5 ms·
Of course, but when you see how many laughably horrible decisions our courts make on a regular basis, it wouldn't be all that surprising for a company to argue
by phaus 13y ago
Of course, but when you see how many laughably horrible decisions our courts make on a regular basis, it wouldn't be all that surprising for a company to argue that your personal account was used for business purposes for a variety of reasons. For example, the mere mention of your employer's name on a site like Linkedin, or perhaps a developer that is known to work at a prominent company who maintains a programming blog.
It's also already a prosecutable offense to lock your company out of a business related account, so what is the point of establishing more legislation?
- tptacek 13y agoLaws that create prosecutable offenses in the ILCS say things like "Any person failing to comply with $(CLAUSE) shall be guilty of a $(CRIME_LEVEL)". This one obviously does not do that. The reason for the legislation is that Illinois companies are specifically not permitted to demand credentials for personal social media accounts; it creates an exception to at-will employment in Illinois that would enable you to sue your employer if you were terminated incident to refusing credentials.
- rayiner 13y ago> Of course, but when you see how many laughably horrible decisions our courts make on a regular basis, Only if you let HN and reddit rashly interpret your court decisions for you... > It's also already a prosecutable offense to lock your company out of a business related account, so what is the point of establishing more legislation? Because by itself, the previous language created an ambiguous situation. All the new bill does is clarify that the ban on asking for login credentials for a personal account doesn't override the offense of locking your company out of a business-related account.