If Elon is concerned maybe he could just rent a jet as needed instead of keeping one all to himself.
If they were publishing "Elon has flown X miles, used Y fuel and created Z emissions in the past T time" that would be far different than what they do.
You are reaching for excuses that can't possibly apply. Perhaps you should ask why you'd go so far to excuse this doxxing, but not others.
I personally dislike Musk and view him as a conman. I take issue with several things he's done at Twitter and even more with what he's done at companies like Boring Company, Paypal, or Tesla (eg, promising the first car to the actual founder then launching it into space just to spite them).
People here just managed to find a thing where he happens to be right (whether it comes from personal pettiness or actual principle).
Second, if it were passed, intent can be very hard to prove -- even in seemingly clear-cut cases.
Third, only the DOJ could choose to actually prosecute.
> Second, if it were passed, intent can be very hard to prove -- even in seemingly clear-cut cases.
It's not at all clear cut in my opinion. This is information that is already in a public database, and it's the location of an airplane - not a person. That's not a technicality, unless the airplane is somehow a primary residence.
It's pretty different than publishing someone's private phone number or the name of the school that their children attend. The latter type of information is actually private.
ElonJet just put the information on Twitter. And Instagram, Facebook, Telegram, and now Mastodon: https://mastodon.social/@elonjet