8 ms·

I did this with my wife's account after she passed just over a year ago. Unfortunately, I didn't think to have Facebook make an archive before I did. They won't

by dpcx 7y ago

I did this with my wife's account after she passed just over a year ago. Unfortunately, I didn't think to have Facebook make an archive before I did. They won't let you do so without a court order once the account is memorialized, which means all her photos (from over 9 years of account activity) are stuck there. Hugs to you.

Zenst 7y ago
It is reassuring that Facebook have some procedures, but these are ones of their own making and nothing to stop that changing (though I doubt that). But it does appear that there should be some sort of law/regulation to set the standard for all social media platforms. Whilst physical graves have some legal protection in place about what and what can not be done. Such digital gravestones have no such protection. Maybe that needs a changing. Digital Cemeteries are after all just as important than physical ones and social media platforms come and go (G+).
- gjs278 7y ago
  digital cemeteries are not important at all. and it’s a first amendment violation to make them change anything.
- henvic 7y ago
  Why regulation? It's working quite well so far. Let the market work things out.
  - JeremyBanks 7y ago
    Yes, because there's such a healthy, thriving, competitive market in social networking...?
    - henvic 7y ago
      And the answer to that is regulating? Of course not. Regulations like these only work out for the powerful.
      - Dylan16807 7y ago
        > Regulations like these only work out for the powerful. "like these"... if you said that in almost any other context I wouldn't bat an eye. When it's about access controls to the accounts of dead people, I am utterly baffled at how that will benefit the powerful.
        jetzzz 7y ago
        It is harder for small teams (or even single persons) running small forums to comply with different regulations than it is for a big company. There was a story recently about a guy who was running some specialized forum but decided to shut it down after he started receiving GDPR requests.
        inflatableDodo 7y ago
        Do you actually think it would be an unreasonable burden on a small business to have to remove a dead person from a marketing database when requested to by their family?
        drusepth 7y ago
        It becomes an unreasonable burden when you have dozens or hundreds of small burdens/regulations that aren't unreasonable on their own, but collectively steal a significant amount of time from small businesses trying to balance developing something new and growing with complying with every little regulation they may or may not even know about.
        inflatableDodo 7y ago
        Having to remove a dead person from a marketing database when requested to by their family is never an unreasonable burden, it is somewhat shameful that there is even a need to remind people of that. Following regulations requiring this should not require any extra effort because it is something you should already be doing.
  - klntsky 7y ago
    Imagine a person preferring one ad-driven social network to another because of more advanced digital graveyard capabilities.
    - Zenst 7y ago
      An interesting thought, probably best left explored by a future episode of Black Mirror. Though the prospect of social media networks bidding for your digital soul after death, does bemuse me.
csomar 7y ago
I'm not certain but I don't think you have the right to download the content of your wife without her permission. It makes sense for Facebook to ask you to go to court to as she is deceased and can't make this decision. ie: maybe you wanted to get hold of the data for other, bad, purposes. That would be Facebook responsibility for giving you unauthorized access and harming one of their (now gone) users.
- thaumasiotes 7y ago
  > I don't think you have the right to download the content of your wife without her permission. Assuming you are her heir (almost always the case), you definitely do have that right.
  - csomar 7y ago
    I don't know how things work in your country but at least, here, you'll need to go through court to get possession of the property if you are a heir.
lma21 7y ago
I'm very sorry to hear that, I hope you're doing well now. I hope you don't mind me asking a (maybe quite stupid) question. What if we don't have the account credentials of our loved ones, what would we do in this case? With all that historical data laying around when people pass away, I wonder if there's a standard procedure one can follow to handle those data.
- incanus77 7y ago
  Facebook seems to take a pretty hard line against giving account access. https://www.facebook.com/help/150486848354038 https://www.facebook.com/help/150486848354038 Technically what I did, by having my wife's 1Password account, was not up to their terms. But I was able to use it for a brief period to settle some affairs before I officially memorialized it and that was very helpful.

by dpcx 7y ago

Zenst 7y ago

It is reassuring that Facebook have some procedures, but these are ones of their own making and nothing to stop that changing (though I doubt that). But it does appear that there should be some sort of law/regulation to set the standard for all social media platforms. Whilst physical graves have some legal protection in place about what and what can not be done. Such digital gravestones have no such protection. Maybe that needs a changing. Digital Cemeteries are after all just as important than physical ones and social media platforms come and go (G+).

gjs278 7y ago
digital cemeteries are not important at all. and it’s a first amendment violation to make them change anything.
henvic 7y ago
Why regulation? It's working quite well so far. Let the market work things out.
- JeremyBanks 7y ago
  Yes, because there's such a healthy, thriving, competitive market in social networking...?
  - henvic 7y ago
    And the answer to that is regulating? Of course not. Regulations like these only work out for the powerful.
    - Dylan16807 7y ago
      > Regulations like these only work out for the powerful. "like these"... if you said that in almost any other context I wouldn't bat an eye. When it's about access controls to the accounts of dead people, I am utterly baffled at how that will benefit the powerful.
      - jetzzz 7y ago
        It is harder for small teams (or even single persons) running small forums to comply with different regulations than it is for a big company. There was a story recently about a guy who was running some specialized forum but decided to shut it down after he started receiving GDPR requests.
        inflatableDodo 7y ago
        Do you actually think it would be an unreasonable burden on a small business to have to remove a dead person from a marketing database when requested to by their family?
        drusepth 7y ago
        It becomes an unreasonable burden when you have dozens or hundreds of small burdens/regulations that aren't unreasonable on their own, but collectively steal a significant amount of time from small businesses trying to balance developing something new and growing with complying with every little regulation they may or may not even know about.
        inflatableDodo 7y ago
        Having to remove a dead person from a marketing database when requested to by their family is never an unreasonable burden, it is somewhat shameful that there is even a need to remind people of that. Following regulations requiring this should not require any extra effort because it is something you should already be doing.
- klntsky 7y ago
  Imagine a person preferring one ad-driven social network to another because of more advanced digital graveyard capabilities.
  - Zenst 7y ago
    An interesting thought, probably best left explored by a future episode of Black Mirror. Though the prospect of social media networks bidding for your digital soul after death, does bemuse me.

csomar 7y ago

I'm not certain but I don't think you have the right to download the content of your wife without her permission. It makes sense for Facebook to ask you to go to court to as she is deceased and can't make this decision. ie: maybe you wanted to get hold of the data for other, bad, purposes. That would be Facebook responsibility for giving you unauthorized access and harming one of their (now gone) users.

thaumasiotes 7y ago
> I don't think you have the right to download the content of your wife without her permission. Assuming you are her heir (almost always the case), you definitely do have that right.
- csomar 7y ago
  I don't know how things work in your country but at least, here, you'll need to go through court to get possession of the property if you are a heir.

lma21 7y ago

I'm very sorry to hear that, I hope you're doing well now. I hope you don't mind me asking a (maybe quite stupid) question. What if we don't have the account credentials of our loved ones, what would we do in this case? With all that historical data laying around when people pass away, I wonder if there's a standard procedure one can follow to handle those data.

incanus77 7y ago
Facebook seems to take a pretty hard line against giving account access. https://www.facebook.com/help/150486848354038 https://www.facebook.com/help/150486848354038 Technically what I did, by having my wife's 1Password account, was not up to their terms. But I was able to use it for a brief period to settle some affairs before I officially memorialized it and that was very helpful.