prior probability

According to this chart prepared by Ian T. Sommers (via Dadaviz), the overall “fling to serious relationship” ratio on the TV show “Friends” is about 4 : 3. Do these data reveal any other intriguing patterns?

Credit: Leon Markovitz (via Dadaviz).

This semester, we are using the founding of Facebook as an in-depth case study to explore various aspects of business law and ethics. In Lesson 1, for example, we discussed the legal and moral dimensions of “Facemash,” a short-lived website Harvard sophomore Mark Zuckerberg had created in the fall of 2003—a few months before he created the first version of Facebook in early 2004. In this lesson, we will focus on the procedural side of law. Specifically, what type of process did Harvard College use to discover and corroborate the relevant facts regarding Facemash, i.e. the fact that Zuckerberg downloaded student I.D. photos without authorization? We will also consider if there are any legal limits on the form of punishment that the Ad Board could have imposed in this case. More broadly, what legal rights does a student (or a professor, for that matter) have when he is accused of wrongdoing or misconduct by a fellow student or faculty member. (Think about the Jameis Winston case at Florida State University, for example.) In addition, who has the burden of proof in these cases, and what burden of proof must the accusing party meet in order to prove his or her case?

We like this chart by our friend and colleague David Orozco. In this case, x = lawyers. But x could be anything: entrepreneurs, salesmen, politicians, writers, professors, etc. The key questions, though, are how does x signal her level of excellence and what makes her signal credible to third parties?

In a previous post, we asked whether Mark Zuckerberg breached any legal duties or violated any laws when he created Facemash? One theory of legal liability might be the tort of invasion of privacy, since Zuckerberg downloaded and then re-posted pictures of Harvard students without their consent. But Zuckerberg only downloaded student I.D. photos. Does one have a reasonable expectation of privacy to one’s I.D. photo? Another possible theory of liability (both civil and criminal) is copyright infringement. But who owns the legal rights to those I.D. photos, the students or the university? Yet another theory of liability might be based on the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which prohibits unauthorized uses of protected computers. (The arrest and prosecution of Internet activist Aaron Swartz, for example, were based in large part on this law.) But does it matter that Facemash was just a prank and not a commercial website? Do you think a jury would find a college sophomore guilty of violating federal law in this case?

As Denise Callahan explains in this report, What you say on Facebook and on other social network sites can be used against you in a court of law: “Whether it’s a divorce proceeding or criminal trial, posts on social networking sites such as Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, and Skype are regularly popping up as evidence in courtrooms locally and across the country.” But why should this be the case? For example, the law protects most communications between a client and his attorney and keeps those communications confidential from all court proceedings. So, arguing by analogy, should the law also recognize a common law “Facebook privilege”?