| Thanks for playing, PP, but you lose the argument. If what you post on the Internet is determined to be an invasion of privacy, you have committed an unlawful act of defamation. Post at your peril. Your IP address can be subpoenaed and once someone gets that, as well as the provider information, they can also subpoena your address and identity. Tell a jury you had a right to post it, but bring your wallet with you. |
Not so, idiot child. Look it up. There is no expectation of privacy in a public space. I'm not sure why you keep ignoring that very simple legal fact. Therefore, what someone posts on the internet, if it happens in public, will never be determined an invasion of privacy and is never an unlawful act. I find it hard to believe that you are so stupid that you don't know that, so I guess you are merely engaging in magical thinking for the audience. Meanwhile, turn off your TV before you seriously rot your brain. Jury? Defamation? You don't even know the meanings of these words. |
|
It's all stupid anyway. What are any of us going to do with a license plate #? Nothing.
That is why in the PPs super dramatic story, the cops refused to give the dude her NAME. He already had he plate #. It's a useless piece of information. |
| Legalities aside, it's totally classless to do this and totally classless for this forum to condone it. |
Uncool, unwarranted. Whatever. But not a violation of any laws currently on the books in these United States. It's neither defamation to ridicule someone who behaves poorly in public, nor is it any sort of invasion of privacy. |
| I have an idea: why don't you aggregate and publish personal information on the Internet that you find either from a public source and/or in public view? Do it a lot. To a lot of people. Eventually,you will hit the jackpot, and someone will sue you for defamation [iwhich includes invasion of privacy[/i]. Then we will find out if such practice violates any law. Good luck. |
| It's much easier to just look up the law, 9:14. Give it a try. |
| I am very familiar with this area of the law and know how to state the claim of invasion of privacy. Thanks and be careful out there. |
Or worse, maybe from the information/photograph provided, a nutcase will identify someone who cut in front of them in traffic for example, deduce from the photo where the person parks/works/lives/hangs out and perhaps starts stalking them or harms them. Not that much of stretch. I agree with a PP that at some point everyone has some deviations from perfection since we are all human. Or perhaps you don't even know what it is you've done. Perhaps you are walking down the street with your skirt stuck up at the back and your panties are showing. You're in public but do you really want someone to post a picture of that on DCUM? Or a picture of your house? Once you start identifying private people or their cars online, it becomes a slippery slope. You never know when it will happen to you... |
| I'm so confused...did anyone actually identify this person? Or is it still just a license plate? It must be sad to live your life being so paranoid. |
| But yet everyone heads off to The People of Wal-Mart page, The "Hot or not" page in Glamour magazine |
Well, now you're talking about something else. Yes, there is danger in having your embarrassing moments, your misdeeds, or just your regular routine photographed and posted online. There are stalking dangers, as well as mistaken identity embarrassment. There is also straight up earned shame. It sucks sometimes to live in the instant age of camera phones and social media, because it is possible that all the dangers and not-really-dangers are magnified in a way they wouldn't have been 20 years ago. However, you are wrong when you call this a "slippery slope". It isn't. It is an entirely different thing than the case the poster you are quoting brings up. That poster thinks, incorrectly, that there is something illegal about posting such information on the internet. They throw around defamation and privacy without having any idea of the law. That is fundamentally different than your argument, which is more of an ethical one. Just because it is legal to post a lawbreaker's license, should we? Frankly, that is a far more interesting question and I might agree with you if your position rested on the idea that calling someone out doesn't advance the public good or change someone's behavior; it's just a mean reaction to a perceived slight.. |
| What thread is this all about? Can someone link? Thanks. |
|
I am the PP who has posted that an invasion of privacy, if proven, constitutes defamation. I am a lawyer with experience in the area of defamation on the Internet.
Please go back to wiping ass, doing laundry, and cooking meals. You are clearly a SAHM, probably in VA, who watches too many episodes of Desperate Housewives and thus, believes that outrageous behavior has no consequences. You know not of what you speak. Now go on and get to the grocery store. Don't forget your coupons. |
"I was single and living alone." If your actual persona is anything like your internet persona, I'd be surprised if that's not still true. "The Rock Creek police, after talking to both of us, figured out that this guy had a screw lose" Seems like you had a lot in common. Maybe you shoudl have stuck around. |