29 ms·

Facebook ruling: German court grants parents rights to dead daughter's account

54 points by cr1895 8y ago

izzydata 8y ago
Put your master password to a password manager in your will.
nmridul 8y ago
But this raises some questions inside me. Maybe some one can shed some light here. 1. The physical letters that I send to a friend are with my friend. So he is now owner of it and when he dies, it goes to his legal heir. Though I am the one who wrote them. Should it not belong to my heirs since I am the creator ? 2. If we are mapping online to offline equivalents, who inherits the facebook messages ? Is it the sender or receiver ? The messages contain both sent and received items as in discussions.
- pc86 8y ago
  To point 1, no. Once your friend gets them they're your friend's property. He dies, his heirs get his property (contingent on the contents of his Will). That you wrote the letter is irrelevant to the fact that it was his property.
- 5555624 8y ago
  I send a friend a physical copy of a letter and they own that copy. I still have a digital copy -- I use a word processor for all my letters -- so I own that copy. Does one take precedence? Can one of us "publish" the letter when the other dies?
- xg15 8y ago
  > who inherits the facebook messages ? Is it the sender or receiver I'd argue both, for the simple reason they both have a copy of the message.
akuji1993 8y ago
I think I'm pretty conflicted about this. On one hand, in this particular case it makes sense for the parents to get closure and find out if their daughter was suicidal. On the other hand, it's their daughter's privacy. She surely wrote messages to people that she didn't want to share with her parents. And there might also be messages on this account that the parents don't want to find. People with psychological problems can write pretty dark stuff and she might also have talked about her parents in those messages. I'm not sure the parents will only get the closure they want, they might also dig up stuff, they later will wish they hadn't found. So in the end, I'm not sure I agree with the judges decision. I think I share information with my parents the way I want to and definitely share other information with my friends in a group and 1on1 in messages. And I'm also sure I don't want my parents or another party not participating in some of those message groups to ever read that content.
- windows_tips 8y ago
  Why do you think she "surely wrote messages to people that she didn't want to share with her parents"? Seems like a pretty big assumption. >On the other hand, it's their daughter's privacy. No, the daughter is dead, according to the title.
  - 1_800_UNICORN 8y ago
    It's not as clear cut as you're making it sound, there are a wide variety of opinions about how much a person's right to privacy extends beyond their death.
    - windows_tips 8y ago
      After a person dies, they don't exist. It is counterfactual to posit that they have 'rights'.
      - nkrisc 8y ago
        Rights exist only so far as they are granted. If we, as a society, choose to grants rights to the dead then the dead shall have rights. Right are a completely arbitrary construction of organized society so it's strange to suggest there are any absolute rules that govern 'rights.'
madez 8y ago
This is a good decision. Letters and journals of dead children also go to the parents. I fail to see why online accounts should make a difference.
- amarant 8y ago
  i suppose one could argue that change should have gone in the other direction. but that's academical. at least now we have consistency, this is of course good
- zeveb 8y ago
  This itself is a good point: contrary to the assumptions a lot of us made in the 90s, cyberspace really isn't an entirely new plane of existence, and there's a lot of overlap with ideas & concepts which already exist offline & with which we're already familiar. We already have a process for what happens to a person's belongings after death; a person's online accounts are belongings; therefor we already have a process for what happens to a person's online accounts after death. Yes, each jurisdiction will have its own rules, but again we already have a process for determining what happens to possessions in other jurisdictions upon the owner's death. (as an aside, this is part of why '… but with a computer!' patents shouldn't be patentable: they're obvious)
- bloak 8y ago
  An online account is a different thing from a physical object like a letter or journal, which can be freely transferred from one living person to another living person. (The right to reproduce the contents of letters and journals is another matter!) An online account is a contractual relationship. I don't know about Facebook, but most online accounts are explicitly non-transferable. So it's not at all obvious that Germany should make these things transferable on the contractee's death regardless of what's written in the T&Cs, if that's what's happened.
  - Tomte 8y ago
    A rent agreement or a gym membership are also non-physical, yet are being inherited.
nashashmi 8y ago
Why wasn't this obvious to Facebook that they should give away a minor's account to their next of kin? Unless there was a will written saying to the contrary? And it SO ARROGANT of Facebook to think they own the data to such an extent where they can effectively deny access to the data from the person who produced it, or in the case of death, to the next of kin.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
afroboy 8y ago
Facebook should make it in the preference if i will allow my account to be opened by my parents or any family member after i die, that will make it easy for them. and definitely i will allow this.
- hexadecimal7e 8y ago
  You can’t overrule an inheritance law by adding some preference. Maybe in the USA, but in many country’s you can’t even write your children off their rightful inheritance.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - detaro 8y ago
    But that's not what the parent poster asked for...
  - namibj 8y ago
    In Germany you can deny them specific property, as the minimum share (Pflichtteil) only goes as far as monetary value goes, not some specific item. I.e., as long as you have over 50% of your net worth in the form of money, you are free to prevent your normal heirs/family from getting any physical assets you posessed.
mikejb 8y ago
Whilst not applicable in this case (because the deceased is a minor), this always reminds me of how important it is to also make arrangements for your digital heritage. Facebook allows you to set a legacy contact [1], who will have some basic rights, or you can request to then have your account deleted. This has to be initiated by someone/anyone after you pass away. Google allows you to predetermine some basic actions [2], and share data from your account with other persons. This is triggered by not using the account for a set period of time (between 3 months and 1.5 years), so it activates automatically, but likely some time after you pass away. [1] https://www.facebook.com/settings?tab=account&section=accoun.. https://www.facebook.com/settings?tab=account&section=accoun.... [2] https://myaccount.google.com/inactive https://myaccount.google.com/inactive
FactolSarin 8y ago
As the court pointed out, diaries and letters would have gone to the parents in the past (I mean, they still would if people wrote letters). However, the magnitude of the data makes things a bit different. If I write something down in my diary, I know someone else might crack it open one day. If I write a letter to a friend, I know that that friend might give it to someone else or let them read it. But this isn't just letters and diaries. This is every page you liked, tons of post history, and every message you've ever sent. Sure, the parents would have gotten letters she possessed, but in ye olden days (ie, 20 years ago) those would have been letters to her, not from her. And it wouldn't have included letters she threw away. Or maybe hid somewhere. This is everything. So it's a bit complicated. In the end, I actually do agree with the courts... I think it's the most reasonable course. But I also think platforms like Facebook should give us the ability to delete data for this exact purpose, and we should use services like Signal for things that are truly sensitive that we never want to get in anyone else's hands.

54 points by cr1895 8y ago

Put your master password to a password manager in your will.

But this raises some questions inside me. Maybe some one can shed some light here. 1. The physical letters that I send to a friend are with my friend. So he is now owner of it and when he dies, it goes to his legal heir. Though I am the one who wrote them. Should it not belong to my heirs since I am the creator ? 2. If we are mapping online to offline equivalents, who inherits the facebook messages ? Is it the sender or receiver ? The messages contain both sent and received items as in discussions.

pc86 8y ago
To point 1, no. Once your friend gets them they're your friend's property. He dies, his heirs get his property (contingent on the contents of his Will). That you wrote the letter is irrelevant to the fact that it was his property.
5555624 8y ago
I send a friend a physical copy of a letter and they own that copy. I still have a digital copy -- I use a word processor for all my letters -- so I own that copy. Does one take precedence? Can one of us "publish" the letter when the other dies?
xg15 8y ago
> who inherits the facebook messages ? Is it the sender or receiver I'd argue both, for the simple reason they both have a copy of the message.

akuji1993 8y ago

I think I'm pretty conflicted about this. On one hand, in this particular case it makes sense for the parents to get closure and find out if their daughter was suicidal. On the other hand, it's their daughter's privacy. She surely wrote messages to people that she didn't want to share with her parents. And there might also be messages on this account that the parents don't want to find. People with psychological problems can write pretty dark stuff and she might also have talked about her parents in those messages. I'm not sure the parents will only get the closure they want, they might also dig up stuff, they later will wish they hadn't found. So in the end, I'm not sure I agree with the judges decision. I think I share information with my parents the way I want to and definitely share other information with my friends in a group and 1on1 in messages. And I'm also sure I don't want my parents or another party not participating in some of those message groups to ever read that content.

windows_tips 8y ago
Why do you think she "surely wrote messages to people that she didn't want to share with her parents"? Seems like a pretty big assumption. >On the other hand, it's their daughter's privacy. No, the daughter is dead, according to the title.
- 1_800_UNICORN 8y ago
  It's not as clear cut as you're making it sound, there are a wide variety of opinions about how much a person's right to privacy extends beyond their death.
  - windows_tips 8y ago
    After a person dies, they don't exist. It is counterfactual to posit that they have 'rights'.
    - nkrisc 8y ago
      Rights exist only so far as they are granted. If we, as a society, choose to grants rights to the dead then the dead shall have rights. Right are a completely arbitrary construction of organized society so it's strange to suggest there are any absolute rules that govern 'rights.'

madez 8y ago

This is a good decision. Letters and journals of dead children also go to the parents. I fail to see why online accounts should make a difference.

amarant 8y ago
i suppose one could argue that change should have gone in the other direction. but that's academical. at least now we have consistency, this is of course good
zeveb 8y ago
This itself is a good point: contrary to the assumptions a lot of us made in the 90s, cyberspace really isn't an entirely new plane of existence, and there's a lot of overlap with ideas & concepts which already exist offline & with which we're already familiar. We already have a process for what happens to a person's belongings after death; a person's online accounts are belongings; therefor we already have a process for what happens to a person's online accounts after death. Yes, each jurisdiction will have its own rules, but again we already have a process for determining what happens to possessions in other jurisdictions upon the owner's death. (as an aside, this is part of why '… but with a computer!' patents shouldn't be patentable: they're obvious)
bloak 8y ago
An online account is a different thing from a physical object like a letter or journal, which can be freely transferred from one living person to another living person. (The right to reproduce the contents of letters and journals is another matter!) An online account is a contractual relationship. I don't know about Facebook, but most online accounts are explicitly non-transferable. So it's not at all obvious that Germany should make these things transferable on the contractee's death regardless of what's written in the T&Cs, if that's what's happened.
- Tomte 8y ago
  A rent agreement or a gym membership are also non-physical, yet are being inherited.

nashashmi 8y ago

Why wasn't this obvious to Facebook that they should give away a minor's account to their next of kin? Unless there was a will written saying to the contrary? And it SO ARROGANT of Facebook to think they own the data to such an extent where they can effectively deny access to the data from the person who produced it, or in the case of death, to the next of kin.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

afroboy 8y ago

Facebook should make it in the preference if i will allow my account to be opened by my parents or any family member after i die, that will make it easy for them. and definitely i will allow this.

hexadecimal7e 8y ago
You can’t overrule an inheritance law by adding some preference. Maybe in the USA, but in many country’s you can’t even write your children off their rightful inheritance.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- detaro 8y ago
  But that's not what the parent poster asked for...
- namibj 8y ago
  In Germany you can deny them specific property, as the minimum share (Pflichtteil) only goes as far as monetary value goes, not some specific item. I.e., as long as you have over 50% of your net worth in the form of money, you are free to prevent your normal heirs/family from getting any physical assets you posessed.

mikejb 8y ago

Whilst not applicable in this case (because the deceased is a minor), this always reminds me of how important it is to also make arrangements for your digital heritage. Facebook allows you to set a legacy contact [1], who will have some basic rights, or you can request to then have your account deleted. This has to be initiated by someone/anyone after you pass away. Google allows you to predetermine some basic actions [2], and share data from your account with other persons. This is triggered by not using the account for a set period of time (between 3 months and 1.5 years), so it activates automatically, but likely some time after you pass away. [1] https://www.facebook.com/settings?tab=account&section=accoun.. https://www.facebook.com/settings?tab=account&section=accoun.... [2] https://myaccount.google.com/inactive https://myaccount.google.com/inactive

FactolSarin 8y ago

As the court pointed out, diaries and letters would have gone to the parents in the past (I mean, they still would if people wrote letters). However, the magnitude of the data makes things a bit different. If I write something down in my diary, I know someone else might crack it open one day. If I write a letter to a friend, I know that that friend might give it to someone else or let them read it. But this isn't just letters and diaries. This is every page you liked, tons of post history, and every message you've ever sent. Sure, the parents would have gotten letters she possessed, but in ye olden days (ie, 20 years ago) those would have been letters to her, not from her. And it wouldn't have included letters she threw away. Or maybe hid somewhere. This is everything. So it's a bit complicated. In the end, I actually do agree with the courts... I think it's the most reasonable course. But I also think platforms like Facebook should give us the ability to delete data for this exact purpose, and we should use services like Signal for things that are truly sensitive that we never want to get in anyone else's hands.