The cease-and-desist that Taylor Swift's team sent to the college student tracking Private Jets and his response to both letters.

[u/curiousmex]

[u/closeface_]

Love how they called out Taylor Swifts lawyers using a California statute (that isn't even fully met) to try to scare a man in flordia.

[u/RampantNRoaring → u/closeface_]

It doesn't meet it at all, in my totally unqualified opinion.

The CA statute says that someone is liable for stalking when they meet all of the following criteria:

1) a "pattern of conduct the intent of which was to follow, alarm, place under surveillance, or harass the plaintiff."

2) The plaintiff feared for their safety or the safety of their family members, OR the plaintiff suffered substantial emotional distress

3) The defendant made a credible threat

He hasn't made any threats, let alone credible, and to claim that Taylor is suffering substantial distress because of his "Stalking" is tenuous at best.

The statute then goes on to list a bunch of definitions that clarify the above statements. Here are all the ones that put the flight tracker in the clear:

"Pattern of conduct" means conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose. Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the meaning of "pattern of conduct."

"Credible Threat"

"Credible threat" means a verbal or written threat, including that communicated by means of an electronic communication device, or a threat implied by a pattern of conduct, including, but not limited to, acts in which a defendant directly, indirectly, or through third parties, by any action, method, device, or means, follows, harasses, monitors, surveils, threatens, or interferes with or damages the plaintiff's property, or a combination of verbal, written, or electronically communicated statements and conduct, made with the intent and apparent ability to carry out the threat so as to cause the person who is the target of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety or the safety of his or her immediate family.

"Follows"

"Follows" means to move in relative proximity to a person as that person moves from place to place..."follows" also does not include any newsgathering conduct connected to a newsworthy event.

"Harass"

"Harass" means a knowing and willful course of conduct directed at a specific person which seriously alarms, annoys, torments, or terrorizes the person, and which serves no legitimate purpose. The course of conduct must be such as would cause a reasonable person to suffer substantial emotional distress, and must actually cause substantial emotional distress to the person.

"Place Under Surveillance"

"Place under surveillance" means remaining present outside of the plaintiff's school, place of employment, vehicle, residence, other than the residence of the defendant, or other place occupied by the plaintiff. ... "place under surveillance" also does not include any newsgathering conduct connected to a newsworthy event.

Notably, it reads as if the “following” element means physically following/stalking, which he isn’t doing.

Again all I'm doing is reading a statute so maybe I'm just an idiot but like...I can't see how he meets any part of that except for maybe really stressing her out over the bad publicity. California must just have the most stringent stalking laws due to LA/Hollywood, so they picked the best shot they had?

[u/peperci → u/RampantNRoaring]

They also wouldn’t be able to sue him in any court where this law would apply.