You might want to think twice before agreeing to that next phone software update delivering new emojis. In a ruling handed down in a British Columbia courtroom, a business has been held responsible for a contractual violation costing tens of thousands of dollars after the judge decided that when an owner sent a text message using an emoji, that constituted a business agreement being finalized.
The conflict springs from a business arrangement that was being worked out where South West Terminal was looking to purchase from the farming enterprise Achter Land and Cattle Inc. a gross of flax seed. Over the phone, they developed an order for 80 tonnes of the grain to be delivered in approximately eight months. After settling on a price and a shipping date, they reached an agreement.
SWT took the step of drawing up a contract for the deal. After SWT wrote out the terms, its owners signed the deal and took a photo of the contract, sending it via text to the owners of Achter. Upon receipt of the document, one owner responded with a "thumbs up" emoji, and this is where contention arises. The grain was not delivered, and SWT sued for breach of contract.
The argument in court from the Achter defendants was rather reasonable; they contend that the emoji was sent to convey merely that the contract came through, not that they were committing to the terms of the agreement. "I did not have time to review the Flax Contract and merely wanted to indicate that I did receive his text message," Achter said. The judge, however, interpreted things differently.
One of the qualifiers is that in the past, these two companies had settled on contracts in a similar fashion, where the image was sent over, and the people at Achter responded with a text – using words in effect saying things looked good – and the delivery was fulfilled. In making the decision, the judge ruled that the emoji was "a non-traditional means to 'sign' a document but nevertheless under these circumstances this was a valid way to convey the two purposes of a 'signature.'" In finding for the plaintiff, he ruled they were to receive damages to the amount of $82,200.21 ($61,498.09 US) plus interest.
The curiosity of this is surpassed by the disturbing reality of other possible legal ramifications.
Consider what other emojis could become interpreted in ways that have legal impacts unintended. A new generation of lawyers could emerge who specialize in Emoji Law. Cases may arrive where you can become charged with sexual harassment for sending an image of an eggplant or peach. Imagine that trouble could develop where one person might state, "I want to be with you forever," and after receiving a heart emoji, they declare that the pair have entered into a common-law marriage.
Scroll through the text image library. You see the legal possibilities. Now consider the nightmare if GIFs are given the same legal weight. A floodgate of digital torts could be on the horizon.
(Enter emoji of a forehead slap → Here.)