“What do you think about the MySpace Hoax Case? I think the acts committed by Lori Drew and her daughter, are not criminal. Life is life and people can’t legally be held responsible for causing someone to have a bad day. Lori Drew is not responsible for the state of mind of the 13 year old, nor her weight or her choice in friends. The parents of the 13 year old girl are however responsible for her choice in online browsing, her health, state of mind and peer group. The personal circumstances regarding the case are disturbing and the situation does become deeply immoral but I feel it is not criminal.” - Inside Out Clothing
When I read this quote, I don’t necessarily like what it says, but I have to agree that it’s true. The case does fall much more into something moral than legal. While we might feel outraged at what happened, it is because according to the standards of our society, we feel a moral outrage.
“Also, I believe that what Drew did is a slander, ‘Slander is the term that describes almost all defamation that cannot be classified as libel. Slander includes spoken words, gestures, actions, and even omissions. Most cases of slander involve thoughtless statements that reflect on another person’s good name and reputation.’ (Essentials of Business Law, Luizzo, Pg. 47)”- RO Vegas Design
This is something I disagree with. I don’t disagree with the idea that the mother used the account for a type of defamation. However, I disagree that it was slander, rather it should be libel. Libel is the term used for when the defamation is in the form of the written word. Seeing as that they used the account to spread rumors and lies via the internet, I would assume that falls under a form of written word. Of course, with the way the internet works these days, perhaps it needs a classification of its own.
“Since the person who committed the hoax feels there was no malicious wrong doing, and the parents of Megan believe the opposite, the case will be left to the courts to decide the outcome.” – Raw Impact Design
The heart of this issue is surely a matter of one person’s morals vs. another. The mother who perpetrated the hoax doesn’t feel she is responsible, and if I remember correctly she was even quoted as saying something akin to that she isn’t responsible, she didn’t pull the trigger. Perhaps the courts will decide that it falls under some sort of crime, but I think that it doesn’t have much legal standing for criminal action.
“I think the lady responsible should be prosecuted for harassment because she knew what she was doing and she knew who she was doing it to. She started by making a false identity for herself presenting herself as somebody she wasn’t to get closer to Megan, this is no different than a sexual predator.” – JV Home Design
I do think this brings up an interesting idea, though. Could this fall under a prosecutable form of harassment? I think the idea that it’s no different than a sexual predator might not be quite right, perhaps this case will bring about some sort of legislation to protect minors from this sort of treatment online. Though, I think the biggest obstacle to this is the fact the internet is a global arena, and then we possibly run into the moral standards set by other countries. That is probably why when you sign up at websites like MySpace, you are required to agree to their terms of service, a sort of contract, weather you take the time to read it or not. Many of the site’s TOS’s have parts about prohibiting the use of the accounts to harass others, and that’s part of the misdemeanor charges they got the mother on.
No comments:
Post a Comment