Australian Court Lets Lawyer Serve Papers Via Facebook 204
a302b writes "A Canberra lawyer has been permitted to serve legal documents via Facebook for a couple who defaulted on a loan. He claims he needed to do this because he was unable to track them down to a physical address. At what point does our online presence become 'real?' And what opportunities are available for fraud, if social networking sites are considered legal representations of ourselves, even when they can be anonymously created under any name?"
One more reason (Score:2, Insightful)
Reason #9,382,329 NOT to waste time on those stupid "social" networking sites.
Re:But.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Facebook no different to email. (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, there is a difference. In general, you are pretty certain who an e-mail address goes to.
If the ISP is contacted to obtain a person's e-mail address, they can definitely provide the info, they can also match the user up with customer billing records. This information is fairly unlikely to be fake.
With e-mail, your address may also be exchanged in advance, i.e. through some other means of communication, so the person serving can show solid evidence that the e-mail address belongs to the person.
I.e. if the legal matter concerns copyright material posted on blah.example.com, and the WHOIS info for that domain lists the e-mail address, then there is PROOF that the e-mail address is provided by a person who controls the domain.
However, with facebook, the target party is found by a simple search for their name and (possibly geography).
Since multiple people have the same name, even in the same area, it is unreasonable to expect you have verifiably served the right person.
You may have accidentally sent the information to the wrong profile.
Also, the purpose of facebook (for many users) is simply to display profile information.
Many users don't expect to receive messages of any sort, so they don't check them.
This is in stark contrast to an e-mail service whose sole purpose is to receive messages, and is effective, so long as the account is not abandoned.
Re:One more reason (Score:1, Insightful)
Or at least to not have your profile open to other members of your network - espically when that network is one called "Australia"
This could be used for (Score:4, Insightful)
The question I have is how dose he know they read it? As I understand it, the key is making sure the person knows they have been served.
Re:But.... (Score:5, Insightful)
You'd probably be pretty confident that you'd found the right people hey?
Well, I'd be confident that I'd found someone claiming to be the right people.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
That wasn't me... (Score:1, Insightful)
If someone tried to serve me via Facebook, they wouldn't be serving me--they'd be serving someone who created a fake Facebook account in my name and posted a bunch of my pictures.
E-mail? That damn hosting provider of mine keeps losing e-mail; I must have never gotten it.
If you want me, you'll have to use Certified Mail or serve me in person. :-)
As a sysadmin, I had one extremely difficult user who would e-mail me with "read receipt" AND "delete receipt" so she could time my replies from the moment I read her messages. Of course, I declined every single receipt from her. I'm just thankful the higher-ups running the Exchange server required permission to send receipts...
Re: At what point isn't an online presence 'real'? (Score:4, Insightful)
In Australia to get a bank account you have to provide 100 points of ID. So my bank knows who I am.
Amazon is a company that provides a service, they don't care who you are as long as they get their money(eg. like a supermarket etc.).
I imagine your clients would regret not having more information about your identity if they paid you and you failed to produce the work required.
Online identity could be the same as physical identity if online services required you to actually provide some form of identification(eg. credit card number, copy of driver's license, etc.) although I've always been horrified at how little is required to prove one's identity and how much that identity gains you.
If I received papers via Facebook I'd just ignore them, as there is not way anyone else could know whether I received them, or that the account was actually me.
- Jesse McNelis
What advantage does the legal notice server get? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:But.... (Score:5, Insightful)
For the record - I don't think anything other than in person should be a legal way to serve, but email is not superior to Facebook.
Why?
Personal service is preferred, and process servers go to extreme and often comical lengths to put the paper in your hand, but some people refuse to accept service. Should you have to continue a manhunt for a year, at a cost of tens of thousands of dollars, in order to exercise your legal rights? How would you feel if someone potentially owed you thousands or millions of dollars and you couldn't get it because they wouldn't open the door?
Like all forms of service other than personal service, it's a last resort after a documented showing of diligence. At some point, you're intentionally avoiding being served, because letters and messages have been left for you, and if that's the case, the notice function of service has been fulfilled. Like everything else in law, it's a balancing of competing needs. You also always have the opportunity to fight a default judgment if you can legitimately demonstrate that the dozens of attempted services were missed because you were actually, truly not available.
As you can imagine, the chances of you disappearing from society and leaving no trace of how to contact you with employers, neighbors, family, and friends is fairly small...unless you're running from something.
Re:But.... (Score:2, Insightful)
our fathers and mothers had the same first and last names and the same middle initials.
I believe they call that 'brothers'.