3 ms·

I'm sure it will be an interesting case, wouldn't be surprised if it goes all the way to the Supreme Court. However -- there are clear laws making it illegal t

I'm sure it will be an interesting case, wouldn't be surprised if it goes all the way to the Supreme Court. However -- there are clear laws making it illegal to demand money to not speak/publish information (i.e. blackmail). I expect the defense will argue that they are not publishing the information, they are merely amplifying it by making items of public record more available.

jMyles 8y ago
This seems to be distinct from blackmail in a clear cut way though - in this case the information is already published, and the market is for removing it. In other words, it isn't a secret at the time of the transaction.
- URSpider94 8y ago
  Here's a really interesting article on the topic: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/07/06/it-is-actually-difficult-to-define-blackmail/?utm_term=.db9992a7008f https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201... Note that in the DC statute discussed in the article, it refers to "publicizing an asserted fact". One could argue that repeating the fact that the mug shot exists in a different forum is an act of publicizing. In this day and age, publication is increasingly a matter of degree -- everyone's a publisher, if you count Twitter and Facebook. It would still be blackmail, I think, if you threatened to take someone's tweet and put it on the front page of the NY Times unless you receive a lifetime supply of M&M's and Diet Coke ...
  - jMyles 8y ago
    > It would still be blackmail, I think, if you threatened to take someone's tweet and put it on the front page of the NY Times unless you receive a lifetime supply of M&M's and Diet Coke ... Haha... wow, such a good synopsis of the state of media today. Yeah, this is a good argument. It also suggests, though, that criminally relevant distinctions between blackmail and publication are strained.

jMyles 8y ago

This seems to be distinct from blackmail in a clear cut way though - in this case the information is already published, and the market is for removing it. In other words, it isn't a secret at the time of the transaction.

URSpider94 8y ago
Here's a really interesting article on the topic: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/07/06/it-is-actually-difficult-to-define-blackmail/?utm_term=.db9992a7008f https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201... Note that in the DC statute discussed in the article, it refers to "publicizing an asserted fact". One could argue that repeating the fact that the mug shot exists in a different forum is an act of publicizing. In this day and age, publication is increasingly a matter of degree -- everyone's a publisher, if you count Twitter and Facebook. It would still be blackmail, I think, if you threatened to take someone's tweet and put it on the front page of the NY Times unless you receive a lifetime supply of M&M's and Diet Coke ...
- jMyles 8y ago
  > It would still be blackmail, I think, if you threatened to take someone's tweet and put it on the front page of the NY Times unless you receive a lifetime supply of M&M's and Diet Coke ... Haha... wow, such a good synopsis of the state of media today. Yeah, this is a good argument. It also suggests, though, that criminally relevant distinctions between blackmail and publication are strained.