# Facebook sued by father over sexual photos of daughter (12). **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [September 6, 2011, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446 "2011-09-06T23:48:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Filbert](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/filbert/32/3433_2.png) [@Filbert](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Filbert)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2011, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/21 "2011-09-10T16:09:42Z")
Did no one else apart from **Brown Eyed Girl**** SmellMyWort**notice the bit about the girl living in a care institition? Guys, she doesn’t live with her father, he didn’t buy her a computer, he doesn’t pay the IP bills, he _can’t_ stop her from getting online. In this situation, the two groups he could blame for it, apart from the kid, are the care institution or facebook. He chose to at least partially blame facebook. It’s very easy to get online without parents knowing for most kids- I know I used to sneak out of school and use the city library computers, which had unrestricted access and anonymous login… Mind you, the school computers were completely uncensored too. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2011, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/22 "2011-09-10T17:56:18Z")
OK, the father blames Facebook. How exactly are they supposed to have prevented this? ---
**Author:** ![Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/brown_eyed_girl/32/3574_2.png) [@Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brown_Eyed_Girl)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2011, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/23 "2011-09-10T18:21:43Z")
Well, according to the article by implementing a process for ensuring accounts are granted to children over age 13: > [@](#): > > Hilary Carmichael, the solicitor acting for the father, told the Herald that Facebook does not have any checks in place to ensure children are over the permitted age, 13, when they open an account. How they propose to do this I’m not certain. But that would be Facebook’s problem. Otherwise, the age restriction is simply lip service. ---
**Author:** ![codgerone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c37758/32.png) [@codgerone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/codgerone)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2011, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/24 "2011-09-10T18:29:49Z")
> [@miss\_elizabeth](#): > > But all the 10-13 year olds I know have computer access about like mine, aka none. . Um… if your computer access is none how come you can post on here. Just wondering is all. ---
**Author:** ![Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/brown_eyed_girl/32/3574_2.png) [@Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brown_Eyed_Girl)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2011, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/25 "2011-09-10T18:46:22Z")
> [@codgerone](#): > > Um… if your computer access is none how come you can post on here. > > Just wondering is all. I think **miss elizabeth** meant ‘mine’ as in her children. ---
**Author:** ![miss\_elizabeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/838e76/32.png) [@miss\_elizabeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/miss_elizabeth)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2011, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/26 "2011-09-10T18:55:23Z")
> [@Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](#): > > I think **miss elizabeth** meant ‘mine’ as in her children. Yes, correct. ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2011, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/27 "2011-09-10T19:01:40Z")
But could you stop your kid from using your computer at all times of day? I’m sure they could get on if they wanted to. It just seems like nowadays especially keeping a kid away from a computer is a really hard task. ---
**Author:** ![codgerone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c37758/32.png) [@codgerone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/codgerone)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2011, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/28 "2011-09-10T19:17:47Z")
> [@Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](#): > > I think **miss elizabeth** meant ‘mine’ as in her children. :smack: I need to work on comprehension skills… ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2011, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/29 "2011-09-11T01:12:04Z")
> [@Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](#): > > Well, according to the article by implementing a process for ensuring accounts are granted to children over age 13 My priority would be about resolving the _existence_ of “sexually suggestive pictures” of my 12 year old, before whether she can get on Facebook without my knowledge. ---
**Author:** ![Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/brown_eyed_girl/32/3574_2.png) [@Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brown_Eyed_Girl)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2011, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/30 "2011-09-11T13:19:09Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > My priority would be about resolving the _existence_ of “sexually suggestive pictures” of my 12 year old, before whether she can get on Facebook without my knowledge. Assuming you have knowledge of the existence of sexually suggestive pictures. Because she wouldn’t be doing \*that \*behind your back as well? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2011, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/31 "2011-09-11T15:13:37Z")
> [@Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](#): > > Assuming you have knowledge of the existence of sexually suggestive pictures. Because she wouldn’t be doing \*that \*behind your back as well? 😕 Huh? We know about them. In the hypothetical presented, they were still put on Facebook. Now the question is when and why they were taken. Behind your back is insufficiently specific. In other words, I think he’s saying that the discovery Facebook’s allowing the pictures to be published or that the care facility granted her computer time are both nowhere as important as the discovery that the daughter is actually taking sexually suggestive pictures of herself. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2011, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/32 "2011-09-11T15:25:15Z")
> [@Inner\_Stickler](#): > > [No, it’s true.](https://www.facebook.com/help/?faq=210644045634222) Yes, but it’s a CYA policy, based on federal law. Zuckerberg [has said](http://allthingsd.com/20110525/zuckerberg-takes-back-under-13-remarks-but-not-really/) he would love to provide service for younger users, and does not like the hoops he currently would have to go through to allow this legally. This does not surprise me: I know of a lot of parents who let their underage kids be on Facebook. A few of the kids even added me. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2011, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/33 "2011-09-16T03:08:54Z")
> [@yoyodyne](#): > > No, I’m saying you’re naive if you think your kid can’t because you monitor him. I’m not saying he is or would even want to, but you can’t stop him unless you lock him up. Apparently, they tried that, and it still didn’t work. ---
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2011, 4:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/34 "2011-09-16T04:33:15Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Yes, but it’s a CYA policy, based on federal law. Zuckerberg [has said](http://allthingsd.com/20110525/zuckerberg-takes-back-under-13-remarks-but-not-really/) he would love to provide service for younger users, and does not like the hoops he currently would have to go through to allow this legally. Yeah, nobody asked about a future hypothetical facebook’s policies on pre-teens. ---
**Author:** ![Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/brown_eyed_girl/32/3574_2.png) [@Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brown_Eyed_Girl)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2011, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/35 "2011-09-16T14:20:31Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Huh? We know about them. In the hypothetical presented, they were still put on Facebook. Now the question is when and why they were taken. Behind your back is insufficiently specific. > > In other words, I think he’s saying that the discovery Facebook’s allowing the pictures to be published or that the care facility granted her computer time are both nowhere as important as the discovery that the daughter is actually taking sexually suggestive pictures of herself. I interpreted his statement, perhaps incorrectly, that he would have made sure to deal with the suggestive pictures before dealing with her unauthorized access to Facebook. That’s why questioned knowledge of the pictures. Until they are published, dad is unlikely to have any idea of their existence. Once they are published on the internet, I’m not sure there’s much you can do about it. Having them removed from Facebook, which I think is a given is unlikely to erase their existence. Digital media has a way of ending up on random strangers’ hard drives. Considering what’s been reported about the girl’s behavior, I do agree he’s got bigger fish to fry than Facebook. I don’t doubt he realizes this, but he’s going through the motions. Facebook is a deep pocket. _shrug_ ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2011, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/36 "2011-09-16T15:02:36Z")
Facebook already has a thing that restricts photo uploads by image size. Can’t they tweak it a bit to automatically detect and reject photos of jailbait? That Zuckerberg guy being such a big-time genius and all, according to a movie I saw… ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2011, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/37 "2011-09-16T16:26:54Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > In other words, I think he’s saying that the discovery Facebook’s allowing the pictures to be published or that the care facility granted her computer time are both nowhere as important as the discovery that the daughter is actually taking sexually suggestive pictures of herself. Thank you, that was the sense in which I meant it. ---
**Author:** ![Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/brown_eyed_girl/32/3574_2.png) [@Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brown_Eyed_Girl)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2011, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/38 "2011-09-16T18:21:30Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > Thank you, that was the sense in which I meant it. Ok. Then how _do_ you resolve this issue? And how does dealing with your 12-year old daughter’s sexual proclivity prohibit taking any action against the other parties involved? You can’t do both at once? I’m not saying the lawsuit has any merit. I’m just questioning the assumption that because he’s suing FB, the father is ignoring the problem of the daughter’s behavior and/or responsible for it through poor parenting. ---
**Author:** ![perfectparanoia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a5b964/32.png) [@perfectparanoia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/perfectparanoia)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2011, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/39 "2011-09-16T20:47:32Z")
Since she is living in a ‘voluntary care institution,’ I don’t think as a parent I would be going after Facebook, I would be going after them. Who lets kids with behavioural problems have unrestricted access to the internet? (Unless of course the dad let the kid have a smartphone with a camera and data package, then he has no one to blame but himself.) ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [September 16, 2011, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446/40 "2011-09-16T21:02:51Z")
> [@Brown\_Eyed\_Girl](#): > > Ok. Then how _do_ you resolve this issue? And how does dealing with your 12-year old daughter’s sexual proclivity prohibit taking any action against the other parties involved? You can’t do both at once? > > I’m not saying the lawsuit has any merit. I’m just questioning the assumption that because he’s suing FB, the father is ignoring the problem of the daughter’s behavior and/or responsible for it through poor parenting. Where on my post do I advocate that he not take the other actions? And if someone accused the father of negligence it was not me. I just meant that if I were in his shoes, my biggest (not only) worry would be how she got into such pictures to begin with - because taking her offline is the easy part. And hell if I know how could I deal with it. Praise Og that I have no children of my own. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/facebook-sued-by-father-over-sexual-photos-of-daughter-12/595446.md?page=1)