Many people believe that to demonstrate the content of a web page with legal value to a judge, it is sufficient to make a printout of the page itself or bring a screenshot to attach to the complaint. Proceeding in this way, on the contrary, has no legal value since it is not possible to guarantee the origin of the document and the counterparty can disown its validity in a very simple way. If you want to give legal value to a web content or a whatsapp chat, you need an AUTHENTIC COPY OF THE DIGITAL CONTENT like the one offered by the international certification service “CertifyWebContent.com” by Informatica in Azienda.
First of all, it’s important to understand why a screenshot isn’t sufficient legal proof. There are several reasons for this, including:
- Lack of authenticity: A screenshot cannot guarantee that the web page is authentic and has not been tampered with. Since screenshots can be easily manipulated using editing software, they cannot be relied upon as reliable evidence.
- The absence of metadata: Screenshots do not contain web page metadata, i.e. information that describes the page itself, such as the title, creation date, and authentication information. This data can be crucial in establishing the validity of a web page as legal evidence. However, even if it had metadata a screenshot would still not have legal value and we explain it below.
- The non-reproducibility: the screenshots cannot faithfully reproduce the entire web page, including its structure with the code not visible and all related features. This means that screenshots can only provide a partial and limited view of the original web page.
If a screenshot has metadata then is it legal?
No, and we’ll give you a practical example to demonstrate it. We want you to understand in a simple way why a screenshot is an unreliable document. We are on a web page and with our phone we take a screenshot. This screenshot has useful and verifiable metadata (there are multiple parameters recorded in the metadata, such as the date created, accessed and modified, the type of file, its extension, the Android or iPhone software used and its version, resolution, copyright of the profile and many others … ). Many believe that this is enough to give legal value to what has been acquired. Mistake! In fact, let’s imagine using a photo editor and modifying our original screenshot, removing the navigation bar and enlarging the margins to make it look like a “normal” screen and now let’s redo our screenshot again but this time with the modified image (basically a screenshot of the edited screenshot). The content has been modified and would appear valid even if it isn’t, even if the metadata is still authentic. This demonstration should make everyone understand that a screenshot is really useless proof!
Is Screenshotting images legal?
Presenting a screenshot as evidence isn’t illegal, of course. However with a screenshot it is not possible to guarantee the origin of the document and the counterparty can disown its validity in a very simple way.
Why the screenshots are more and more often not accepted by a judge?
Because they do not meet all the requirements that we indicate on this page: certify web content with legal value [ click here ]
Do screenshots hold up in court?
More and more courts do not accept screenshots as evidence, because they can easily be artifacts and even the metadata present, even if original, can refer to a screenshot modified and acquired after the modification itself, as we explain in the first point entitled: “If a screenshot has metadata then is it legal?”
How do I authenticate a screenshot?
Screenshots cannot be authenticated
Are screenshots real evidence?
No and we have already explained it in the first point entitled: “If a screenshot has metadata then is it legal?”
how to prove a screenshot is real
It is not possible to prove that it is real and we have already explained this in the first point from the title: “If a screenshot has metadata then is it legal?”
