No longer for sale on LFGSS, probably on Facebook, user now banned

No. But it's probably not a good look.

Sharing a video, which the person themselves put on the internet, unlikely. But there would be no winners in that scenario either.

I have not read the remainder of the conversation, but for what was described, the act of of linking to a video that someone had posted publicly and is presumably still under their control... I cannot see how that is either harassment or bullying.

"Legally" doesn't make a lot of sense either, the legal definitions of these things I guess stem from the Protection from Harassment Act of 1997 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1997/40 within which, whilst it is suitably vague (allows a judge or jury room to interpret actual events), it doesn't have anything within that which could reasonably be interpreted as harrassment for the scenario given.

If you upload a video to the internet, and you own the video and control the video. Then I struggle to see how, in any universe, creating a hyperlink to the video would be harrassment.

Surely Matt still has control of the video, or is able to assert control and ownership via whatever video platform, and if none of the above then surely it was made with his consent.

Hyperlinks, to material on the internet in which the person consented would be publicly posted... that isn't, and is unlikely to ever be, illegal or an issue.

Now... separately... if the combined acts of someone could be argued to amount to a campaign of harassment. Well, that is something else. But I've not read this whole thread, and am not aware of any other interactions between any participant of this thread and Matthew Cutler, and so on the face of it I know of no harassment taking place. If someone reads this and sees themselves in this comment, and is harassing someone... then they should reflect on their personal position, because I'll happily throw them under a bus.

Still doesn't change the fact that hyperlinking publicly material isn't illegal.