Usually, G4 doesn't bring you news of obscure legal opinions that are unlikely to affect your life, but I'm making an exception for the case of Quigley Corp. v. Karkus because it finally legally codifies an opinion I've held since I was on Friendster: social network "friends" are not actually your friends.
The ruling had to do with whether a group challenging a corporate board failed to adequately disclose membership of a person in the challenger group. See, the guy in question was "facebook friends" with the group, and the corporate board argued that, based on that computer friendship, he was in the group.
Here's how the court put it:
For purposes of this litigation, the Court assigns no significance to the Facebook "friends" reference. Facebook reportedly has more than 200 million active users, and the average user has 120 "friends" on the site. . . . Regardless of what Facebook's apparent popularity or usefulness may say about the nature of 21st century communications and relationships, the site's designers' selections of icons or labels offer no substance to this dispute . . . Indeed, "friendships" on Facebook may be as fleeting as the flick of a delete button.
See, people? The full power of the American legal system agrees with me: Facebook friends don't count!
Comments are Closed
Comments
Displaying 1–2 of 2
OverlordofG4
I have to agree with Cybermind here. I've been friends with a few people online that have been more helpful, understanding and caring about who I am as a person and friend then any so called "Friend" in real life. So in my opinion, a friend is a friend if that s what you consider them regardless if you and said person s friendship is based in the cyber world.
Cybermind
can facebook friends give advice, or lend an ear, or be kind, or express themselves in ways that inspire you? does THAT count? so not seeing them in person means they have less value compared with someone who just happens to be in close proximity? interesting questions..
Displaying 1–2 of 2