Hacker News Reader

This seems to be the statute: https://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Disp...

With the obvious IANAL, it doesn't seem to rely on the message be sent to the person being threatened. The specific segment is "in any manner in which it may be viewed by another person".

This may be one of those cases where we get to find out how courts view SaaS platforms.

View on HN

The subjective element of crime (i.e. doing it on purpose) is fundamental also in the US legal system. If the person wasn't aware that someone else might see their messages, it should be hard to claim that they committed the crime.

According to Gemini, "Florida appellate courts have overturned juvenile convictions [based on this law] when the state could not prove the person subjectively intended for the record to be seen."

The prosecution will ruin her life regardless of the outcome.

Interesting that it exempts telephone calls. Why don't we treat other messaging services like phone calls?

It looks like a prior statue covered that: https://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Disp...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com