ILNews

Neumann: Digital treasures play a role in estate planning

February 29, 2012
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Commentary

By Matthew D. Neumann
 

neumann-matthew Neumann

Here is some interesting food for thought. In December 2011, Facebook introduced “Timeline.” At first only available to select users, it will become mandatory for all Facebook users in the coming weeks. More than just a new feature, Timeline is a redesign of Facebook’s user interface that reorganizes the structure and presentation of a user’s profile. Changing from the old “profile” format, Timeline now allows users to experience and consume information in a chronological, graphical timeline.

Think of it as a living, digital journal. You go about your life. Some things are mundane: taking pictures; writing down your thoughts and mood (status updates); talking with people; making new friends. Other things are significant: graduating from school; getting married; getting a job; the birth of your first child. Facebook will chronologically record and organize all of this information. With your assistance, Facebook will, in effect, record and chronologically organize your life.

The implications that stem from this are many (and most pre-date the release of Timeline). The most obvious implication is that at the end of your life you can look back and, in some sense, relive your life in a chronologically organized timeline. You can see photographs from when you were 16. You can relive the party you went to back in college. You can see all the well wishes you received when your first child was born.

Another obvious implication is that other persons (with, or perhaps without, your permission) can “live” your life for the first time. Likewise, you will be able to “live” the life of your family, friends and acquaintances. From there, the implications may be less obvious, but no less significant. Companies. Advertising agencies. Government. Investigators. Lawyers. Law enforcement personnel. Employers. Each, for different reasons, would jump at the chance to “live” your life.

A less obvious implication of Facebook – one that Timeline helps brings into focus – is the potential of Facebook for future generations. Today, even among the most diligent and heritage-minded persons, the tangible things that have survived from our ancestors are limited. For some (if not most), our basic knowledge and awareness of our ancestors is limited once we move beyond the two generations that came before us. Of course we know our parents. Of course we know our grandparents. How many people can name their four great-grandmothers or eight great-great grandfathers? Sadly, probably not many. Facebook may have the potential to change this.

I’ll admit that I can’t tell you the names of my four great-grandfathers. I can’t tell you what they looked like. I can’t tell you their hobbies. I can’t tell you what was on their minds on April 18, 1875. And I can’t tell you who wished them a “happy birthday” when they turned 30 years old. If you could travel into the future and ask my great-grandson the same questions, he might be able to tell you the answers. He would log into Facebook and go to the “Family” or “Ancestors” tab. He would navigate through a digital representation of his family tree, and within minutes, he would be traveling backward through my digital life. If he was so inclined, he might use the opportunity to get to “know me” in some small way. He could see pictures of me when I was 16, relive that party I went to in college, relive the birth of my son (his grandfather) and watch videos I made so my descendants could learn about me.

If you accept what I have described above as plausible and believe that a digital copy of your life can be recorded and potentially exist forever, the ability to protect, control and ensure the preservation of this digital information takes on an increased importance. What steps should we as a society take to ensure this protection and preservation occurs? Facebook offers a very simple approach to the issue by making it easy to transfer a decedent’s account to a memorialized status.

A more robust way to approach the issue is estate planning. The intersection of estate planning and technology presents a variety of interesting legal issues, the predominant of which is how to protect and manage digital assets that come in a variety of flavors – online financial accounts, digital media, digital records, etc. As other authors have pointed out, one’s Facebook profile or Timeline could be considered a digital asset that should be taken into account during the estate planning process.

An even broader way to approach the issue is the concept of a public utility. It is interesting to note that Facebook may exhibit two characteristics of historically regulated utilities: (1) arguably Facebook provides a product/service that serves an important public interest; and (2) Facebook, given its land grab on the social networking market, may have natural monopolistic tendencies that insulate it from competition. While it may be too draconian to imply that government intervention is a real possibility for Facebook, these are interesting issues to think about as Facebook continues to grow and becomes more embedded in our lives. At minimum, if we take seriously the idea that we can build, whether through Facebook or some future social utility, a comprehensive and navigable digital family tree for our society, including everyone in the conversation (i.e., framing the issue of digital preservation on a collective, societal level) might be worthwhile.

Given the exponential rate at which technology develops (if you believe Moore’s law), it’s hard to predict what the future may hold. These sorts of issues will only grow in importance as new technologies develop and our digital society ages. Although I am sure there are some octogenarians fully capable of sending a friend request or “liking” someone’s status update, generally speaking, those persons in the later stages of life are not full-fledged members of our digital society. It’s only a matter of time, however, before Generation Y and the Millennials – generations fully immersed in our society’s technological development – reach old age. As this occurs, as technology moves forward and as new issues develop, it is important that we continue to consider the long-term preservation of the digital treasures we create.•

__________

Matthew D. Neumann is an associate attorney with Hackman Hulett & Cracraft, practicing in the areas of civil litigation and utility law, with experience in cases involving utility regulation, insurance coverage and defense, eminent domain, and general real estate and business matters.  He can be reached at 317-636-5401 or mneumann@hhclaw.com. The opinions expressed are those of the author.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I can understand a 10 yr suspension for drinking and driving and not following the rules,but don't you think the people who compleate their sentences and are trying to be good people of their community,and are on the right path should be able to obtain a drivers license to do as they please.We as a state should encourage good behavior instead of saying well you did all your time but we can't give you a license come on.When is a persons time served than cause from where I'm standing,its still a punishment,when u can't have the freedom to go where ever you want to in car,truck ,motorcycle,maybe their should be better programs for people instead of just throwing them away like daily trash,then expecting them to change because they we in jail or prison for x amount of yrs.Everyone should look around because we all pay each others bills,and keep each other in business..better knowledge equals better community equals better people...just my 2 cents

  2. I was wondering about the 6 million put aside for common attorney fees?does that mean that if you are a plaintiff your attorney fees will be partially covered?

  3. I expressed my thought in the title, long as it was. I am shocked that there is ever immunity from accountability for ANY Government agency. That appears to violate every principle in the US Constitution, which exists to limit Government power and to ensure Government accountability. I don't know how many cases of legitimate child abuse exist, but in the few cases in which I knew the people involved, in every example an anonymous caller used DCS as their personal weapon to strike at innocent people over trivial disagreements that had no connection with any facts. Given that the system is vulnerable to abuse, and given the extreme harm any action by DCS causes to families, I would assume any degree of failure to comply with the smallest infraction of personal rights would result in mandatory review. Even one day of parent-child separation in the absence of reasonable cause for a felony arrest should result in severe penalties to those involved in the action. It appears to me, that like all bureaucracies, DCS is prone to interpret every case as legitimate. This is not an accusation against DCS. It is a statement about the nature of bureaucracies, and the need for ADDED scrutiny of all bureaucratic actions. Frankly, I question the constitutionality of bureaucracies in general, because their power is delegated, and therefore unaccountable. No Government action can be unaccountable if we want to avoid its eventual degeneration into irrelevance and lawlessness, and the law of the jungle. Our Constitution is the source of all Government power, and it is the contract that legitimizes all Government power. To the extent that its various protections against intrusion are set aside, so is the power afforded by that contract. Eventually overstepping the limits of power eliminates that power, as a law of nature. Even total tyranny eventually crumbles to nothing.

  4. Being dedicated to a genre keeps it alive until the masses catch up to the "trend." Kent and Bill are keepin' it LIVE!! Thank you gentlemen..you know your JAZZ.

  5. Hemp has very little THC which is needed to kill cancer cells! Growing cannabis plants for THC inside a hemp field will not work...where is the fear? From not really knowing about Cannabis and Hemp or just not listening to the people teaching you through testimonies and packets of info over the last few years! Wake up Hoosier law makers!

ADVERTISEMENT