Whether Instant Messaging Can Lead to Defamation

Instant messaging or "IM" a technology permittingper se arises when the false remarks in themselves
users to send and receive text messages to one ormay form the basis of an action for damage in which
multiple parties without a time delay between sendingboth malice and damage are presumed as a matter
and receipt of the message is a powerful tool. Usingof law. Id.
this technology is similar to having a conversationThe issue to consider is whether a reasonable
with another person; just like that person was in theperson's expectation of privacy using a web-based
room with you. The difference is that the two orsystem that is intended as a two-person form of
more people may be several miles or even continentscommunication, is reasonable? To take it one step
apart. The benefit of this technology would seem tofurther, should a person have the expectation that
be obvious, in that a conversation can take placeno other person is viewing the conversation, without
much like one were on a telephone, but without thespecifically asking the question to the other person,
long distance fees. However, this "IM" technology can"are you alone"? If the answer is that a person
also lead to great liability for those who takeshould not reasonably expect the conversation to be
advantage of its electronic conversation capabilities.viewed only be the sender and recipient, then
Like conversation, instant messaging is a simultaneousperhaps the publication element of defamation can be
give-and-take of messages, but it occurs in textmade.
form. It is very possible that a person can make aAn instant messaging provider typically maintains
statement to another person, where the statementinstant messaging systems, and a client-side
concerns the other person and the statement isapplication is usually accessed through a small window
false. If such a situation occurred in a room whereon the computer desktop that remains open when
the two people were the only ones in the room, itthe instant messaging program is running. Instant
might be emotionally hurtful, but not legallymessaging systems use several different and unique
defamation. However, what would be the result if amethods to deliver text messages on two or more
third person were either part of the conversation orusers computers at the same time. The most
simply watching the screen, of the receiving partycommonly used system is a centralized network,
when the statement was made. Lets further assumewhich connects multiple users to a series of servers
the statement dealt with a person's professional(large computes that connect to each other).
reputation. Even if such a statement was notThe servers transmit each text message through the
considered written as a result of the intended privatecentralized network until it is dispatched to the
communication, such a statement could conceivablyintended recipient's computer. The systems that
be defined as slander per se.work in this way, centrally store user data, including
Slander is defined as 'the speaking of base oruser names settings, passwords and your favorite
defamatory words which tend to prejudice another infriends. There are many publicly accessible
his reputation, office, trade, business, or means ofinstant-messaging systems that use this method
livelihood.' Long v. Vertical Technologies, Inc., 113 N.C.including AOL, Yahoo and MSN Messenger.
App. 598, 601, 439 S.E.2d 797, 800 (1994). Slander