5 ms·

There is absolutely a legal theory, and that is fraud. If you claim to be someone you are not, and someone relies on your false claim to their detriment, you ar

There is absolutely a legal theory, and that is fraud. If you claim to be someone you are not, and someone relies on your false claim to their detriment, you are liable.

Nextgrid 6y ago
My point was whether Facebook itself committed a crime and whether the account holder had any recourse against Facebook. To me it doesn't look like it - the username remains the property of FB and they are free to do anything they want with it.
- otterley 6y ago
  It might take an open-minded judge to accept this, but attorneys often fall back to common-law negligence when there are no stronger legal theories to rely on. All the elements of negligence seem to be here, except probably for duty of care. A judge would have to find that Facebook owes a duty of care to its users to protect the integrity of its identities, and that Facebook breached that duty. I can foresee Facebook and other information service providers fighting vigorously against such a legal conclusion, but maybe it's just the kind of law we need.
- klyrs 6y ago
  If somebody hijacks your account, they get access to all your DMs and other private info. Are you claiming that all that is fb's property, too?
owenmarshall 6y ago
Fraud seems a stretch. Maybe if you used your handle for commerce and someone stole it & attempted to sell the same product. It doesn’t strike me as litigation you’d be likely to win.
- otterley 6y ago
  > Maybe if you used your handle for commerce and someone stole it & attempted to sell the same product. That would be an example -- but certainly not the only imaginable one -- of reliance and detriment, both of which are necessary elements of fraud.
dmurray 6y ago
It's likely that Facebook was defrauded here, or that an employee of Facebook breached his employment contract. In either case Facebook would have standing to go after the fraudster/employee, but the account "owner" might not.

There is absolutely a legal theory, and that is fraud. If you claim to be someone you are not, and someone relies on your false claim to their detriment, you are liable.

Nextgrid 6y ago

My point was whether Facebook itself committed a crime and whether the account holder had any recourse against Facebook. To me it doesn't look like it - the username remains the property of FB and they are free to do anything they want with it.

otterley 6y ago
It might take an open-minded judge to accept this, but attorneys often fall back to common-law negligence when there are no stronger legal theories to rely on. All the elements of negligence seem to be here, except probably for duty of care. A judge would have to find that Facebook owes a duty of care to its users to protect the integrity of its identities, and that Facebook breached that duty. I can foresee Facebook and other information service providers fighting vigorously against such a legal conclusion, but maybe it's just the kind of law we need.
klyrs 6y ago
If somebody hijacks your account, they get access to all your DMs and other private info. Are you claiming that all that is fb's property, too?

owenmarshall 6y ago

Fraud seems a stretch. Maybe if you used your handle for commerce and someone stole it & attempted to sell the same product. It doesn’t strike me as litigation you’d be likely to win.

otterley 6y ago
> Maybe if you used your handle for commerce and someone stole it & attempted to sell the same product. That would be an example -- but certainly not the only imaginable one -- of reliance and detriment, both of which are necessary elements of fraud.

dmurray 6y ago

It's likely that Facebook was defrauded here, or that an employee of Facebook breached his employment contract. In either case Facebook would have standing to go after the fraudster/employee, but the account "owner" might not.