10-09-2019, 12:53 PM
(10-09-2019, 12:32 PM)fredtoast Wrote: In the first two cases the law treats "public figures" differently from private citizens when it comes to making statements about them. Public figures, ESPECIALLY CANDIDATES FOR PUBLIC OFFICE, give up some protection due to their choice to be a public figure. This is more commonly dealt with in libel and slander cases, but it should also apply to harassment. Certainly anything pertaining to a candidate for office is fair game because of the public interest.
In the final case it seems the information would be public knowledge so it is complicated. But, for example, If you knew my children would never speak to me again if they knew I had gotten fired and I was somehow able to keep them from knowing then it could possibly be harassment.
Different cases will be treated differently based on all the facts. In this threads case the people who posted the information knew it was a complete secret and that making it public would cause the victim considerable psychological and possibly even physical damage, so I still don't know why people don't think they should be punished.
I know this to be true with libel and defamation, I am yet to see where this has been established for other laws. Can you show me where harassment falls under the same standard? You can say it should apply, but I can't find a place that says it does apply outside of defamation and libel. Cheating on your wife with a porn star doesn't seem like politically relevant information, but rather information who's main intent was to cause harm.
If this is true then you have a couple million people on Facebook/Twitter who are about to be charged with harassment. This amounts to, "you can't say mean things about people" which is 100% a freedom of speech issue.
Because as I have contended I am only using the information in this one article because of the context of the OP question. Even for harassment I refuse to throw away free speech for a single event (which this article only mentions one event). If a repeated barrage of negative and harassing behavior takes place (which it sounds like occurred here but wasn't in this article), then sure, but a single negative comment or act when it comes to free speech isn't enough for me to pull that right. The information was given up willfully and was factual, in those cases even beyond this one unless there is a history of behavior preceding it then to answer OP question, no.
