14 ms·

Legal action being taken against the person who pulled public flight information and published already public information? The sad part is I’m sure Elon can bu

Legal action being taken against the person who pulled public flight information and published already public information? The sad part is I’m sure Elon can bury this guy in fees even if the lawsuit is ultimately ruled as entirely without merit.

trident5000 4y ago
Your home location is also public info. Publishing it on twitter is still doxxing and always has been.
- joshuamorton 4y ago
  "Doxxing" isn't illegal and never has been.
  - jacquesm 4y ago
    That is location dependent. NL, Spain and China (and possibly others) have anti-doxxing laws. That said: tracking a plane is not doxxing.
    - koolba 4y ago
      Just because information is publicly available doesn’t mean it’s not doxxing. It’s the act itself. Otherwise every accusation of doxxing could be denied with a single level of indirection.
      - Jarwain 4y ago
        Exactly. Just because information is publicly available, doesn't mean it's easy to find or access. Doxxing makes it easy to access and reference, and bridges the gap between a pseudonyms and real identity
      - jacquesm 4y ago
        The bar for doxxing is that the information is either private or difficult to obtain and pertains to a person. That bar is not met here.
        catiopatio 4y ago
        No, the bar for “doxxing” is whether you’re disseminating private or sensitive identifying information about a person, and particularly if you’re doing so with malicious intent. Given my real name — which is available on Twitter — my home address is not difficult to obtain from online, public, governmental real estate records. Despite the fact that the information is public, it would still be doxxing — not to mention inappropriate, violating, and frightening — if someone decided to dig up that address and post it to a broad audience on Twitter that would have otherwise been unaware of it. This is even more true if that audience is hostile, and my information is being posted in an attempt to harass and/or intimidate.
        jacquesm 4y ago
        It helps if you use a word if you use the common definition of that word. If you want to expand the definition of the word doxxing then that's fine but you'll have to have that conversation all by yourself. I'll just use this one: "Doxing" is a neologism. It originates from a spelling alteration of the abbreviation "docs" (for "documents") and refers to "compiling and releasing a dossier of personal information on someone".Essentially, doxing is revealing and publicizing the records of an individual, which were previously private or difficult to obtain. " From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing So this isn't doxing, since the information isn't private and it isn't difficult to obtain.
        catiopatio 4y ago
        I’ll just use this one, from the first paragraph of the very same page you cited: > Doxing or doxxing (originally spelled in 1337 as d0xing) is the act of publicly providing personally identifiable information about an individual or organization, usually via the internet. Historically, the term has been used interchangeably to refer to both the aggregration of this information from public source or record databases and social media websites (like Facebook), as well as the publication of previously private information obtained through criminal or otherwise fraudulent means such as hacking and social engineering. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing So this is doxxing, and you dishonestly cherry-picked an incomplete definition. In case any confusion remains, here’s the Oxford Languages’ definition: > search for and publish private or identifying information about (a particular individual) on the internet, typically with malicious intent.
    - joshuamorton 4y ago
      Fair, I should clarify: it is not illegal in any of the locations that Musk or Jack Sweeney operate in. Musk going after Sweeney would hopefully get thrown out at the anti-SLAPP stage. Unfortunately, my go-to person for such questions (@popehat) just left Twitter because of how awfully Musk is running it.
  - spritefs 4y ago
    It isn't legal in California > Every person who, with intent to place another person in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of the other person’s immediate family, by means of an electronic communication device, and without consent of the other person, and for the purpose of imminently causing that other person unwanted physical contact, injury, or harassment, by a third party, electronically distributes, publishes, e-mails, hyperlinks, or makes available for downloading, personal identifying information, including, but not limited to, a digital image of another person, or an electronic message of a harassing nature about another person, which would be likely to incite or produce that unlawful action, is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in a county jail, by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=653.2 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio...
    - joshuamorton 4y ago
      Despite Musks claims, there's zero evidence that Sweeney has ever done anything with intent to place someone in fear for their safety. And, given that it operated for years without issue, there is in fact compelling evidence to the contrary.
      - spritefs 4y ago
        I mean, I never said what Sweeney was doing is considered doxxing, or whether his behavior could lead to reasonable fear for safety. I'd rather let the lawyers untangle this annoying mess really didn't expect my initial comment to lead to a shitstorm...
    - browserman 4y ago
      > with intent to place another person in reasonable fear for his or her safety This would cover LibsOfTikTok, but not ElonJet
      - NaturalPhallacy 4y ago
        You mean Taylor Lorenz who doxxed LibsOfTikTok?
  - stale2002 4y ago
    - jacquesm 4y ago
      No, of course he does not and this comment is against the guidelines of HN.
      - stale2002 4y ago
        jacquesm 4y ago
        They don't have to do anything because you are breaking the rules here.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        stale2002 4y ago
        dang 4y ago
        Could you please stop posting in the flamewar style to HN? It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. We've had to ask you this more than once: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29629700 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29629700 (Dec 2021) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21499309 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21499309 (Nov 2019) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19342820 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19342820 (March 2019) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14610460 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14610460 (June 2017) I don't want to ban you, but if this keeps up, we'll end up having to. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.
akiselev 4y ago
IANAL so correct me if I’m wrong but it looks like Musk has a decent chance of getting SLAPPed back [1] to kingdom come. Twitter may be a private entity but the lawsuit is clearly meant to stifle the distribution of public information. Now that he owns one of the largest social media platforms used to distribute stuff like CALFire emergency announcements, that jet information is not only already public but arguably that information is now in the public interest [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_pu...
- ncallaway 4y ago
  It would depend on where the lawsuit is filed. Anti-SLAPP statutes are state laws, and vary wildly by state from very strong laws, weak laws with almost no teeth, to no laws at all. Unfortunately this means enterprising billionaires might be able to forum shop the SLAPP lawsuit to states where it’s less likely to bite them later.
  - akiselev 4y ago
    Sweeney is a college student in Florida and the alleged incident happened in California. I’m guessing Musk is based out of Texas? CA > TX > FL according to anti-slapp.org grades but all three have anti-SLAPP laws. Sweeney might actually have the hardest time in his state because the laws are weirdly specific. IANAL and genuinely curious, how much further can Musk shop around? To the state Sweeney’s corp is in (if he has one)? Does some random court in Kansas or whatever have the jurisdiction to slap a meaningful injunction against someone who’s never stepped in the state? I doubt Musk would be able to actually recover any funds that way but again IANAL and I’m curious. Can he make this federal? Musk is literally trying to sue a twenty year old college student. Might as well try bleeding a rock. Is Musk so out of touch that he really thinks that he can get anything but a pyrrhic victory?
    - wpietri 4y ago
      What Musk would get is more of what he's already getting: causing pain to the target and fear to others. Whether or not he eventually loses the lawsuit doesn't matter for that.
minimaxir 4y ago
Very many lawyers would love to work pro bono on this type of case.
- sangnoir 4y ago
  ...and many people would be ready to donate. I wonder if it's possible to crowdfund lawsuits against billionaires, a reverse Thiel (vs Gawker), in a way.
baby 4y ago
Come on. That is such a bad faith argument to read on HN. There is a difference between open data and someone publicizing it. I know you hate musk but let’s not write reddit-level comment please. If it had been a personality you liked you would have written a totally different comment.
- ssnistfajen 4y ago
  Then why isn't OpenSky (where elonjet gets data from) and sites like Flightradar24 being sued by Elon then? They publish/provide the exact same info. The only bad faith argument here is claiming publishing publicly available information is somehow endangerment.
  - extropy 4y ago
    Let me argue from the other end. The incident happened, which is obv not good. What where the causes? How can we prevent this from happening again? What do other high profile perons do to prevent this from happening?
    - Eisenstein 4y ago
      > What where the causes? Elon loves to shove himself front and center into the public eye and to stoke a fanbase. Large groups of people inevitably contain some crazy ones. Obsessive para-social relations often lead to unhinged fans stalking or harassing the targets of their obsession. This is so common it has a term coined by Eminem: "Stan". > How can we prevent this from happening again? Celebrities are often stalked not just by fans but by reporters. Princess Di was arguably put in a situation by photographers which led to a car crash and her death. It appears the solutions are either: (1) Don't be famous, or be the type of famous person that has a low profile (there are a lot of them) (2) If you are a billionaire then you can afford a security detail -- get one (3) Support real mental health efforts and legislation which funds support for people with mental health issues, instead of sticking them in prison or making them live on the street
      - 4y ago
esskay 4y ago
From the sounds of it its a bit more than just posting public flight data. He had people at airports tracking the plane as it was changing its flight code to prevent tracking. That goes beyond using public information and enters into stalking teritory, even if only in a fairy minor way. Not defending the ban, but the context is a bit more complex than posting something off of a public site onto twitter.
- jfoster 4y ago
  Not just that, but the owner of the account offered to take it down for a price. Feels like extortion.
  - imperfect_blue 4y ago
    Wait, where did he say this? To me it doesn't just feel like extortion, it straight up is extortion.
    - jfoster 4y ago
      Twitter DM, apparently: "Any chance to up that to $50k? It would be great support in college and would possibly allow me to get a car maybe even a Model 3." https://www.protocol.com/elon-musk-flight-tracker#toggle-gdpr https://www.protocol.com/elon-musk-flight-tracker#toggle-gdp...
    - jacquesm 4y ago
      Not really, the party never solicited payment. Musk opened up the negotiations and was then pissed off when the other side didn't accept his first offer.
  - 0x53 4y ago
    But he didn’t take the money, meaning that at least his intent wasn’t to extort. Edit: looked this up apparently Elon offered him 5k which he rejected and asked 50k instead. So I guess neither have the moral high ground.
  - isleyaardvark 4y ago
chaosbolt 4y ago
Well Alex Jones got sued and the judge said he has to pay 1 billion $, and all he was sued for (according to the prosecutor) was publishing the family's information which I'm sure he also found available publicly and they got harassed by other people. So Elonjet taking the information publicly available, sharing it, and people "harassing" Elon is similar enough. Again, before Elon bought twitter the narative was that twitter as a private platform could ban anyone they wanted for no reason at all, so if that logic was reasonable then it should be reasonable now.
- wasmitnetzen 4y ago
  That's just plain false. Alex Jones was sued for defamation, not for doxxing.
- kentm 4y ago
  > and all he was sued for (according to the prosecutor) was publishing the family's information This is incorrect.

trident5000 4y ago

Your home location is also public info. Publishing it on twitter is still doxxing and always has been.

joshuamorton 4y ago
"Doxxing" isn't illegal and never has been.
- jacquesm 4y ago
  That is location dependent. NL, Spain and China (and possibly others) have anti-doxxing laws. That said: tracking a plane is not doxxing.
  - koolba 4y ago
    Just because information is publicly available doesn’t mean it’s not doxxing. It’s the act itself. Otherwise every accusation of doxxing could be denied with a single level of indirection.
    - Jarwain 4y ago
      Exactly. Just because information is publicly available, doesn't mean it's easy to find or access. Doxxing makes it easy to access and reference, and bridges the gap between a pseudonyms and real identity
    - jacquesm 4y ago
      The bar for doxxing is that the information is either private or difficult to obtain and pertains to a person. That bar is not met here.
      - catiopatio 4y ago
        No, the bar for “doxxing” is whether you’re disseminating private or sensitive identifying information about a person, and particularly if you’re doing so with malicious intent. Given my real name — which is available on Twitter — my home address is not difficult to obtain from online, public, governmental real estate records. Despite the fact that the information is public, it would still be doxxing — not to mention inappropriate, violating, and frightening — if someone decided to dig up that address and post it to a broad audience on Twitter that would have otherwise been unaware of it. This is even more true if that audience is hostile, and my information is being posted in an attempt to harass and/or intimidate.
        jacquesm 4y ago
        It helps if you use a word if you use the common definition of that word. If you want to expand the definition of the word doxxing then that's fine but you'll have to have that conversation all by yourself. I'll just use this one: "Doxing" is a neologism. It originates from a spelling alteration of the abbreviation "docs" (for "documents") and refers to "compiling and releasing a dossier of personal information on someone".Essentially, doxing is revealing and publicizing the records of an individual, which were previously private or difficult to obtain. " From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing So this isn't doxing, since the information isn't private and it isn't difficult to obtain.
        catiopatio 4y ago
        I’ll just use this one, from the first paragraph of the very same page you cited: > Doxing or doxxing (originally spelled in 1337 as d0xing) is the act of publicly providing personally identifiable information about an individual or organization, usually via the internet. Historically, the term has been used interchangeably to refer to both the aggregration of this information from public source or record databases and social media websites (like Facebook), as well as the publication of previously private information obtained through criminal or otherwise fraudulent means such as hacking and social engineering. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing So this is doxxing, and you dishonestly cherry-picked an incomplete definition. In case any confusion remains, here’s the Oxford Languages’ definition: > search for and publish private or identifying information about (a particular individual) on the internet, typically with malicious intent.
  - joshuamorton 4y ago
    Fair, I should clarify: it is not illegal in any of the locations that Musk or Jack Sweeney operate in. Musk going after Sweeney would hopefully get thrown out at the anti-SLAPP stage. Unfortunately, my go-to person for such questions (@popehat) just left Twitter because of how awfully Musk is running it.
- spritefs 4y ago
  It isn't legal in California > Every person who, with intent to place another person in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of the other person’s immediate family, by means of an electronic communication device, and without consent of the other person, and for the purpose of imminently causing that other person unwanted physical contact, injury, or harassment, by a third party, electronically distributes, publishes, e-mails, hyperlinks, or makes available for downloading, personal identifying information, including, but not limited to, a digital image of another person, or an electronic message of a harassing nature about another person, which would be likely to incite or produce that unlawful action, is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in a county jail, by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=653.2 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio...
  - joshuamorton 4y ago
    Despite Musks claims, there's zero evidence that Sweeney has ever done anything with intent to place someone in fear for their safety. And, given that it operated for years without issue, there is in fact compelling evidence to the contrary.
    - spritefs 4y ago
      I mean, I never said what Sweeney was doing is considered doxxing, or whether his behavior could lead to reasonable fear for safety. I'd rather let the lawyers untangle this annoying mess really didn't expect my initial comment to lead to a shitstorm...
  - browserman 4y ago
    > with intent to place another person in reasonable fear for his or her safety This would cover LibsOfTikTok, but not ElonJet
    - NaturalPhallacy 4y ago
      You mean Taylor Lorenz who doxxed LibsOfTikTok?
- stale2002 4y ago
  - jacquesm 4y ago
    No, of course he does not and this comment is against the guidelines of HN.
    - stale2002 4y ago
      - jacquesm 4y ago
        They don't have to do anything because you are breaking the rules here.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        stale2002 4y ago
        dang 4y ago
        Could you please stop posting in the flamewar style to HN? It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. We've had to ask you this more than once: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29629700 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29629700 (Dec 2021) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21499309 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21499309 (Nov 2019) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19342820 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19342820 (March 2019) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14610460 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14610460 (June 2017) I don't want to ban you, but if this keeps up, we'll end up having to. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.

akiselev 4y ago

IANAL so correct me if I’m wrong but it looks like Musk has a decent chance of getting SLAPPed back [1] to kingdom come. Twitter may be a private entity but the lawsuit is clearly meant to stifle the distribution of public information. Now that he owns one of the largest social media platforms used to distribute stuff like CALFire emergency announcements, that jet information is not only already public but arguably that information is now in the public interest [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_pu...

ncallaway 4y ago
It would depend on where the lawsuit is filed. Anti-SLAPP statutes are state laws, and vary wildly by state from very strong laws, weak laws with almost no teeth, to no laws at all. Unfortunately this means enterprising billionaires might be able to forum shop the SLAPP lawsuit to states where it’s less likely to bite them later.
- akiselev 4y ago
  Sweeney is a college student in Florida and the alleged incident happened in California. I’m guessing Musk is based out of Texas? CA > TX > FL according to anti-slapp.org grades but all three have anti-SLAPP laws. Sweeney might actually have the hardest time in his state because the laws are weirdly specific. IANAL and genuinely curious, how much further can Musk shop around? To the state Sweeney’s corp is in (if he has one)? Does some random court in Kansas or whatever have the jurisdiction to slap a meaningful injunction against someone who’s never stepped in the state? I doubt Musk would be able to actually recover any funds that way but again IANAL and I’m curious. Can he make this federal? Musk is literally trying to sue a twenty year old college student. Might as well try bleeding a rock. Is Musk so out of touch that he really thinks that he can get anything but a pyrrhic victory?
  - wpietri 4y ago
    What Musk would get is more of what he's already getting: causing pain to the target and fear to others. Whether or not he eventually loses the lawsuit doesn't matter for that.

minimaxir 4y ago

Very many lawyers would love to work pro bono on this type of case.

sangnoir 4y ago
...and many people would be ready to donate. I wonder if it's possible to crowdfund lawsuits against billionaires, a reverse Thiel (vs Gawker), in a way.

baby 4y ago

Come on. That is such a bad faith argument to read on HN. There is a difference between open data and someone publicizing it. I know you hate musk but let’s not write reddit-level comment please. If it had been a personality you liked you would have written a totally different comment.

ssnistfajen 4y ago
Then why isn't OpenSky (where elonjet gets data from) and sites like Flightradar24 being sued by Elon then? They publish/provide the exact same info. The only bad faith argument here is claiming publishing publicly available information is somehow endangerment.
- extropy 4y ago
  Let me argue from the other end. The incident happened, which is obv not good. What where the causes? How can we prevent this from happening again? What do other high profile perons do to prevent this from happening?
  - Eisenstein 4y ago
    > What where the causes? Elon loves to shove himself front and center into the public eye and to stoke a fanbase. Large groups of people inevitably contain some crazy ones. Obsessive para-social relations often lead to unhinged fans stalking or harassing the targets of their obsession. This is so common it has a term coined by Eminem: "Stan". > How can we prevent this from happening again? Celebrities are often stalked not just by fans but by reporters. Princess Di was arguably put in a situation by photographers which led to a car crash and her death. It appears the solutions are either: (1) Don't be famous, or be the type of famous person that has a low profile (there are a lot of them) (2) If you are a billionaire then you can afford a security detail -- get one (3) Support real mental health efforts and legislation which funds support for people with mental health issues, instead of sticking them in prison or making them live on the street
    - 4y ago

esskay 4y ago

From the sounds of it its a bit more than just posting public flight data. He had people at airports tracking the plane as it was changing its flight code to prevent tracking. That goes beyond using public information and enters into stalking teritory, even if only in a fairy minor way. Not defending the ban, but the context is a bit more complex than posting something off of a public site onto twitter.

jfoster 4y ago
Not just that, but the owner of the account offered to take it down for a price. Feels like extortion.
- imperfect_blue 4y ago
  Wait, where did he say this? To me it doesn't just feel like extortion, it straight up is extortion.
  - jfoster 4y ago
    Twitter DM, apparently: "Any chance to up that to $50k? It would be great support in college and would possibly allow me to get a car maybe even a Model 3." https://www.protocol.com/elon-musk-flight-tracker#toggle-gdpr https://www.protocol.com/elon-musk-flight-tracker#toggle-gdp...
  - jacquesm 4y ago
    Not really, the party never solicited payment. Musk opened up the negotiations and was then pissed off when the other side didn't accept his first offer.
- 0x53 4y ago
  But he didn’t take the money, meaning that at least his intent wasn’t to extort. Edit: looked this up apparently Elon offered him 5k which he rejected and asked 50k instead. So I guess neither have the moral high ground.
- isleyaardvark 4y ago

chaosbolt 4y ago

Well Alex Jones got sued and the judge said he has to pay 1 billion $, and all he was sued for (according to the prosecutor) was publishing the family's information which I'm sure he also found available publicly and they got harassed by other people. So Elonjet taking the information publicly available, sharing it, and people "harassing" Elon is similar enough. Again, before Elon bought twitter the narative was that twitter as a private platform could ban anyone they wanted for no reason at all, so if that logic was reasonable then it should be reasonable now.

wasmitnetzen 4y ago
That's just plain false. Alex Jones was sued for defamation, not for doxxing.
kentm 4y ago
> and all he was sued for (according to the prosecutor) was publishing the family's information This is incorrect.