Social Media and its ramifications are rarely out of the news. Last year, headline-grabbing dismissal of employees due to use of social media affected companies as diverse as Microsoft and Wetherspoons. But the ‘danger’ of social media misuse isn’t confined to the employee. For many businesses, corporate social media discrimination is becoming an increasingly tricky issue to deal with and often, the necessary defences have not been put in place.

Corporate social media discrimination refers to situations where employers use social networking sites such as Facebook to undertake research about a candidate’s background either prior to or during the interview process. The aim is to understand more about each applicant before taking a decision to hire them or not.

But the challenges involved in not overstepping the mark in this regard are only set to mount as social media usage continues to grow. Ten years ago, the channel was merely a pipe dream, with one or two very basic sites such as Six Degrees and Friendster acting as the vanguard. Today, nearly everyone you meet has a Facebook, Twitter or LinkedIn account, with some people even having their own blog, Flickr and YouTube accounts as well.

Social Media usage continues to grow and grow:

• Users spend more than 500 billion minutes per month on Facebook • Twitter gets more than 300,000 new subscribers every day • A new member joins LinkedIn every second, the organisation’s press office claims.

Looking at such numbers, it becomes clear just how important social media has become in today’s society. And the same is just as true in the world of work as workers progressively realise how important it is to be connected to others and how useful being online can be for networking purposes.
» Read more: Social media and the workplace – legal implications in 2012

Smartphones and tablets are changing the way everyone does their job and this includes lawyers. There was only so much that you can fit in your briefcase but thanks to these devices you can now have your whole office at your fingertips, wherever you are. To make the most of these devices we have put together a list of the top 10 apps for lawyers. The list includes everything from legal dictionaries to expenses calculators that will suit both the working lawyer and the student alike.

iLegal: (iPad, iPhone: £39.99) Need to get the latest information of legislation right now? This app claims to give you access to the revised text of almost all UK, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales legislation, as well as Acts of Parliament of Great Britain and English Parliament. You don’t even need signal as most of the information can be accessed offline.

Remote Desktop: (iPhone, iPad: Free) We’ve all had the sinking feeling - the moment you realise that the file you desperately need is sitting on the desktop of your office computer and you’re miles away. With this app, you can connect to your Windows workstation computer and see all of your files and programs.

Dragon Dictation: (iPhone, iPad: Free) Need a portable court reporter? This app allows you to speak and instantly see your text. It is reportedly five times faster than typing on a keyboard.

Court Search: (Android: £9.99) This app gives you access to details of every Court in England and Wales. Get access to addresses, maps, contact details, as well as live Crown Court details and daily lists for the High Court.

Stanza: (iPhone, iPad: Free) Need to brush up on your case law? Use this app to download from over 100,000 books and periodicals to read on your phone or tablet. Or if you already have a selection of electronic books, you can read them using Stanza as well. You can change elements like font size and line spacing to customise and best suit your needs.

CrimeLine Law: (iPad, iPhone: £2.49) This app puts the Bailii database in your pocket, allowing quick and easy access to thousands of cases and statutes. It also allows you to bookmark cases or legislation for quick reference.

Black’s Law Dictionary: (iPhone, iPad, Android: $54.99) Though largely consisting of American legal terms, Black’s Law Dictionary is still the world’s most cited law book. It contains more than 45,000 terms, alternative spellings and even an audio pronunciation for those hard-to-say terms.

OfficeTime: (iPhone, iPad, Android: $7.99) Have trouble calculating your out of office time? This app can track your hours and expenses. You can even sync the app with OfficeTime for Mac or PC (sold separately) for simplicity.

Instapaper: (iPhone, iPad, Android: $4.99) Save web pages for offline reading.

TrialPad 2.1.4: (iphone, ipad: $89.90) This is a handy presentation tool developed specifically for the legal profession for use in trails and hearings. You can organise, manage, annotate, and store documents and video.

Photo by Judy Breck

Social media is a frontier, a seemingly boundless territory that is occupied by several major tribes and numerous smaller groups or gangs. Policing social media, as with most frontiers, is not especially easy, but law and order must be preserved for all the obvious reasons. Social media is unlike any other frontier, however, because it exists in a virtual realm.

This is a place where laws already exist but do not necessarily apply to the new technological world. If the rule of law is to catch up with social media, its enforcers must be willing to explore unfamiliar territory.

Without doubt the biggest problem facing those who wish to enforce the law is jurisdiction. The internet is home to more than two billion users - the figure is likely to be much higher counting families, children and students etc, who share accounts. Geographically, internet users come from everywhere. Internet penetration - by percentage of population - is highest in the United States (78.3%), followed by Oceania (60.1%) and Europe (58.3%).

The number of internet users by continent or region, however, is highest in Asia, where some 922 million people, just 23.8% of the local population, have access to the internet. This figure represents 44% of the global share of internet users, ahead of Europe (22.7%), North America (13%), Central/South America and the Caribbean (10.3%), Africa (5.7%), the Middle East (3.3%) and Oceania (1%). Thus, the region with the second highest internet penetration rate has the smallest share of global internet users. Legal systems vary worldwide.

The problem with the 'worldwide' nature of the web is that all of these regions are subject to different laws. This would not in itself be a major problem were it not for social media interaction on a global scale. People on the internet tend to mingle, so cultures, content and legal systems very often clash. The issue was highlighted in 2006 when La Ligue Contre Le Racisme et l'antisémitisme (LICRA) sued Yahoo! and Yahoo! France for allowing French users to access Nazi material. Ordered to remove the content by the French court, Yahoo! was afforded personal jurisdiction by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. In effect, this meant that Yahoo! was not duty-bound to remove the content under US law; the French Court had no jurisdiction.

The LICRA case did not intend to permit social media users to flout the rule of law online; on the contrary, users remain subject to the laws of the land but perhaps only their land. The internet is global but most laws are local. The issue of jurisdiction in social media lawsuits has yet to be fully explored, however and it is entirely possible that cases will arise in coming years that shape the argument in one direction or another, perhaps risking the globalisation of social media. In the meantime, individuals and companies will continue to struggle to uphold certain laws against users who are subject to completely different legal systems.

Another legal implication of the social media revolution is defamation, particularly libel, but also slander on certain multimedia-based social networking sites. Defamation cases involving websites are nothing new, but lawsuits involving social media are on the rise. According to industry experts, online libel cases in the UK doubled between 2010 and 2011, when a total of 86 cases progressed to court. The situation is likely to worsen as social media usage increases over the coming years.

The main problem with libel and social media, from a company's perspective at least, is that enforcement can do more harm than good. Social media communities expect a certain freedom online, whether justified or not. Bringing claims against libellous social media users can be the virtual equivalent of shooting oneself in the foot. There is often no good reason to pursue libel action against social media users. The most appropriate and effective course of action is usually to retort in some form or another (the more creative the better). At the very least, a company ought to consider refuting comments via a press release before considering legal action but ignoring defamation or denouncing it in good humour is almost always the best policy.

The situation is somewhat different for defamed individuals. In one particularly remarkable case, Orlando Figes, an esteemed professor in Russian history, was exposed for committing a quite unremarkable offence. He had dabbled in a spot of 'astroturfing'.

Astroturfing in this context refers to posting fake comments or reviews about a person, product or place etc, usually with the intention of increasing or destroying its reputation. Figes had defamed historical works published by his rivals by posting spurious reviews on Amazon. Although the professor did so anonymously, Rachel Polonsky, one of the defamed individuals targeted by Figes, tracked down the miscreant historian and demanded justice.

After threatening Polonsky with legal action - libel, ironically - Figes came clean, admitting that he had criticised rivals' work in order to promote his own. Astroturfing, however, was not vanquished by Figes' confession. Libel remains a serious threat to all individuals and businesses online and social media is the perfect breeding ground for internet users who defame others for whatever reason.

Jurisdiction and defamation are just two of the legal issues threatening the development of social media. Copyright infringement is another serious concern, as it has been online for more than a decade. As with libel and slander, copyright is at the mercy of jurisdiction. If two conflicting legal systems go head to head, the tangible will almost certainly triumph over the virtual. Regional jurisdiction presides for the time being. However, many sites such as Facebook and Twitter employ strict terms and agreements that aim to impose rules pertaining to copyright and defamation, so remedial or punitive measures are often available at the source.

In summary, the social media revolution is still in its infancy. As with all infants, mistakes are made on a frequent basis. The task of individuals and companies is to learn from those mistakes, anticipate others and prepare for the odd tantrum. Social media is growing up, but can the rule of law catch up?

Photo by HonestReporting.com

With over half the UK population having a Facebook account, employers are losing £14 billion per year as a direct result of employees accessing social media sites during work hours, according to Business Weekly. Two million workers spend an hour of each working day social networking, with companies' productivity suffering as a result. Yet bosses’ hands are tied when it comes to disciplinary action – resulting in a minefield for employers.

Read the full article on the Business Weekly website.

Photo by MarkoPako

According to the Arab Journal; Lisa A. Alfaro joined Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher in 1995 after receiving her JD from Stanford Law School. Now she is partner in charge of the firm’s São Paulo office in Brazil, and she co-chairs the Latin America practice group. She is fluent in Portuguese and Spanish, and she is licensed in California and New York.

But there is one thing Alfaro can’t do: engage in any kind of local law practice in Brazil.

For more information go to the Arab Journal website.

Picture by Sean MacEntee.