So far social networks can not ignore the law

The Code Napoléon had not anticipated the Facebook phenomenon. So far, social networks can not ignore the law. The legal consequences of their use are considerable, especially in business. They can find themselves victims of denigration and officials of malicious remarks. They should therefore pay attention to the use made by employees from their professional connections. But how far can go in their investigations MeChristiane Féral-Schuhl (1) indicates the rules of good conduct in the matter.

1. Vilification: a serious threat

A conversation launches a social network between former students of a high school about the release of a new product by an industrial company. The exchanges are increasingly bitter. In the end, innovation out laminated, ridiculed... For the company, the harm is real. Can prosecute the slander In any case, it can turn against their employers. As explained MeFéral-Schuhl, "If prejudicial information was aired on a social network, by an employee using his professional connection, his employer may be implicated".

Wearproof article 1384 of the civil Code is here to return to service. This more than century-old text provides for the liability of persons, in this case here of business leaders, "as their constituents." This is exactly the case as a business computer was used to spread negative comments. The law Hadopi does not say anything when it provides that the company can be held responsible, as long as his professional connections were used to download illegal content.

2. A strong temptation: ban

Faced with such threats, many employers are considering to prohibit the use of social networks. They have the technical means, they also have the right. A condition however that two principles are respected: transparency and proportionality. Specifically, employees must be informed of implemented controls implemented. No question that someone discovers a posteriori that his mail was monitored. Then, the proportionality claims a good dosage. The employee who gives appointment to his friends for a dinner in the city will not be sanctioned. But for those who disclose strategic information or confidential, then there may be misconduct warranting his dismissal. This would be the case for example of an unconscious, on a social network, indicating that he cancels his dinner because it is "held by a meeting regarding the redemption of the main competitor who risk to complete steps of time".

However, as stated MeFéral-Schuhl, "the gathering of evidence must have been fair." That all depends on the nature of the impugned remarks. Criminal evidence is free and it will be for the judge to assess its relevance. The civil magistrate shall verify that the rules of transparency and proportionality have been complied with. But now, courts take more account of the duty of loyalty of the employees to their employer. The Court of cassation, in a judgment of March 12, considered that the verification of the information issued from a company computer was not contrary to respect for private life. It thereby confirmed the decision of the Court of appeal of Aix-en-Provence, April 13, 2008, which had held that an employee who, on a social network, "under female pseudonyms, has maintained for more than a year with one of his subordinates a sustained correspondence, with his computer professional and during his working time", was guilty of serious misconduct justifying the immediate termination of his contract of work.

3. The best attitude: incentives

Rather than suffer the events and see their communication escape, the companies will be well inspired in the future to create an internal social network. They will gain in security, by providing a tool for dialogue at the most unexpected benefits. Through this link, for example, in a pharmaceutical laboratory of research and development projects are more left dormant when an employee leaves the company. The achievements of its work can be enriched by the contributions of employees scattered around the world. And there, at least, everything is legal.