Under "Examples of harassing behavior may include, but are not limited to", one of the bullet points reads:
Comments, either verbal or written, that are interpreted as threatening
It's pretty much boilerplate legalese, but it makes me wonder. I know that intent is notoriously difficult to prove, but relying on interpretation seems disintuitive. I suppose in a legal sense it opens the door for a judge's interpretation of the events, or at least some sort of arbitration. But it seems that leaving the wording as vague as that opens up the door for lawsuits.
I'm just surprised is all.