Help with web post and responses

Research post topic and submit 260 word post on the given topic, indicate at least two source or reference in your original post. This assignment is to be scholarly; it is not enough for you to simply post your article and add cursory reviews. CITED REFERENCES ARE REQUIRED. Also post a reply to given 2 posts,  include at least 110 words in each post and provide at least one reference seperately. In reply posts, do not  say, good job, way to go, etc. Your reply should reflect an understanding of the situation and the reading materials.

Post Topic:
Please do an internet search and find out the results of the Erin Andrews invasion of privacy case that the Craig discusses in the assigned text.  Write a commentary on your thoughts on the case. Minimum 260 words.

Reply to following posts with at least 110 words and at least 1 cited reference, do not say, good job, way to go, etc. Your reply should reflect an understanding of the situation and the reading materials.

Post 1:
Erin Andrews Invasion of Privacy Case
In the current digital era, it is very easy to spread the embarrassing images through online which becomes viral. This type of the videos are highly offensive and there is an expectation of privacy for the criminal and the civil lawyers (Caristi & Davie, 2018). This type of privacy invasion case has taken place with Erin Andrews who is a TV host and a network sportscaster. Erin Andrews was a reporter for ESPN and she was been unknowingly filmed while she was dressing in the year 2008. Erin Andrews was staying at a hotel room and the incident took place at Marriot Hotel in Nashville. The Nashville Hotel owner had given a customer room next of Ms. Andrews that has greatly shown an impact on her and Mr.  Barrett has shot the film from a peephole and uploaded it online. From the incident case, it is noticed that Andrews had filed a case against Barrett the victim and the person were prisoned for about 2.5 years. The Jury has awarded victim for the damage of invasion of her privacy from the Marriot hotel owner and the person Barrett (Trager, Ross, & Reynolds, 2017). In the current case both the owner, employees, and Mr. Barrett were responsible for the privacy invasion that has happened with Erin Andrews. The case is directly related to the lawsuit because the domestic violence abuser will seek to find its victim as similar as it happened in Andrew’s case. In this case, it is found to physically harm more than the invasion of privacy (Benjamin, 2018). Erin Andrew’s case represents a keen element to understand regarding the privacy rights of the individuals and also to protect the individual’s women, girls from such type of privacy crimes.
References
Benjamin, N. (2018, October 1). Erin Andrews Receives $55 Million Awarded In the Invasion of Privacy Case. Retrieved from www.benjlaw.com: https://benjlaw.com/erin-andrews-invasion-of-privacy-case/
Caristi, D., & Davie, W. R. (2018). Communication Law: Practical Applications in the Digital Age. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Trager, R., Ross, S. D., & Reynolds, A. (2017). The Law of Journalism and Mass Communication. Washington, USA: CQ Press.

Post 2:
In this specific case, Erin Andrews won fifty-five million dollars for her nude video that was uploaded on the internet. The Jury in Nashville found the Hotel Marriot owner and stalker guilty of intruding privacy and humiliation of the then ESPN (Fox, 2016). This case set a guideline at a legal level for the hotels that have to be implemented. This was one of the highlighted cases where such huge amount of compensation paid to the victim.
I personally do think that the jury has taken right decision because it was released that the video was a PR stunt. It provided a baseline for the hotels to be more aware of an invasion of privacy as well as to implement better strategies to overcome this kind of issues. It definitely put the safety concerns in the Limelight for staying in hotels. As it was the fault of the hotel which revealed that Rein was a guest and they provided the stalker a room next to Erin. No one has the right to intrude on the privacy of a person (Broillet and Wheeler, 2010).
To get things to worst the guy records when a woman is undressing without her permission. Provided compensation for the humiliation of Erin Andrews and set an example of the fair decisions made by Court against such incident. Michael David Barrett was held accountable for violating the privacy of Eric and reviews and for humiliation by uploading the video of the internet for 28 million dollars (Davis, 2016).  
References
FOX, J. T. (2016). What the Erin Andrews case means for the hotel industry. Hotel Management (21582122), 231(7), 16. Retrieved from http://0-search.ebscohost.com.library.acaweb.org/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,cpid,url&custid=s4338230&db=b9h&AN=115104763
Contact For All Law Firms Greene Broillet & Wheeler, P. (2010, July 15). Erin Andrews Files Civil Suit for Invasion of Privacy and Negligence. Business Wire. Available from NewsBank: https://0-infoweb-newsbank-com.library.acaweb.org/apps/news/document-view?p=AWNB&docref=news/13101E075F565AA8.
DAVIS, L. (2016). Andrews Stalker Trial. World News with Diane Sawyer, 1. Retrieved from http://0-search.ebscohost.com.library.acaweb.org/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,cpid,url&custid=s4338230&db=bwh&AN=113444380