4 ms·
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 o
by 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 agoHere'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.