The term, itself, is a bit of a neologism and doesn't really have any legal meaning or legal definition. This means that doxxing isn't illegal in any way. If it is used specifically to harass someone, it can be considered harassment but I feel like shills are trying to make it seem illegal to avoid exposure. Even Google wants everyone to think it is illegal. Sharing information should not be illegal. The bigger picture in all of this is I have been toying with the idea of a RICO case against shill machines and this really upsets some power moderators on Voat. My line of reasoning is that, if shills are being paid to help cover up corruption, then they are participating in organized forensic interruption. I very much would like to know who the shills are and who they work for so that I can submit a nice fat packet outlining a RICO case to the proper jurisdiction. I don't really care for people who spend all day trying to fight to keep crimes against children and crimes regarding corruption secret and, in my opinion, it falls squarely within the laws provided to fight organized crime. It drives these people nuts that I have a lot of their personal information and it doesn't come from just one place. If I keep someone talking long enough, I'll usually figure out where to look. I dox criminals all the time. I share information all the time that will help others find criminals, as well. OSINT exists and if I am not going to use it, someone else will. I'm not even that great at it. I am, however, one of the few people willing to explain how it works so I am often the lightning rod for the outrage. Public information off of a state website is not unethical to share. Private information, like finances, can be questionable, but, on the other hand can also prove crimes are happening. I'm of the opinion that if 100,000 government employees and contractors are allowed to have all this data, then we should too. If people misuse dox, then they should be held accountable for the particular crime, but not the dox itself.