Post 1 Cyberstalking Cyberstalking is defined as the online stalking. And it generally involves the use of internet or other electronic means to frighten or harass a person or group. It may include posting derogatory statements online or false accusations. It also includes the destruction of the data or manipulating the victim’s devices by sending the virus to it and monitoring someone’s online activity or his/her location, identity theft etc. The stalking might be through any of the means. May be through phone calls, emails or any other communication. Cyberstalking can be a serious crime with legal implications. It may also be done using the internet or social media. Cyberstalking laws of Pennsylvania. Cyberstalking – 18 Pa.C.S.A. S2709.1 Offense defined, Venue and Grading: Cyberstalking is a crime in Pennsylvania. Cyberstalking refer to a Pennsylvania crime offense in which the individuals use of electronic devices to stalk an individual on the internet. Pennsylvania law defines the crime of “Stalking” as repeated harassment that creates substantial emotional distress or threatening someone. It may be done by a course of conduct that includes repeated acts or communications. The conviction of stalking is a misdemeanor of the 1st degree. And if it is found that the defendant has a prior conviction for stalking the same person, then it is considered to be a felony of the 3rd degree, its violating the section 2701(relating to simple assault), 2702(relating to aggravated assault), 2705(relating to recklessly endangering another person), 2901(relating to kidnapping)etc. Post 2 Cyberstalking Top of Form Cyberstalking refers to the utilization of the Internet, email, or other media transmission advancements to badger or stalk someone else. It isn't the insignificant irritation of spontaneous email. It is precise, conscious, and industrious (Porsons, 2009, p.435). The correspondences, regardless of whether from somebody known or obscure, don't stop even after the beneficiary has requested that the sender stop all contacts, and are frequently loaded up with improper, and some of the time irritating, content. Cyberstalking is an augmentation of the physical type of stalking. Cyberstalkers utilize an assortment of methods. They may at first utilize the Internet to distinguish and follow their exploited people. They may then send spontaneous messages, including foul or compromising mail. Live visit badgering mishandles the injured individual legitimately or through electronic harm (for instance, flooding the Internet talk channel to upset the unfortunate casualty's discussion). With newsgroups, the cyberstalker can make postings about the person in question or start gossipy tidbits that spread through the announcement board framework. A cyberstalker may likewise set up a website page on the unfortunate casualty with individual or invented data or sales. Another system is to expect the injured individual's persona on-line, for example, in talk rooms, ...

1. Post 1
Cyberstalking
Cyberstalking is defined as the online stalking. And it generally
involves the use of internet or other electronic means to frighten
or harass a person or group. It may include posting derogatory
statements online or false accusations. It also includes the
destruction of the data or manipulating the victim’s devices by
sending the virus to it and monitoring someone’s online activity
or his/her location, identity theft etc.
The stalking might be through any of the means. May be
through phone calls, emails or any other communication.
Cyberstalking can be a serious crime with legal implications. It
may also be done using the internet or social media.
Cyberstalking laws of Pennsylvania.
Cyberstalking – 18 Pa.C.S.A. S2709.1
Offense defined, Venue and Grading:
Cyberstalking is a crime in Pennsylvania. Cyberstalking refer to
a Pennsylvania crime offense in which the individuals use of
electronic devices to stalk an individual on the internet.
Pennsylvania law defines the crime of “Stalking” as repeated
harassment that creates substantial emotional distress or
threatening someone. It may be done by a course of conduct that
includes repeated acts or communications.
The conviction of stalking is a misdemeanor of the 1st degree.
And if it is found that the defendant has a prior conviction for
stalking the same person, then it is considered to be a felony of
the 3rd degree, its violating the section 2701(relating to simple
assault), 2702(relating to aggravated assault), 2705(relating to
recklessly endangering another person), 2901(relating to
kidnapping)etc.
Post 2

2. Cyberstalking
Top of Form
Cyberstalking refers to the utilization of the Internet, email, or
other media transmission advancements to badger or stalk
someone else. It isn't the insignificant irritation of spontaneous
email. It is precise, conscious, and industrious (Porsons, 2009,
p.435). The correspondences, regardless of whether from
somebody known or obscure, don't stop even after the
beneficiary has requested that the sender stop all contacts, and
are frequently loaded up with improper, and some of the time
irritating, content. Cyberstalking is an augmentation of the
physical type of stalking.
Cyberstalkers utilize an assortment of methods. They may at
first utilize the Internet to distinguish and follow their exploited
people. They may then send spontaneous messages, including
foul or compromising mail. Live visit badgering mishandles the
injured individual legitimately or through electronic harm (for
instance, flooding the Internet talk channel to upset the
unfortunate casualty's discussion). With newsgroups, the
cyberstalker can make postings about the person in question or
start gossipy tidbits that spread through the announcement
board framework. A cyberstalker may likewise set up a website
page on the unfortunate casualty with individual or invented
data or sales. Another system is to expect the injured
individual's persona on-line, for example, in talk rooms, to ruin
the unfortunate casualty's notoriety, posting insights concerning
the person in question, or requesting undesirable contacts from
others. Cyberstalking is a course of direct that happens over
some undefined time frame and includes rehashed, purposeful
endeavors to make trouble the person in question
Massachusetts Laws Governing Cyber Stalking
Massachusetts Laws defines stalking as willfully and
maliciously engaging in conduct that seriously alarms or annoys
a specific person and would cause reasonable person to suffer
substantial emotional distress and makes a threat with the intent

3. to place person in fear of death or bodily injury. Such conduct,
acts or threats include, but are not limited to, conduct, acts or
threats conducted by mail or by use of a telephonic or
telecommunication device including, but not limited
to, electronic mail, Internet communications and facsimile
communications. Stalking is a felony that is punishable by
imprisonment in the state prison for up to five years or by a fine
of not more than $1000, or imprisonment in the house of
correction for not more than two and one-half years or both.
Bottom of Form
Post 3
Social media has become a very important tool for people to use
on a personal as well as professional level these days. People all
over the world make use of social media in order to stay
connected with each other. On the other hand, business
organizations use social media not only to promote their
products and services but also to obtain customer feedback on
the same (Gelinas et al., 2017). This has become the primary
reason for discussing the importance of ethics and a formal code
of conduct while using social media.
Assuming that the line between the personal and professional
spaces on social media is very thin in case of corporate
employees, it is important that the employees understand certain
ethics that they need to follow while making use of social
media. The primary responsibility of an employee is to
understand that even if they are using their personal profiles,
they are not allowed to share any confidential information over
social media with anyone or publicly. Besides, it is also
important for the employees to understand that just like them,
their superiors are also allowed to use social media at a personal
level. The employees should respect their privacy and also make
sure that they are being provided the same by the organization
that they are a part of (Martin, 2016).
In spite of such regulations, there are many grey areas in the

4. discussions about ethics and obligations of the employee while
using social media. In a recent case, it was seen that an
employee demanded a sick leave from work but posted a number
of her pictures while being on a holiday. Even though it is a
breach of employee privacy, social media became an important
source of evidence against the employee in this case. In another
case, an employee abused and openly criticized his employer on
social media after a bad day at work (Gelinas et al., 2017). This
not only attracted attention to the affairs of the company but
was also seen as an open insult of the managers after which the
employee was expelled from the company.
Post 4
Online web-based social networking applications are rapidly
picking up the mindshare of organization representatives and
changing similarly as quickly. With every one of the advantages
that online life is bringing to the corporate world, an
organization faces various dangers in its utilization, from abuse
of organization assets to irreconcilable situations and
stigmatization of others.
Internet-based life is a difficult theme since it traverses such a
large number of morals and consistence issues. Be that as it
may, similar to some other morals and consistence theme, it can
and should be proactively overseen for an organization to
protect its notoriety and give its workers the devices to deal
with their very own and business exercises
Representing the Company
At the point when workers use organization email, they go
about as delegates of their manager regardless of whether
they're sending an easygoing email to an expert associate. On
the off chance that workers utilize unseemly language, it
ponders adversely the organization and could drive away
forthcoming clients or stain the organization's picture.
Likewise, if a representative makes articulations or guarantees
utilizing organization email, the beneficiary may think about

5. that anything the worker says speaks to the organization's
perspectives, and that anything guaranteed is authoritative.
Policies
It's significant that organizations make arrangements with
respect to email use in the working environment, and that those
approaches layout precisely what's permitted and what's
disallowed. On the off chance that the arrangement is obscure,
it may not ensure bosses. For instance, if businesses intend to
screen both organization and individual messages, the approach
should express that even close to home, Web-based records are
dependent upon examination. On the off chance that the
organization permits restricted individual use, the approach
should state when workers can do as such, for instance just
during breaks and lunch hours. In the event that the strategy is
ambiguous, workers could effectively challenge it in court.
Example 1:
A student-teacher had posted pictures of herself dressed as a
pirate and clearly alcoholic on MySpace. The school region,
arranging her as a worker instead of as an understudy for
reasons for assessing her, banned her from the study hall before
her finishing the semester. The college where she was enlisted
renamed a few credits, issuing her a degree in English instead
of the training degree that would have qualified her to look for
credentialing. The understudy instructor contended that being
delegated a representative limited her ability to speak freely
rights contrasted with what they would have been under an
understudy classification.
Documenting a claim against the college in 2008, Ms. Snyder
affirmed that college directors abused her First Amendment
ideal to opportunity of articulation. Following a 2-day non-jury
preliminary, the judge decided for the college litigants.
Example 2:
In this case, includes a 14-year-old young girl who was an
eighth-grade student at Blue Mountain Middle School,

6. Orwigsburg, PA, during 2008. J.S. (initials are utilized on the
grounds that the understudy was a minor) and a kindred
understudy made a profile for their school head-on MySpace.
The profile they made for the chief incorporated various
vulgarities and rough references and made trashing remarks
with respect to his better half and youngsters. The profile
contained the chief's photo duplicated from the school area's
Website.
The student looked for an impermanent limiting request and
primer order against the school locale to hinder sanctions. That
was denied in US District Court. A similar court later allowed
outline judgment to the school area, deciding that the school
could train lecherous and indecent off-grounds discourse that
affected grounds, regardless of whether this impact didn't add
up to a "generous disturbance," as characterized in the Tinker
case choice.