Questions are being raised about who the actual victims of the story are. Are there grounds for dismissal? Will jobs be lost? Was there a workplace promotion on offer? Will marriages survive? Will the business involved perhaps consider installing curtains or blinds or just opt for dark tinting. Have uploaders given us our first real dose of reality TV?
As if to reinforce my position on what passes as news these days, our screens and newspapers have been bombarded by items relating to this story - headlines, opinion pieces, even the calling in of privacy experts to explore and explain the legalities of it all.
Joe Public has had a fair bit to say about it, too; Pam Corkery's rant on the subject drawing 230 comments, with very mixed views.
There have been suggestions that the shaggers were doing nothing wrong, some going as far as to say they were, in fact, the victims and that someone should have alerted them to the fact that their private liaison was actually a very public one. Really? How? Should the audience have been throwing Jaffas at the windows in the hope of getting their attention. Perhaps somebody could have abseilled down the building and pointed out their folly to them.
Were the wrongdoers the uploaders of the images? Were these posters and sharers really no better than peeping Toms? I think that's a bit harsh. Peeping Toms are traditionally found lurking in the shadows, not wanting to be seen. Onlookers in this case were quite the opposite.
Others argued that the shaggers were the makers of their own misfortune. If they didn't want to get caught, their choice of glass "bedroom walls" in a well-lit office was a bizarre one.
In this very PC world we live in, I wonder if any of these questions are the right ones to be asking.
I'd like to know if there was a memorandum of understanding in place: was the workers' union on board with such a union? And the health and safety aspects of this case also need to be examined: were they shagging on approved work surfaces? Was the correct safety gear being worn? If the lights had been off, should they have worn high-visibility vests?
And, most importantly, what measures were taken after the event to clean and sanitise affected work areas? Has the use of black light been employed to ensure that no trace evidence remains? Other people work in this building. Sit on, eat and drink off these surfaces and, from what I have read, not one has bothered to ask about the hygiene aspect of it all.
Ewww, it's disgusting when you think about it. I hope trauma counselling is available for fellow staff who may feel their work space has been violated.
The rights and wrongs of this story - which I have now dubbed "The Showmance" - can be argued for a lifetime. Many think the couple involved got exactly what they deserved and it serves them right. Equally, just as many squarely lay the blame with those who filmed the event and went on to post it.
Our often perverse addiction to social media dictates there will be always be an enormous public following to view such a private act. Much like the naked selfie hoo-ha, the only way to avoid the spotlight is to do what this couple didn't and stay in the dark - or exercise some self-control.
Like it or not these public recordings are here to stay, as is the ever-increasing number of websites that are only too happy to exploit them.
Kate Stewart is an unemployed, reluctant mother of three, currently running amok in the city ... making sure the lights are off. Feedback to investik8@gmail.com
