Nebraska is Latest State to Address Digital Legacy

Nebraska is Latest State to Address Digital Legacy

Nebraska is the latest state to propose legislation to allow next of kin to control digital accounts after a user has passed away. Senator John Wightman is proposing Legistlative Bill 783 on behalf of the Nebraska Bar Association to clarify the rights of representatives of the deceased.

The proposed bill is modeled after Oklahoma’s digital property management after death law, that passed in 2010. The law states that “The executor or administrator of an estate shall have the poser, where otherwise authorized, to take control of, conduct, continue, or terminate any accounts of a deceased person on any social networking website, any microblogging or short message service website or any e-mail service websites.”

Idaho passed a similar law last year. Conneticut, Rhode Island, and Indiana have older legislation covering email and digital files.

The BBC told the story of a Nebraska woman who is affected by the remaining Facebook page of her sister. After 2-years, she has come to peace with the death of  Janna Moore Morin, but seeing her picture on Facebook each time they log in has become a constant reminder of her family’s loss.

“The only issue that we have now is that her picture’s always popping up and her picture’s always in your friends and after a while, it just gets to be enough. You get to the point where you’ve accepted things, and you want to see pictures when you want to see them, not just whenever they pop up. And so sometimes it’s almost a deterrent to going online or going on Facebook. One of my brothers…never even uses his account because he doesn’t like to be reminded every time he goes online.”

Currently, Facebook offers two options to deal with a deceased user’s account: you may request memorialization or request the account to be closed.

In the case of the Remember Janna Moore Morin page, her sister may feel differently than other members of her family about wanting the page removed. Janna’s father posts post messages of remembrance there frequently alongside posts from friends and family. This particular case may be another of a contrast in how people mourn online.

For those who do not want to be reminded of a departed one each time they log in to Facebook, there are options other than removing the page or personal profile that may be providing comfort to others.

Simply “unliking” a Facebook page will remove the updates from your news feed. However, the posts that your friends in common make may still appear in your news feed.

“Unfriending” will remove that person’s personal profile from your friends list. A word of caution, though: Unfriending a deceased person’s profile is permanent as there will be no way for a renewed friend request to be approved, so think carefully about this option.

However, to truly manage a deceased’s digital life after they’ve passed away, the legal representative needs the right to access accounts and files across the web. The next few years will see laws passed both in the United States and elsewhere to give executors and next-of-kin the teeth they need to carry out their loved ones’ wishes.

Make Sure You Know Who Will Inherit Your Twitter Account

Make Sure You Know Who Will Inherit Your Twitter Account

Who gets access to your Facebook, Google and Twitter accounts after you die? The WSJ’s Eva Tam finds out.

People draft estate plans that carefully detail how their money and property should pass to their heirs after they become incapacitated or die.

But what about our so-called digital assets, such as an iTunes account containing thousands of songs, or a Twitter account with hundreds of followers? Can people pass those on as well? And how do they ensure that heirs get access to password-protected bank and trading accounts that exist only online?

Questions like these are popping up with more frequency—and for good reason. A popular blog or Web domain, for example, can have great, or potential, value as a business. But if the owner doesn’t take the proper legal steps ahead of time, their heirs may lose the rights to those assets. Photos, videos, email and contents of social-media accounts also may be lost.

Make a List

Justin T. Miller, national wealth strategist in the San Francisco office of BNY Mellon Wealth Management, a division of Bank of New York Mellon Corp. , says that clients often react with surprise when advisers ask about their plans for passing on things like online financial and social-media accounts. Even the technology executives he counsels, Mr. Miller says, have given little thought to how to provide their heirs with access to some of their online assets.

Katherine Dean, managing director of wealth planning for Wells Fargo Private Bank, San Francisco, says one couple worth around $20 million seemed abashed when she asked them to detail their digital assets in making a comprehensive financial and estate plan. She gave them a one-page checklist seeking information about such assets as photo and social-media accounts, Web-based games, and online-only banking and brokerage accounts.

“They said, ‘Oh my gosh, we’ve got to go online to get this,’ ” says Ms. Dean. “Whenever we hear that, we take the time to have the conversation that this is very important.”

The most important thing, estate attorneys say, is to establish procedures for protecting and granting access to passwords and for transferring assets and account ownership. The rules can vary widely depending on the vendor. While there is nothing in Twitter’s company rules and conditions that says one of its accounts must close if the owner dies, Apple Inc. ‘s iTunes says it doesn’t have a policy that allows anyone to will or inherit an iTunes account.

But even where limits exist, by placing the license and necessary passwords in a trust, access to such accounts can be preserved, says Naomi R. Cahn, a professor at George Washington University Law School.

Ms. Cahn explains: Many digital assets are owned through a license that is limited to the account-holder and nontransferable. The license may cease to exist when the account-holder dies, so it can’t be transferred in a will. But by placing the license in a trust, it is possible that the license will survive the death of its creator.

Wills play an important role, too, Ms. Cahn says, mainly in stating who should receive any digital property that is capable of being inherited. A will can also designate who will have access to digital accounts, although this may not be legally binding.

Estate advisers caution against listing digital assets and passwords in a will because the will can become public. Such information instead should go into a separate letter, says Lesley Moss, an attorney at law firm Oram & Moss in Chevy Chase, Md.

Looking for Legislation

A group of states is interested in drafting a law that would make it easier for consumers to bequeath online property by giving fiduciaries the right to manage and distribute their clients’ digital assets.

Lawyers, judges, legislators and law professors from the Uniform Law Commission, a group appointed by state governments to draft and promote new state laws, met this summer to discuss such a proposal.

Currently only Connecticut, Idaho, Indiana, Oklahoma and Rhode Island give fiduciaries this right.

Life and Death Online: Who Controls a Digital Legacy?

Life and Death Online: Who Controls a Digital Legacy?

hree days after the Toronto teen lost a long battle with a colon disease, her sister Jaclyn Atkins had a technician crack Alison’s password-protected MacBook Pro. Her family wanted access to Alison’s digital remains: Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, Yahoo and Hotmail accounts that were her lifeline when illness isolated her at home.


Alison Atkins Linda Bell

“Alison had pictures, messages and poems written that we wanted to keep to remember her,” says Ms. Atkins, 20, an undergraduate at the University of Toronto.

But using Alison’s passwords violated some of those websites’ terms of service, and possibly the law. None of the services allow the Atkins family—or any others—to retrieve the passwords of the deceased. Their argument is that it would violate Alison’s privacy.

Since then, Ms. Atkins’s attempts to recover Alison’s online life have begun falling apart. The websites that previously logged in automatically on Alison’s laptop began locking out Ms. Atkins as part of their standard security procedures. Her attempts to guess or reset her sister’s passwords backfired. Some of the accounts have been shutting themselves down.

On Nov. 21, Alison disappeared from Facebook, where her family used her account to communicate and share memories with more than 500 friends. “We have already lost Alison,” says Ms. Atkins. Now the family says it fears losing another part of her.

The digital era adds a new complexity to the human test of dealing with death. Loved ones once may have memorialized the departed with private rituals and a notice in the newspaper. Today, as family and friends gather publicly to write and share photos online, the obituary may never be complete.


The Atkinses—Jaclyn, Alison, Gary and Lyn—on a 2010 trip to Las Vegas. Linda Bell

But families like the Atkinses can lose control of a process they feel is their right and obligation when the memories are stored online—encrypted, locked behind passwords, just beyond reach. One major cause is privacy law. Current laws, intended to protect the living, fail to address a separate question: Who should see or supervise our online legacy?

In Toronto, taking hold of Alison Atkins’s digital afterlife forced her family to tread a line between celebrating her, and invading her privacy. In the process, her family discovered some dark journals Alison clearly meant to conceal. “She had passwords for a reason,” Ms. Atkins says.

U.S. and Canadian laws, which are similar for the most part, don’t treat digital assets like physical ones that can be distributed according to wills. In 1986, Congress passed a law forbidding consumer electronic-communications companies from disclosing content without its owner’s consent or a government order like a police investigation. Although that law predates the rise of the commercial Internet, courts and companies have largely interpreted it to mean that the families can’t force companies to let them access the deceased’s data or their accounts.

Yahoo Inc. lays it out plainly in its terms of service. “Upon receipt of a copy of a death certificate, your account may be terminated and all contents therein permanently deleted.”

A Yahoo spokeswoman said that users of the company’s mail and photo services “agree that their account content won’t be transferred without their explicit permission.” To ensure an account gets transferred at death, “users need to provide consent and their account information in their estate plans.”

Microsoft Corp. , which owns Hotmail, won’t provide families with passwords or control of accounts, a spokeswoman said. But with “appropriate documentation” it will give next of kin the deceased’s email on discs.

Customers’ privacy is “something the company respects both in life and in death,” says Dharmesh Mehta, Microsoft’s senior director of product management.

Facebook Inc., which by one estimate saw 580,000 American members die this year, has gone to court to oppose the notion that families can compel it to hand over data. In September, Facebook successfully blocked the estate of British model Sahar Daftary from getting account details in U.S. District Court of Northern California, San Jose Division. The executor was hoping Ms. Daftary’s posts and messages might help prove to a coroner that she didn’t commit suicide by showing her state of mind.

A Facebook spokesman said, when it receives requests for user data, “We will respond in a way that is sensitive to [a family’s] loss and is consistent with applicable law, which limits a provider’s ability to disclose data to third parties.”

Five states have passed legislation giving executors power over digital assets. Connecticut and Rhode Island laws cover only email, while Indiana, Idaho, and Oklahoma laws include social-networking and blogging accounts. The laws remain largely untested in court.

National action isn’t expected for at least two years. The Uniform Law Commission, a group that drafts state laws for nationwide consideration, met for the first time in November to tackle a digital-asset law. Under one proposal, the law could broadly redefine the “authorized user” of an account to include an agent or a representative of his estate, says Suzanne Walsh, a Connecticut estate lawyer leading the committee.


But Google Inc. and Facebook representatives raised concerns about how such a law might upend users’ privacy expectations and how it might be implemented, attendees say.

There are also the business costs. Companies fear a patchwork of laws or having to adjudicate who should get a dead person’s files. Handing over data too readily could undermine their users’ trust. And fundamentally, leaving dead people’s accounts active runs counter to a core business proposition of sites like Facebook, which is to sell advertising targeted at real living people.

Internet companies face a “conflict between federal law, which strictly limits” disclosure, and state laws “seeking to expand the authority of the deceased,” a Facebook spokesman said. He also said that keeping dead people’s accounts active “would undermine the fundamental concept of authenticity on Facebook.”

A Google spokesman said, “It’s crucial to strike a balance” between the grieving family and the user’s privacy. He said Google is also concerned that an account could be used to impersonate the dead.

Some people may have good reason to keep their files private. Minneapolis computer expert Mark Lanterman recalls a computer hard drive he recovered for a family after a 2009 fire revealed that its owner was researching arson-investigation techniques, had a female companion not his wife, and was an embezzler.

Facing a lack of legal clarity, families are charting their own course. In one the first lawsuits over the issue, the parents of Justin Ellsworth, a Marine who died in Afghanistan in 2004, sued Yahoo to access his email. Yahoo at first refused, but ultimately complied with a court order to hand over his data.

Since then, a Yahoo spokeswoman said, the company has revised its terms of service to make it clear that the accounts aren’t the property of the estate. (However it will respect a person’s wishes if consent and account details including the password is given in an estate plan.)

Today, some people share passwords so others can access their accounts after death, or write clauses into their wills, though the legality of either is unclear. The Justice Department has said in testimony to Congress that it believes fraud laws would permit criminal charges if a person “exceeds authorized access” by violating a website’s terms of service, which often say nobody else can access an account.

In the Atkins situation, no law-enforcement agency or company is suggesting it would press charges. Still “there hasn’t been a lot of case law on this,” says Jim Lamm, a Minnesota estate lawyer who focuses on digital issues. “It’s up to a prosecuting attorney whether to charge” a family member with a crime for accessing the accounts of the dead, he says, “and that’s not a risk that I would advise them to take.”

In 2009, Facebook began allowing family members to either delete or “memorialize” the accounts of the deceased. In a memorialized account, a person’s existing friends network can still leave comments and photos with the account of a dead person. But nobody has permission to log in or edit the account.

For Teddy Campagna of Salt Lake City, his dead brother’s online presence is making the private process of grieving excruciatingly public. After his brother B.J. committed suicide at age 40 in April, Mr. Campagna planned a fitting funeral for the former photographer of rock concerts, car shows and other events. He dressed his brother in a pair of “really cool Levi’s” and two of his favorite shirts, as well as a beanie, and blasted Pink Floyd music.

Mr. Campagna has struggled to maintain that kind of control online. “His Facebook page is one of only a few things we have left of him,” he says.

So he has kept the account active, which he is able to do because his brother had given him the password. But he’s sensitive about his brother’s suicide and doesn’t want B.J.’s profile tarnished by off-color comments or gruesome details about his cause of death.

Around B.J.’s birthday this summer, an ex-girlfriend of his posted something negative, he says. “I am protecting my little brother, who can’t fight back,” he says.

He says he contacted Facebook to ask what would happen if he “memorialized” his brother’s page and then someone posted an unwelcome message on it. He didn’t like the answer: “That message is also memorialized—forever,” he says, unless its author deletes it.

The Facebook official said the company’s “hearts go out to those who have lost loved ones.” Memorialization, he said, is designed to respect the privacy of the dead. “Allowing ongoing access to accounts,” he said, “could potentially run afoul of federal wiretapping law as well as state computer trespass and online impersonation laws.”

“I think that is a cop-out,” says Mr. Campagna.

In Toronto, Alison Atkins was diagnosed with ulcerative colitis, a painful colon disease, when she was 12. A petite brunette with a broad smile, Alison tried to live a normal teen life. She played the violin and kept pet hermit crabs.

As part of her disease, she had her colon removed—one of at least eight surgeries. “She was wise beyond her years,” says her mother, Lyn Atkins. “We talked about lots of things, including organ donation or being kept alive on machines.”

Alison worked to raise money and awareness for people like her who live with ostomies, which require people to attach a pouch to their bodies to collect waste. At age 13, she posed for modeling portraits wearing her ostomy bag.

In her better moments, she counseled suicidal kids online, her father says. But as her health declined, she could no longer attend school regularly and became suicidal herself, says her sister Ms. Atkins.

Some mystery shrouded Alison’s death. She was found unconscious in her bed on July 26, and suffered heart attacks that left her brain-dead. Her family wasn’t initially certain if she accidentally choked, or intentionally overdosed on pain killers.

Three days after Alison died, Ms. Atkins says her parents asked her to try to access her sister’s Internet accounts to find photos and to better understand what she was thinking in her final days. She took her sister’s MacBook, a hand-me-down that was missing the return key, to a friend who is a computer repairman. Within 10 minutes, she says, he circumvented the computer’s password.

Once on the computer, Ms. Atkins found that it automatically logged her into her sister’s Twitter, Tumblr and Facebook accounts. She spent hours scouring their pages. “I felt a longing, like I was going to find a secret code that is going to change everything and make everything better,” Ms. Atkins says.

Logged in as Alison, her mother posted to Facebook: “We unlocked Alison’s MacBook Pro so don’t be alarmed if you see her online on Facebook.…It’s just her family getting information and all the messages!”

Alison’s sister discovered some of Alison’s most intimate thoughts and feelings. On her Tumblr account, Ms. Atkins found a password-protected second blog under the heading “you wouldn’t want to know.” Inside, she found posts about suicide and what she describes as “dark” comments.

Ms. Atkins and her cousins debated whether to tell Alison’s parents about the private account. Eventually, they did.

As difficult as that was, Alison’s mother, Lyn, says she has no regrets. “I read it with sadness. There were no surprises,” she says.

Ultimately, Alison’s online activities helped the family feel more certain that she likely hadn’t attempted suicide. In some of her final writings, she expressed excitement about plans to meet a boyfriend in coming days.

Asked if she felt Alison had a right to privacy, her mother says she doesn’t believe so. “She was my child. I felt I had a right to know.”

A Tumblr Inc. spokeswoman says the company doesn’t provide passwords to families of the dead, but will shut down accounts upon a family’s request.

Ms. Atkins used her access to Alison’s accounts to change Alison’s privacy settings, she says. She gave herself access to her sister’s private Twitter posts, and unblocked herself and her parents on Alison’s Facebook profile.

A Twitter Inc. spokesman declined to comment on an individual account.

As Alison’s friend network learned of her death, they began posting photos, videos and other memorials to her Facebook page. More than 20 people sent Alison’s Facebook account new friend requests, which her family approved.

Alison’s death notice in the Toronto Star, written by her father and aunt, was short and said little about her struggle or accomplishments. But across hundreds of posts on Facebook, friends wrote their own testimonials about how much they missed Alison and had been inspired by her bravery in confronting disease.

Amid the mourning, Ms. Atkins hadn’t dealt with an issue she knew was coming: Sooner or later, the Twitter, Facebook and other accounts on Alison’s MacBook would automatically log out and require her to type in passwords. She didn’t possess the passwords.

It started happening in early November. She could no longer get into Facebook on Alison’s computer. “I thought I could fix this or figure it out, but I was afraid of telling my parents,” she says.

Her attempts to reset Alison’s passwords made things worse. She couldn’t reset Facebook without access to Alison’s Yahoo mail account. But when she tried to log in to Yahoo, it asked her a series of “challenge” questions, put in place by Alison, which she kept getting wrong.

She suspects her sister intentionally put in the wrong answers to the questions. “Very sneaky on Alison’s part,” she says. The same happened with Microsoft Hotmail.

On Nov. 21, Ms. Atkins noticed that her sister’s Facebook account was gone entirely. Clicking on Alison from her own account brought up an error message. Alison’s profile photo, which once showed the family together at Disney World, had been replaced by a generic outline of a head.

She sent Facebook a message, pleading that the company return her sister’s account to its former state. “We just want her account back the way it was!” she wrote.

On Nov. 26, Ms. Atkins received a response from a Facebook staffer named Chester. “We are very sorry to hear about your loss,” he wrote. “Per our policy for deceased users, we reactivated and memorialized this account.”

Ms. Atkins is happy to have Alison’s Facebook content back, but sad that Alison no longer appears in search results, and that she can’t add any more friends to Alison’s account.

If she herself were to die, Ms. Atkins says, she would want her boyfriend or parents to have access to her accounts. But there is no system to make that happen. The Internet seems like “a scrapbook and a memory book that is going to be there forever—but it isn’t,” she says. “It could all be gone in an instant.”

Digital Estate Planning in a Digital Age

Digital Estate Planning in a Digital Age

Digital Estate Planning in a Digital Age

digital estate planning in a digital age
digital estate planning in a digital age

In more recent history, a news story circulated through social-media spheres involving a lawsuit by Bruce Willis against Apple Inc. involving his right to transfer ownership of his vast iTunes collection to his heirs. Though the story was debunked by his representatives, it raised an interesting dilemma surrounding the ownership of digital assets and the transferability of those assets posthumously. Digital estate planning in a digital age has become increasingly relevant.

In our increasingly digital world there is a greater need to protect the digital assets we increasingly amass over time. Digital content is referred to “any information that is published or distributed in a digital form, including text, data, sound recordings, photographs and images, motion pictures, and software.” [1] Digital assets include such digital content as one’s online persona, passwords to the likes of Facebook, Twitter, Linked In, and blogs. [2] Currently, there are only five states that have laws governing digital estate planning. [3] As a result, an overwhelming majority of jurisdictions lack statutory guidelines governing digital asset bequeathment leaving loved ones lacking legal recourse. Traditional estate planning plays a major role in protecting both tangible and intangible assets alike, however has been slow to evolve with emerging technology.

Traditional Estate Planning

Digital Estate Planning in a Digital Age
Digital Estate Planning in a Digital Age

Essentially, one’s estate amounts to anything a person owns, tangible or intangible. Traditional estates are defined as a person’s interest in land or other property. [4] Generally, a person’s estate consists of traditional assets defined as items that are owned and have value. [5] Accordingly, traditional estate planning primarily involves the posthumous disposition of property typically involving a three step process. [6] First, there is a consultation to consider an individual’s present and lifetime needs. [7] Second, and most importantly, a thorough plan designed around meeting those needs during the client’s lifetime. [8] Last but not least, traditional estate planning involves the creation of a unified estate plan, which balances the client’s needs during his/her lifetime with the needs of his estate after death. [9] Nonetheless, our increasingly digital world has created a whole new class of assets that traditional estate-planning tools may not be equipped to handle, including the ability to legally transfer a decedent’s ownership of digital assets. As such, digital estate planning in a digital age is evermore important.

Digital Estate Planning

Digital Estate Planning in a Digital Age
Digital Estate Planning in a Digital Age

Digital estate planning not only promotes alienability of ownership, but it also:

  • Makes life easier for the estate’s executor and family members.
  • Impedes identify theft.
  • Protects decedent’s intellectual property interest.
  • Preserves a decedents digital legacy [10]

Currently, there is no standard to bequeath ones digital estate, however digital estate planning can be something as simple as executory guidelines constituting a letter to one’s executor listing important URLs, usernames, passwords, security codes, and other information needed to access online accounts. [11] Since one of the most common forms of digital assets is licenses which are fully transferable within a trust, author Joseph M. Metrek suggests providing clients with a “Digital Asset Revocable Trust” (DART). [12] Essentially, the DART, like a traditional trust, will retain ownership of digital assets beyond the life of the grantor. Therefore, a trustee would have the authority to manage and transfer authorizing licensing agreements to a client’s heirs based on the needs established when the estate was created.

In addition, an executor or fiduciary can mitigate the amount of personal hardship and grievance associated with digital estate planning by following a simple set of guidelines. [13] Experts recommend fiduciaries implement the following crucial steps when administering a decedent’s digital estate:

  • Seek the assistance of technical help if necessary.
  • Work on consolidating virtual assets to as few “platforms” as possible (e.g. have multiple e-mail accounts set to forward to a single e-mail account.
  • Obtain statements (or data) of the prior twelve months of the decedent‘s important financial accounts.
  • Consider notifying the individual [sic] in the decedent‘s e-mail contact list and other social media contacts.
  • Change passwords to those that the fiduciary can control (and remember).
  • Keep all accounts open for at least a period of time to make sure all relevant or valuable information has been saved and all vendors or other business contacts have been appropriately notified, and so all payables can be paid and accounts receivable have been collected.
  • Remove all private and/or personal data from online shopping accounts (or close them as soon as reasonably possible).
  • The fiduciary should plan on archiving important electronic data for the full duration of the relevant statutes of limitations. [14]
Digital Estate Planning in a Digital Age
Digital Estate Planning in a Digital Age


Sadly, many will not implement traditional or digital estate plans, leaving their loved ones to sort out unfinished details of their lives. Estate planning traditionally has been a service primarily utilized by the elderly, however increasing awareness among tech savvy clients can reduce the ambivalence towards estate planning. Essentially, digital content owners face two distinct issues; (1) do they really own their online digital content and if so, (2) how can they pass that ownership or the use of that content on to their loved ones. One thing is for certain however, without digital estate mechanisms, such as DART’s or executory guidelines, even the likes of Bruce Willis would not be able to ensure his loved ones were legally entitled to his vast collection of Rob Zombie albums. Digital estate planning in a digital age is essential to pass on one’s legacy.

  1. What Happens When We Die: Estate Planning of Digital Assets, (last visited Aug 20, 2014).
  2. Michael Walker & Victoria D. Blachly, Virtual Assets, ST003 A.L.I –A.B.A 177 (2011)
  3. Alissa Skelton, Facebook After Death: What Should the Law Say?, MASHABLE (Jan. 26, 2012), Oklahoma, Idaho, Rhode Island, Indiana and Connecticut have all enacted laws regarding digital estate planning.
  4. BLACK‘S LAW DICTIONARY 626 (9th ed. 2009).
  5. Id. at 134.
  6. Jerome Solkoff, Scott Solkoff, What is elder law—Estate planning –.14 Fla. Prac., Elder Law § 1:3 (2011-12 ed.), FLA. PRAC., ELDER LAW, § 1:3.
  7. Id.
  8. Id.
  9. Id.
  10. Planning for digital assets, (last visited Aug 20, 2014).
  11. Joseph M. Mentrek, Estate Planning in a Digital World. 19 Ohio Prob. L.J. 195 (2009).
  12. Id.
  13. Walker & Blachly, supra note 2, at 182-85.
  14. See generally id. at 184-85