It’s even more ridiculous than that: harassment is by definition unwanted, repeated disruptive conduct.
Filming someone from a respectable distance in public does not meet that standard, but more importantly, the flock employee did absolutely nothing explicit whatsoever to express to the reporter that his conduct was unwanted.
Filming people in public absolutely can rise to harassment, even without “explicit” actions expressing that it is unwanted.
Which leads me to 2 things- the flock creep did take that action… they called the cops. Which if you think about is better than letting flock creeps directly confront people.
Secondly, all of this is the reporters entire point. flock is breaking the law. They’re stalking us, and generally harassing us. If it’s wrong for the reporter to do it to them, it’s wrong for them to do it to millions of people daily.
I’d agree with that if we’re discussing a persistent nuisance or aggressively filming in someone’s face, certainly. In the context of the article, I’m not seeing much that justifies the allegation.
It seems Flock recording everyone is ok as it isn’t harassment using this definition however every Tom, Dick and Harry has access to the data and people are definitely being harassed. So Flock employees should be expecting to be recorded in a public place. An interesting discussion given how much people don’t like pervert glasses and don’t like Flock.
It’s even more ridiculous than that: harassment is by definition unwanted, repeated disruptive conduct.
Filming someone from a respectable distance in public does not meet that standard, but more importantly, the flock employee did absolutely nothing explicit whatsoever to express to the reporter that his conduct was unwanted.
This is a false police report, clear and simple.
Filming people in public absolutely can rise to harassment, even without “explicit” actions expressing that it is unwanted.
Which leads me to 2 things- the flock creep did take that action… they called the cops. Which if you think about is better than letting flock creeps directly confront people.
Secondly, all of this is the reporters entire point. flock is breaking the law. They’re stalking us, and generally harassing us. If it’s wrong for the reporter to do it to them, it’s wrong for them to do it to millions of people daily.
I’m not at all sure about that. If one were to lay a hand on me, the outcome might be highly amusing if filmed.
Or they come out and confront you with a gun and you die.
Or you carry and kill them and go to jail because a jury decided you provoked the confrontation and therefore it would not have been self defense.
I’d agree with that if we’re discussing a persistent nuisance or aggressively filming in someone’s face, certainly. In the context of the article, I’m not seeing much that justifies the allegation.
It seems Flock recording everyone is ok as it isn’t harassment using this definition however every Tom, Dick and Harry has access to the data and people are definitely being harassed. So Flock employees should be expecting to be recorded in a public place. An interesting discussion given how much people don’t like pervert glasses and don’t like Flock.
Wrong one person, it’s a police report. Violate countless people at once, it becomes policy.