Taking public and legally published information from one website and putting it on another is not free speech? Excuse me?

Every day I wake up and wonder what the free speech absolutist's new definition of free speech would be.

“fish this information out” makes it sound like it's hard to use any of the common websites which do the same thing. If the goal is security, he either needs to stop flying a personal jet or accept the cost of having adequate physical security where he does. Anyone who was incapable of looking up the jet's location without Twitter is unlikely to be competent enough to pose more risk than they would, say, staking out one of the buildings he frequents.

Death threats are not covered by free speech, but the location of a jet is not a death threat. I don't think you'll find any legal precedent that says doxing isn't protected speech. Doxing is a bit of forum etiquette and is not considered taboo under other norms.

It's also incorrect to say the jet's location tells you where Elon is. I have a friend who's ridden that jet. My friend isn't Elon, but worked for him

Using sites like www.flightradar24.com is not that hard, so there isn't a higher threat level by the twitter account.

And it was Elon who stated free speech over everything.

If he doesn't want people to know where he is, he shouldn't fly around in a private jet.

Sorry but the world doesn't revolve around that guy. No special rules for billionaires.

Musk isn't a person, he's public property. He's our puppet now, and we make it dance until it falls apart.

Like anyone else so unreasonably rich or famous, they should have no expectation of privacy or any of the other privileges us commoners enjoy. There need to be consequences to such sociopathic hoarding of resources.