A ‘must read’ for Facebook users…

Martin George has a very useful post “Facebook, Oxford and Privacy” on his blog. Fascinating stuff – definitely a must read if you are on Facebook. A tale of dark deeds by Oxford dons against Oxford students and other matters…

***

See also: Alex from IMPACT on his take on all this

See also: Lilian Edwards, Pangloss on Facebook

See also: Prisonlawinsideout for more on this 

9 thoughts on “A ‘must read’ for Facebook users…

  1. Thanks, Charon. I have updated my original post. I would add that Alex and Lilian posted an item on this first, and mine was a response to theirs. If it is interesting or useful, it is only because I had other equally interesting and useful posts to refer to!

    I don’t particularly agree with jailhouselawyer’s analysis. The breach of privacy issue is far more complex than he makes out (see pangloss for some insight into the problems). And neither am I convinced that principles of natural justice that apply to a court of law can and should apply to university disciplinary regulations. It isn’t a “trial.”

  2. If someone publishes a photo on a public space, I find it difficult for them to later claim that there has been an invasion of privacy. Agreed, the purpose of showing the photos was not with the intent that Oxford University would then use them for disciplinary purposes. The police have prosecuted some who have self incriminated themselves for “happy slapping”. I don’t think privacy laws have developed over here yet…

    The case I cited related to an administrative decision, a backward transfer in prison and recategorisation from “C” to “B”. It wasn’t a trial nor a prison adjudication. I was adversely affected by the decision, and not allowed any input to the decision-maker, in effect, I was denied a hearing at first instance, but I was informed that I could appeal. This sounds similar to what Oxford University are doing. The decision-maker has made a decision based upon photos, imposed a fine, and they are told that they may appeal the decision. In my case, Ed Fitzgerald QC submitted that it is a very different situation trying to influence a decision, from trying to change a decision which had already been made. The Court was persuaded by this forceful argument.

  3. I have to say… I concur… but… I may well take a different view in the morning when I recover.

    Privacy is a many splendoured thing…. which is why I am planning to get married to another cartoon and sell the artwork to Hello magazine. I have a feeling it will not be a lot of mullah.

    Buona notte

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>