Reply to post: Re: Hoist on own petard

Googlers fired after tracking colleagues working on US border cop projects. Now, if they had monetized that stalking...

prinz

Re: Hoist on own petard

@JMCH, I agree - how someone feels is not really relevant - and this CA law *agrees* with you on this point.

That's why the second part of (e) is key - "serves no legitimate purpose".

The reason for the stalking behavior in question does not appear to serve any legitimate purpose and could easily be interpreted as a threat - especially *if* the stalkers let it be known that they were "watching" the victims.

Only when **both** conditions are met do you have something to begin to work with.

It isn't just "feelings".

For example : A police detective tracking a suspect as part of an investigation. That would be legitimate - even if the suspect felt "unsafe" - the officer has a legitimate reason.

But, if the same police officer were tracking a woman because he liked her and she felt "unsafe", that would not be a legitimate reason and then becomes stalking (eg. https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/crime/article235979622.html).

Hope that help makes it more clear that it isn't just how one "feels".

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR WEEKLY TECH NEWSLETTER

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020