A university scholar who has tracked Taylor Swift‘s personal jet miles defended his proper to protected speech in a brand new letter despatched to the pop star after she fired off a stop and desist.
“Put merely, there’s nothing illegal,” a lawyer acknowledged on his behalf, RadarOnline.com has discovered, noting his consumer, Jack Sweeney, and Sweeney’s firm, GRNDCTRL, LLC., solely used “publicly accessible info to trace personal jets,” and people utilized by public figures together with Russian oligarchs and Elon Musk.
In keeping with his letter, Sweeney’s reporting of the mileage from the Federal Aviation Administration doesn’t violate any of her authorized rights. “Our shoppers have by no means made any threats towards Ms. Swift and your letter doesn’t recommend they’ve accomplished so.”
Swift’s legal professional, Kate Wright Morrone, sang a really totally different tune in her stop and desist and claimed Sweeney was partaking in “stalking and harassing conduct” by revealing the singer’s flight info in real-time through social media, stating they might “don’t have any alternative however to pursue any and all authorized treatments” if he didn’t cease.
Marrone stated it prompted “direct and irreparable hurt, in addition to emotional and bodily misery,” and heightened Swift’s “fixed state of concern for her private security.”
“Whereas this can be a sport to you, or an avenue that you simply hope will earn you wealth or fame, it’s a life-or-death matter for our Shopper,” Morrone wrote, arguing there was “no legit curiosity in or public want for this info, apart from to stalk, harass, and exert dominion and management.”
As we beforehand reported, Sweeney was famously booted off X, previously Twitter, in December after platform CEO Musk stated that monitoring his jet was akin to sharing “assassination coordinates,” except accomplished on a “barely delayed foundation.”
Sweeney and his legal professional, James Slater, stood by his choice to share her and different public figures’ flight paths in his letter despatched to Swift.
By no means miss a narrative — join the RadarOnline.com publication to get your day by day dose of dope. Day by day. Breaking. Movie star information. All free.
“We have no idea why you believed the perfect declare towards a person in Florida and his firm is a California statute, however that, mixed with the absence of any credible authorized declare, suggests a groundless effort to intimidate and censor our shoppers,” it learn. “We doubt Ms. Swift will pursue meritless authorized motion, but when she does, we’ll defend our shoppers’ rights.”