying- what it looks like, what the effects are and how to handle it. Rosalind Wiseman, educator and author of the best seller "Queen Bees & Wannabes", suggest parents consider the following: Use technology as an opportunity to reinforce your family values. Attach rules and consequences if inappropriate behavior occurs. Move the computer out of your child's bedroom and into the family room. Teach your child not to share passwords. Install monitoring and filtering software. Monitor your child's screen name(s) and Web sites for inappropriate content. If cyberbullying occurs, save and print out any evidence and decide whom you should contact for assistance.

Mathew Firsht brought the landmark libel action after coming across a Facebook group titled “Has Mathew Firsht lied to you?” as well as a profile containing false claims about his sexuality, religion and political views.

The damages awarded on Thursday by the High Court, as well as the record payout given to Max Mosley, the motorsports chief accused of indulging in a Nazi-themed orgy, will serve as a stark warning to old and new media alike, experts said.

Users who think of the site as a harmless way to catch up with friends still do not appreciate the risks of posting jokes or other potentially embarrassing details about friends and colleagues, experts said

But that doesn't mean YouTube or any other media company should get the blame, legally or ethically, for the attack, media experts said Friday.

The teenagers have been arrested on charges that they beat the teen so they could make a video of the attack to post online. One of the girls struck the 16-year-old victim on the head several times and then slammed her head into a wall, knocking her unconscious, according to an arrest report.

From a legal standpoint, YouTube and other online service providers are largely exempt from liability because of a 1996 anti-pornography law. One provision says Internet service providers are not considered publishers simply because they retransmit information provided by their users or other sources.

May school officials lawfully “search” the confiscated cell phone to look at stored text messages, photographs, videos, and logs of incoming and outgoing calls? Clearly, the circumstances of the search must satisfy the T.L.O. standard. Not as clear, however, is whether such a search violates federal or Michigan laws regarding stored electronic communications.

[A] search of a student by a teacher or other school officials will be ‘justified at its inception’ when there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the search will turn up evidence that the student has violated or is violating either the law or the rules of the school. Such a search will be permissible in its scope when the measures adopted are reasonably related to the objectives of the search and not excessively intrusive in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the infraction.”

In Klump v Nazareth Area Sch Dist, 425 F Supp 2d 622 (ED Pa, 2006), a federal district court denied the school’s motion to dismiss a lawsuit filed by a student whose cell phone was searched.