#Login Register


  • 4 Vote(s) - 4 Average
Home 


Doxxing, The Law, CT Forums, and YOU!!
Anonymous Kritter Show this Post
02-21-2015, 09:47 PM #1
Anonymous Kritter Incognito Anonymous
 
"Doxing" is a legal term that means revealing "documents" about a person. This can range from revealing the name of a person who uses an alias, but more commonly refers to revealing whatever the person doing it feels will harm, shame, humiliate, endanger, or put the person at some risk. Doxing is a form of stalking or threatening and is illegal under many different federal and state laws, depending on the exact facts and location.

Revealing a "name" per se' may, or may not be considered "Doxing" depending on the level of anticipated anonymity. However, in this law, the term "restricted personal information" means, "with respect to an individual, the Social Security number, the home address, home phone number, mobile phone number, personal email, or home fax number of, and identifiable to, that individual." This is an important distinction to remember.

Once you outline the address or location of a person, within which a person can be placed at risk, YOU have VIOLATED THE LAW. PERIOD.

In all cases if you outline the physical location of any individual with the intent to harm, shame, stalk, humiliate, endanger, or otherwise compromise the safety and security of ANY individual you have placed that person in a position of risk and you are in violation of ALL State Stalking laws.

THIS is the most commonly crossed line.

However, in some cases, such as federal agents, or in Mark Osterman's case his anonymity as a Federal Air Marshal, just revealing his name crosses the threshold for illegal activity.

I CAN FIND THOSE PIECES OF INFORMATION USING GOOGLE SEARCH. IS THAT STILL RESTRICTED? YES. It is illegal to announce or disseminate or post those listed pieces of information for the purposes listed in the law (18 USC § 119). Those are purposes such as threatening or intimidating or making it so others can harass or harm the person. This law is about acts that endanger the safety of or encourage attacks against a person or a person's family. It is not about where you found the information.

READ THAT AGAIN:

This law is about acts that endanger the safety of, or encourage attacks against, a person or a person's family. It is not about where you found the information.

18 USC § 119


The information may or may not even be on the internet; that is not a factor for a charge. A criminal act does not need to be physically possible for a charge to exist with regard to it. The activity can take the form of cyber-space and internet posting.

Doxing might also be part of a conspiracy to harm, endanger, or even kill a person. Even if unintentionally if the action of the party is intended to threaten, harass or harm.

Doxing is always illegal, whether it is done against a federal employee, a state employee, or a regular person. There are federal and state laws that specifically address doxing government employees 18 U.S.C. Sec 371 (18 U.S.C. Sec 119).

With regular non-governmental citizens, doxing falls under various state criminal laws, such as stalking, cyber stalking, harassment, threats, and other such laws, depending on the state.

Since these doxing threats and activities are made on the internet, the law of any state may be invoked, though most often an investigator will look to the state in which the person making the threat is located, if this is known, or the state in which the victim is situated.

A state prosecutor can only prosecute violations of the laws of his or her own state, and of acts that extend into their state.

However, when acts are on the internet, they extend into all the states. Thereby allowing the victim to choose the state of filing which may, or may not, be the state of residence for the victim(s) or perpetrator(s).

Increasingly with internet use, attorneys are affirming representation to the state with the strongest current legal remedies for Doxing, Cyber-Stalking, or Harassment.

Misinformation was spread that doxing is legal. I am not sure how or why anyone fell for that misinformation. Surely, people must understand instinctively, even if they were misled about the law, that if they are threatening someone or putting them at risk, or tormenting or harassing the other on the internet, that this must be illegal.

Common sense would tell you that bullying or jeopardizing another would be illegal in some way. So yes, doxing is illegal, no matter who the target. The difference is when it is on the internet it is Federal, or State. When it is not via cyber space it is State issue/laws/ remedy only.

In addition there are even more consequential specific federal laws, and federal remedies, against doxing federal employees. This is one of the issues with Mark Osterman and the potential for Frances Robles indictment. In addition, many states have such individual laws against doing this to state employees, officials, and/or law enforcement officers.

If you are doxing a non-government person, this can be illegal under various laws that have names such as stalking, cyber stalking, cyber-bullying, harassment, invasion of privacy, threatening, terroristic threatening, endangering the safety of, intentional infliction of emotional distress (this can be a crime or a tort, depending on state law), threatening a witness (if the person is a witness), intimidation, and other laws that exist in the different states.

Depending on the situation, it might also be a hate crime or a violation of civil rights. Some states also have laws that specifically apply to students harassing or being harassed. Many states now have laws about posting a person's name or photo on an indecent or incendiary website without their permission. It really depends on the situation, but there are plenty of laws that can be invoked and multiple remedies available.

When you do something on the internet, it reaches into every state and you open yourself up to potentially being prosecuted under the laws of any state.

In addition, since it is being done in interstate commerce (the internet), you can be accountable under federal law.

Also, if you dox someone using an internet website or service such as Facebook or Twitter or most other such services, such as WordPress or Blogger, and your intent is stalking, cyber stalking, cyber-bullying, harassment, invasion of privacy, threatening, terroristic threatening, endangering the safety of, intentional infliction of emotional distress or intimidation, you are probably violating the Terms of Service under the media contract which binds your activity from your acceptance of the terms.

Violating the terms of service can actually be a federal crime, depending on the situation, and especially so when the terms are violated in order to harm a person.

It is important at this point to note the "intent" of the activity itself, which is where capturing the full data "as it exists" becomes important. Example: A post itself may not violate the terms or the law; However, the "intent" can change depending on the editorial content within the control of the site operator. When the comments follow, and reflect, a specific intent as outlined, then the arbiter of the posting itself is ultimately liable for the consequences of their affiliates.

Think about only using a name, it is probably a violation of law, but maybe not. However, once you go beyond the name IT IS ALWAYS A VIOLATION OF LAW.

If we are hosting a site discussion and publicly name a private party, depending on intent, there is no harm. However, if we further provide, or a commentator provides an address for the party - and we do not delete the information in a timely manner, then depending on circumstance we could be in direct violation of law.


http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012...-or-place/

http://patch.com/massachusetts/malden/wh...is-illegal
[/quote]
02-21-2015, 09:51 PM #2
Octo Mother Superior
Posts:42,572 Threads:1,469 Joined:Feb 2011
An important reminder for one and all.
02-21-2015, 10:12 PM #3
JayRodney ⓐⓛⓘⓔⓝ
Posts:31,262 Threads:1,438 Joined:Feb 2011
We've had to remove a few posts like that, we can't allow that type of thing, nor condone it in any way.
There's no good reason for anyone's personal info to be disseminated on this site.

wonder.gif
Anonymous Kritter Show this Post
02-22-2015, 02:22 AM #4
Anonymous Kritter Incognito Anonymous
 
bump.gif
02-22-2015, 02:47 AM #5
Octo Mother Superior
Posts:42,572 Threads:1,469 Joined:Feb 2011
This goes for OSINT (open source intelligence) as well
Anonymous Kritter Show this Post
02-22-2015, 10:12 AM #6
Anonymous Kritter Incognito Anonymous
 
(02-22-2015, 02:47 AM)Octo Wrote:  This goes for OSINT (open source intelligence) as well

Correct! This issue came to a head, some say, during the Trayvon Martin case. Zimmerman was doxxed, and if you remember, there were a lot of people who wanted to do him serious harm or even kill him. What would happen to his family, if they answered the door one night, to somebody with bad intentions towards him? There are many examples of why this is the law and that it protects people from harassment and being hate trolled.
Anonymous Kritter Show this Post
02-22-2015, 10:14 AM #7
Anonymous Kritter Incognito Anonymous
 
(02-22-2015, 10:12 AM)Anonymous Kritter Wrote:  
(02-22-2015, 02:47 AM)Octo Wrote:  This goes for OSINT (open source intelligence) as well

Correct! This issue came to a head, some say, during the Trayvon Martin case. Zimmerman was doxxed, and if you remember, there were a lot of people who wanted to do him serious harm or even kill him. What would happen to his family, if they answered the door one night, to somebody with bad intentions towards him? There are many examples of why this is the law and that it protects people from harassment and being hate trolled.

Adding: I think even a media outlet released his personal information, and broadcast it somehow, or his SSN. Certainly twitter was guilty of letting the Black Panther Party spam his personal information out.
02-22-2015, 03:57 PM #8
Shadow Mrs. Buckwheat
Posts:12,782 Threads:1,182 Joined:Feb 2011
Shortly after one of those shootings a newspaper published a map of many of the gun owners in the New York area. What their intent was I don't know.
02-22-2015, 04:23 PM #9
JayRodney ⓐⓛⓘⓔⓝ
Posts:31,262 Threads:1,438 Joined:Feb 2011
(02-22-2015, 03:57 PM)Shadow Wrote:  Shortly after one of those shootings a newspaper published a map of many of the gun owners in the New York area. What their intent was I don't know.

Nefarious thing to do, but they still own their guns. Oh well, they will recycle that agenda again in a few years, Such is the nature of the game they play.

wonder.gif
02-22-2015, 04:25 PM #10
Shadow Mrs. Buckwheat
Posts:12,782 Threads:1,182 Joined:Feb 2011
(02-22-2015, 04:23 PM)JayRodney Wrote:  Nefarious thing to do, but they still own their guns. Oh well, they will recycle that agenda again in a few years, Such is the nature of the game they play.

I think it backfired. Crooks figured out who didn't have guns lmao.gif



Home 




 



DISCLAIMER / Terms of Service (TOS):
Kritterbox.com - Socialize anonymously, commentary, discussion, oddities, technology, music and more!  This website is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. kritterbox.com shall not be liable for any damages whatsoever, including, without limitation, those resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether or not advised of the possibility of damage, and on any theory of liability, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of this site or other documents which are referenced by or linked to this site.
This website exists solely for the purposes of exchange of information, communication and general entertainment. Opinions from posters are in no way endorsed by kritterbox.com. All posts on this website are the opinion of the authors and are not to be taken as statements of fact on behalf of kritterbox.com. This site may contain coarse language or other material that kritterbox.com is in no way responsible for. Material deemed to be offensive or pornographic at the discretion of kritterbox.com shall be removed. kritterbox.com reserves the right to modify, or remove posts and user accounts on this website at our discretion. kritterbox.com disclaims all liability for damages incurred directly or indirectly as a result of any material on this website. Fictitious posts and any similarity to any person living or dead is coincidental.
All users shall limit the insertion of any and all copyrighted material to portions of the article that are relevant to the point being made, with no more than 50%, and preferably less of the original source material. A link shall be visible in text format, embedded directly to the original source material without exception.
No third party links, i.e. blogs or forums will be accepted under any circumstances, and will be edited by staff in order to reflect the original source of copyrighted material, or be removed at the sole discretion of kritterbox.com.
Fair Use Notice:
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Users may make such material available in an effort to advance awareness and understanding of issues relating to economics, individual rights, international affairs, liberty, science, and technology. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for educational and/or research purposes.
This Disclaimer is subject to change at any time at our discretion.
Copyright © 2011 - 2017 kritterbox.com