6 ms·
Seems like this is a violation of Twitter's obligations under the ECPA to ensure that someone's private communications are not delivered to a third party.
by metageek 16y ago
Seems like this is a violation of Twitter's obligations under the ECPA to ensure that someone's private communications are not delivered to a third party.
- pbhjpbhj 16y agohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Communications_Privacy_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Communications_Priva... is US law, does this apply to protect people in Scotland?
- rmc 16y agoIt may not apply to Scotland, however it /should/ apply to Twitter, which is based in the USA AFAIR
- collypops 16y agoOnly the username was taken over. The account itself is still owned by the original user (just with a new username). Nothing private would have been transferred.
- stuhacking 16y agoDMs and @mentions will now be redirected to the new account until the original user is able to send the change of username notification. There's now a chance, however slim, that a private message will arrive at the wrong person as a result of Twitter's actions. I'm ignoring the question of whether Twitter should be a medium for private communications.
- graywh 16y agoyou can't send DMs to a non-follower
- biot 16y agoYou're looking at this from the wrong angle. A DM sent to girlgeeks will be delivered to girlgeeks, exactly as the sender specified... much in the same way that a postal carrier will deliver private snail mail to a street address even if the intended recipient has already moved. Unlike snail mail where you can address a specific individual by name (thus making it illegal for someone else to open it) Twitter is the equivalent of "Dear Occupant" and whoever is at that address can open it.