A Lawyer’s Take on The Charlie Sheen HIV Disclosure

“Failing to disclose to a sexual partner that you’re HIV positive is like playing Russian roulette with someone’s life” – Jon Mitchell Jackson, Esq.

This morning Charlie Sheen revealed he is HIV positive on the TODAY show with Matt Lauer. Afterwards, an ex-girlfriend of Mr. Sheen and fellow Periscope Summit NY panelist, Bree Olson, told Howard Stern that Sheen never told her he was HIV positive.

These types of cases are more common than you think. In today’s Periscope, I share several legal thoughts about the implications of one partner transmitting to another, a sexually transmittable disease (SDT).

Charlie Sheen HIV Mitch Jackson Streaming Lawyer Commentary

Update: Former ‘Goddess’ Says HE NEVER TOLD ME ABOUT HIV

This afternoon’s Blab discussing California law relating to this issue. A special thanks to Tamara Shelley and Steve Cozart for joining me live!

charlie_sheen_hiv_announcement 600

#SBizHour: Squashing Criminal Trolls

Enjoyed being a guest on today’s #SBizHour with Rachel Miller and Brian Fanzo to share solutions to help you deal with trolls.

Click here or on the image to watch and also see the related Twitter feed here #SBizHour via Storify!


Rachel Mitch and Brian on Blab

Related Blog Post: How To Stop Internet Trolls

The Legal and Social Implications of Oral Promises, Handshakes and Agreements on Social Media

“An oral contract is worth only as much as the paper it’s written on.”

While the lawyer in me believes the above is true, social media and live streaming are changing everything when it comes to connecting and doing business with each other. Trust, reputation and perceived abilities are the new social currency.

For this reason and regardless of whether or not an agreement or promise is in writing, I think we should all treat oral promises, handshakes and agreements as gold. Whether they are in writing or not, they should be honored.

Click here or on the image below to find out why I feel this way, and why you should too!

Mitch Jackson Periscope Sunrise

Live Streamers Doing Business and “In Personam Jurisdiction”

Mitch Jackson is The Streaming LawyerPlease note that while I am a California lawyer, I am not your lawyer. No legal advice is being given. Contact a lawyer in your state with questions.

Many of us travel around the country to do business. If you’re live streaming while traveling on business, you should be aware of the legal principle commonly known as In Personam Jurisdiction.

When most people here this Latin phrase they think #WTF (and I don’t mean “Wow that’s fantastic!”). What this concept is all about is that when a lawsuit is brought against a person, that person must be properly served with a summons and complaint giving the court jurisdiction. Generally speaking, in order for someone to serve your with a summons and complaint and hold you individually accountable to appear and defend yourself, in their state, you must live, be physically present and/or do business in their state. There are exceptions and this is a complicated and much adjudicated concept.

Click here to watch today’s Periscope!

Here are more details…

Live streaming business owners need to be aware of the following concepts:

Example #1: If you have a company based out of New York and are sued in California by a disgruntled citizen, and you neither live or do business in California, an argument can be made that the California courts do not have In Personam Jurisdiction over you as an individual. The California citizen cannot serve you with a lawsuit and force you to travel to California to defend yourself. He will need to travel to New York to pursue his alleged claims against you.

Example #2: In this example and in most states, if you are “doing business in another state” such as California (and this applies to internet businesses and sales), or are physically present in California, then California could very well have In Personam Jurisdiction over you. You could be forced to travel to California to defend yourself.

The reason I’m bringing this up is that if you are a live streamer as described in Example #1 and only do business in New York and lived in New York, but popped on Periscope while traveling in California to share and sell your products or services, a very strong argument could be raised that you have subjected yourself to In Personam Jurisdiction with the California courts. The fact that you are physically live streaming from within California, and talking about business, is probably enough for that state to have jurisdiction over you. This same concept applies to any live streams you may have participated in, from every state you physically visited, along the way.

The take-away is to simply understand that while it is easy to click and stream from almost anywhere in the world, doing so while traveling may subject you to the In Personam Jurisdiction of that particular state’s court system. I’m not suggesting this is going to happen to you but I did want to bring this to your attention.

If you have a question about this, please contact a lawyer in your state.

If you like this live streaming business tip, then make sure to get on my weekly email newsletter where I share more tips just like this!

A BIG legal mistake businesses make on Periscope

mitch jackson periscope get deals in writing 500

This is one of the most common mistakes I see people and businesses make on live streaming sites like Periscope. During today’s show, I’ll also show you how to easily avoid making this mistake yourself!

Join me on today’s Periscope at 1pm PDT (4pm ET). You can watch the recorded show on Katch and/or watch from your desktop here.

Show notes will be shared after the live Periscope on Facebook.