3 ms·

But the context here are conversation which appear in the court records. So they're either breaches of a civil agreement, or criminal law. By all means use the

But the context here are conversation which appear in the court records. So they're either breaches of a civil agreement, or criminal law. By all means use them in your day to day conversations, but if you expect your messages to ever require interpretation in a court of law, and you don't want a jury to decide what you meant by eggplant, kissy face, don't use emoji. Or, conversely, if you want to be ambiguous, like say you're a pimp communicating to his prostitutes, emoji usage might work in your favor.

ipython 8y ago
And how do you determine ahead of time with 100% certainty that your communication will not be subject to subpoena and appear in court record? In a divorce proceeding for example many so called “day to day” conversations will suddenly be open to legal interpretation.
- huffmsa 8y ago
  Yeah divorce is a sticky situation. And there's no way to be 100% certain. But if a contract or other agreement involving money is the topic of discussion, it's safe to assume that it might be used as evidence.
icebraining 8y ago
I don't think the couple in Israel looking for an apartment ever expected their messages to require interpretation in a court of law. Sure, writing contracts with emojies is probably ill-advised, but it doesn't seem to be the case.
- huffmsa 8y ago
  They probably didn't, and I know I come from position of legal awareness, bordering on paranoia, but I would never communicate with a potential landlord over anything but phone and email. And I suspect the Israeli couple didn't think texts were serious, like an email would be. But the court decided otherwise.
dragonwriter 8y ago
> But the context here are conversation which appear in the court records. So they're either breaches of a civil agreement, or criminal law. No, the fact that she conversation appears in a court record does not mean it was involved in a violation of any law (and you probably meant civil or criminal law; not all civil cases involve even alleged violations of agreememts—contracts isn't the whole civil law universe.) Courts may exist to determine if a violation of law occurred, but sometimes the answer is “no”. (And even if it is yes, the specific conversation at issue may not have.) > By all means use them in your day to day conversations, but if you expect your messages to ever require interpretation in a court of law, and you don't want a jury to decide what you meant by eggplant, kissy face, don't use emoji. Sure, if that's a major concern, but I doubt that it reasonably is for the sender in most communication that actually ends up in court.
- huffmsa 8y ago
  No I meant civil agreements, specifically because those are the civil cases the article mentions emojis in the context of court records.

ipython 8y ago

And how do you determine ahead of time with 100% certainty that your communication will not be subject to subpoena and appear in court record? In a divorce proceeding for example many so called “day to day” conversations will suddenly be open to legal interpretation.

huffmsa 8y ago
Yeah divorce is a sticky situation. And there's no way to be 100% certain. But if a contract or other agreement involving money is the topic of discussion, it's safe to assume that it might be used as evidence.

icebraining 8y ago

I don't think the couple in Israel looking for an apartment ever expected their messages to require interpretation in a court of law. Sure, writing contracts with emojies is probably ill-advised, but it doesn't seem to be the case.

huffmsa 8y ago
They probably didn't, and I know I come from position of legal awareness, bordering on paranoia, but I would never communicate with a potential landlord over anything but phone and email. And I suspect the Israeli couple didn't think texts were serious, like an email would be. But the court decided otherwise.

dragonwriter 8y ago

> But the context here are conversation which appear in the court records. So they're either breaches of a civil agreement, or criminal law. No, the fact that she conversation appears in a court record does not mean it was involved in a violation of any law (and you probably meant civil or criminal law; not all civil cases involve even alleged violations of agreememts—contracts isn't the whole civil law universe.) Courts may exist to determine if a violation of law occurred, but sometimes the answer is “no”. (And even if it is yes, the specific conversation at issue may not have.) > By all means use them in your day to day conversations, but if you expect your messages to ever require interpretation in a court of law, and you don't want a jury to decide what you meant by eggplant, kissy face, don't use emoji. Sure, if that's a major concern, but I doubt that it reasonably is for the sender in most communication that actually ends up in court.

huffmsa 8y ago
No I meant civil agreements, specifically because those are the civil cases the article mentions emojis in the context of court records.