4 ms·
Just so we're clear: You'll be totally in favor of maintaining the accounts of anyone who routinely posts the location of others, including yourself, right? Bec
by EarlKing 4y ago
Just so we're clear: You'll be totally in favor of maintaining the accounts of anyone who routinely posts the location of others, including yourself, right? Because that's not stalking at all... right?
- woodruffw 4y agoRelitigating this is not going to be fruitful: Elon Musk is a public figure who chooses to fly by private jet. Callsigns and flight status are public information by necessity.
- EarlKing 4y agoBeing a public figure does not mean you have a right to stalk and harass him. It means you get to have a higher bar to charges of defamation for things said about them and nothing more.
- woodruffw 4y agoTracking an aircraft's callsign does not remotely approach the bar for "stalking and harassing." Put another way: the courts have overwhelmingly recognized the rights of "paparazzi": if you're a public figure, there is going to be independent public interest in your life. The interest can't be intrusive (meaning that it doesn't enable someone to break into your house and take pictures of your underwear drawer), but it does allow citizens to use any public information available to them. Since airplane information is public by necessity, there is no reasonable legal structure that enhances Musk's privacy without compromising well-trodden expression rights.
- troyvit 4y agoIt's all about what we call a "reasonable expectation of privacy" right? And all Sweeney did was publish information that was already publicly available[1], right? [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Sweeney https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Sweeney
- EarlKing 4y agoSo if someone goes around taking a picture of your vehicle everywhere you go you won't have any objections to that because you have no reasonable expectation of privacy and it's all publicly available information. Got it. I'm sure you'll stoically accept such behavior rather than scream for it to stop.
- woodruffw 4y agoThis is exactly what highway toll systems and ALPR enforcement already do. But even on the public side: yes, this would be entirely appropriate. It's not clear what the alternative would even be; what would it look like to have civilian evidence in e.g. traffic accidents if people weren't allowed to take pictures of others' cars?
- EarlKing 4y ago1. Highway toll systems aren't random people on Twitter. 2. In such a case you have a need to know that supersedes one's right of privacy. Are you saying you have a need to know where Elon Musk is at all times?
- woodruffw 4y agoElon Musk is the antithesis of a "random person on Twitter." He's the CEO, and one of the richest men on Earth to boot. I don't have any particular need (or interest) in knowing where Elon Musk is. I also don't know where he is at all times with the information in this flight tracker: I only know the parts that are already necessarily public. Law is fundamentally casuistical in nature: there are standards that apply to John Q. Publics (like you and me), and there are other standards that apply to the Barbara Streisands (and Elon Musks) of the world.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- tryingtoawkgood 4y agoTail numbers and flight paths is publicly available information. https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry https://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info
- EarlKing 4y agoSo is your license plate number, and you have no reasonable expectation of the privacy of that information... but you wouldn't be happy if someone went around tracking everywhere you went now would you?
- kalkr 4y agoHow are those two things related at all?
- chimerasaurus 4y ago1090 MHz
- timeon 4y agoJust so we're clear: I'm not free speech absolutist.