Global Courier Express - GCX, is a company engaged in international shipping and imports packages that are purchased from various suppliers (such as Amazon) and lost a customer package. The customer, who was unable to contact the company, which does not have an address or regular contact methods, except for the option to contact the company's website, commenced publishing on social media, including a call for a consumer boycott against the company, and a call for Facebook users to personally harass the company's CEO and her daughter, who is VP of the company.
The Court issued a cease a desist of harassment order prohibiting harassment of the company’s CEO and VP, but not an order prohibiting harassment of the company. Harassment on social networks is sufficient harassment for the purpose of issuing an order. Only in exceptional cases can an order be obtained that prevents harassment of a corporation, and this when the harassment is directed at the employees of the corporation by virtue of their affiliation with the corporation. Here the harassment is against the corporation and not against its employees and therefore there is no place to issue an order preventing this. The fact that the customer demanded compensation as a condition for stopping the harassment is not a reason for an order against him, because the compensation required was for the damage caused to him and the fact that it is not possible to contact the corporation. In contrast, there is no justification for turning the company managers’ personal Facebook wall into a place for protests against the company and therefore there is room to issue an order preventing this.