Tagged Facebook Photos Admissible as Evidence
That evidence (of course) came from Facebook photos. The court didn't buy her argument that since the photos weren't hers, and were tagged without her permission, they shouldn't have been admissible. In the opinion last month, the court noted: "There is nothing that requires her permission when she was 'tagged' or identified as a person in those pictures."
This is hardly the final word on tagging. Technology attorney Evan Brown, points out on his blog that there are still likely any number of instances in which tagged items would not be admissible:
But the decision is certainly an interesting turn of events, as well as a reminder (apparently still needed) that Facebook isn't invisible.
Some instances of tagging might be part of something actionable. For example, the posting and tagging of photos in the right context might constitute harassment, infliction of emotional distress, or invasion of privacy. Use of another's photo on the web without permission for commercial purposes might violate that person's right of publicity. And of course there is the question of copyright . . . .