Emojis like thumbs-up or a full moon are tiny icons, but they can have big legal implications

Emojis, those adorable tiny symbols such as the thumbs-up or smiling face, may appear harmless, but they can lead to expensive legal ramifications.

Courts have recently interpreted the utilization of emoji as a form of behavior that is considered threatening, harassing, and even defamatory in various cases.

According to Marilyn McMahon, a professor of law at Deakin University, emojis present some of the most concerning situations, partly due to their use in text messages and online conversations.

According to Professor McMahon, individuals accused of committing illegal acts using emojis frequently argue that they were merely "playing around" or engaging in jest. However, this defense strategy typically does not result in a favorable outcome during legal proceedings.

She states that their defense tends to be ineffective.

What factors do courts take into account when deciding on the use of emojis and what actions are considered to be going beyond accepted limits?

According to Professor McMahon, youngsters in America, as young as 12, have faced legal action after sharing menacing messages on the internet containing emojis resembling explosives or blades.

She explains that the question at hand is determining if the statements made by the young individual pose a genuine danger or if they are simply expressing emotions without any real intent.

According to Marilyn McMahon, a professor of law, the combination of young individuals' impulsive behavior with the instant expression of emotions through emojis can be a problematic blend.

Back in 2016, there was a serious incident involving a student from Virginia who was only 12 years old. This student faced charges due to a threatening act towards her school. The student had used Instagram to convey her message, using emojis of a gun, bomb, and knife, accompanied by the words "killing" and "meet me in the library".

In some other places, the utilization of emojis has resulted in accusations of domestic violence.

Additionally, in 2016, a young man who was 22 years old in France received a three-month prison sentence for sending his former girlfriend a series of text messages containing a firearm emoji. These messages were deemed as an act of intimidation.

According to Professor McMahon, the court determined that there was undeniable proof of a threat on someone's life, with the gun serving as evidence to support the seriousness of the threat.

In the country of New Zealand, a gentleman issued menacing statements in the year 2017 toward his former significant other while including a symbol depicting an aircraft.

According to Professor McMahon, the court ruled that the man and his former partner resided in different locations within the country. Additionally, the emoticon played a role in intensifying and making the threat more imminent. The man had expressed his intention to board a plane and carry out the threat made towards his ex-partner.

Earlier this year, a judge from Canada made a decision stating that the thumbs-up emoji holds the same legal weight as a signature.

A judge from Canada has determined that an emoji representing a thumbs-up gesture may be deemed as a form of consent to a contractual agreement.

The magistrate, in the jurisdiction of Saskatchewan, ruled that farmer Chris Achter must shell out $82,000 ($AU90,000) for violating the contract. It was concluded that he had given his approval using an emoji displaying a raised thumb.

Due to Achter's past behavior of employing brief language, such as "looks good" or "OK," to agree to previous agreements through text, the judge determined that the emoji held the same legal weight. Consequently, it was concluded that a valid contract existed.

In a separate incident in the United States, currently under investigation, a moon symbol in the form of an emoji has stirred up complications.

According to Eric Goldman, co-director at the High Tech Law Institute at Santa Clara University, individuals often use the phrase "to the moon" when enthusiastically promoting stocks.

When billionaire investor Ryan Cohen made a post on social media about a company in which he had invested, and added a symbol representing a full moon, it was claimed that he was encouraging people to buy that company's stocks, with the intention of later selling his own shares. This information was reported by the Washington Post.

The judge made a remark stating that "emojis might be subject to legal action if they convey a notion that would otherwise be subject to legal action."

Judge Trevor McFadden stated that a person committing fraud cannot evade responsibility just because they utilized an emoji.

There is a debate going on suggesting that utilizing the emoji was a concealed indication implying that individuals ought to acquire that particular stock, and this action may be considered as insider trading.

Professor Goldman asserts that this scenario serves as yet another instance where a solitary emoji holds the potential to lead to grave legal repercussions, specifically, the possibility of engaging in securities fraud.

Andrew Rich, a legal professional specializing in employment law at Slater and Gordon law firm, suggests that although it has not occurred yet, Australia might experience a similar case to the Canadian "thumbs-up" case.

"The situation holds significance in Australia as it could potentially carry weight in influencing decisions within this context."

Therefore, you can envision attorneys representing a client bringing up this point and arguing, "Take a look at what occurred in Canada. The court in this case should adopt the identical method." It is no longer innovative," Mr. Rich remarks.

Additionally, he mentions that an increasing number of enterprises are adopting the practice of utilizing emojis to convey their messages. This trend is especially prominent within the construction sector.

There is an increasing prevalence of such forms of communication.

I'm discussing tradespeople, primarily, sharing information regarding the duration of their commitment and the specific terms and arrangements related to their involvement.

Mr. Rich frequently highlights the constant exchange of discussions that takes place between the contractor and the employer regarding contracts. This communication may occasionally include the use of emojis and text messages.

What does he suggest? "Exercise caution."

In all honesty, it all comes down to staying vigilant. You have to exercise caution when communicating and refrain from reacting without carefully considering the potential consequences of your response.

However, according to Professor Goldman, the likelihood of encountering a legal issue related to the use of emojis is relatively minimal in most situations.

Moreover, it is crucial to note that there exist numerous situations where emojis serve as the optimal means to convey an individual's thoughts or emotions.

According to him, the most important factor is clearness.

I urge individuals to communicate with utmost accuracy.

Get RN Updates

Receive additional narratives that delve deeper than current events with our weekly newsletter.