'Revenge porn' should be a crime

[FA_Q2]

Then why does HE have the right to publish those photos?

Do you think that she should win a civil suit? By the way, I don’t have a problem with that and I equate that to being ‘illegal.’ While not illegal in a criminal sense, it does not make much of a difference to me if he is held liable in a civil sense so, in that we can agree if you think that such a suit should find in favor of her.

I don't believe I used the term "illegal." I think I've made it pretty clear I oppose any criminal statutes about this - no need to feed the Prison-Industrial complex.

But on the civil side, I think that the woman, who's image is published without consent, has every right to demand the publisher cease and desist. If they do not, I believe she has grounds for a tort of defaming her character.

You did not use the term illegal, I did. I was stating that I think making him civilly responsible is essentially equivalent to illegal in my mind. In essence, I was trying to agree with you on a single contention and one that you have not addressed.

You reiterated that you think the site should be held responsible but you have still failed to comment (as far as I can tell) on whether or not the perpetrator (the man who uploaded the picture in the first place) should be held civilly liable as well.

I can’t see how the site can be held responsible for keeping the post up when the actual perpetrator (the original publisher of the photo) is somehow exempt.

 

[Luissa]

So the last post shows on the thread title when on the app.. With the title I thought you were going somewhere else until I opened the thread.

I'm in really good shape for a 55 year old man.

Still, I'm a 55 year old man... No one wants to see me naked - and I figure the revenge sites would refuse to post an pictures of me...

They post porn with grandmas, they would post it.

 

[Moonglow]

Does it count when they hung a nude painting of me in the college art museum without me getting paid?

 

[emilynghiem]

Servers and websites should have an agreement in advance, that if people producing legal ID to show they are the individuals in the photos, or family/spouse of the deceased, OBJECT to the photos being displayed, then they agree not to post such material, period.

Such sites should have users sign agreements in advance that should any dispute arise regarding photos of sexual nature (or murder photos etc. whatever the site admins DO NOT WANT to be involved in controversies over), then the material will be pulled.

So the users and the site admins/owners agree in advance that any such dispute
will be avoided by removing or not posting such material in the first place.

[And yes, for couples, agreements should be made in advance that any spoken, written or printed information implicating intimate issues or details about either party will NOT be disclosed to other parties without consent of BOTH parties on each item to be made public.

I have an unwritten agreement that if I'm ever asked even DETAILS of what kind of relations I had with X Y or Z person, I will not discuss such persons without their consent.
Because that is how I'd ask to be respected. In general I try to avoid business agreements or interaction that is sensitive with ANYONE I don't trust enough to share my credit card information with. That's the criterion I use. And anytime I crossed that line, I regretted it.
People you wouldn't trust with your credit card won't pay back debts to you, but will make up excuses to "blame you" for why they can't. Once someone has that victimhood mentality, that is where the irresponsible behavior of this guy comes from, who put his own interests in retribution above the safety and welfare of the person he was hurting.

If you don't trust someone with your credit card, don't trust them with anything intimate.]

I can totally believe the highlighted portion.

*****************************************************************



(CNN) -- "Jane" allowed her ex-boyfriend to take her naked photograph because, he assured her, it would be for his eyes only. After their breakup, the man betrayed her trust.

On the revenge porn site UGotPosted, he uploaded her naked photo and contact information. Jane received calls, e-mails, and Facebook friend requests from hundreds of strangers, many of whom wanted sex.
After the site refused to take down the post and the anonymous calls and e-mails intensified, she turned to law enforcement. According to the officers, nothing could be done because her ex had not engaged in a harassing "course of conduct," as required by criminal harassment law, and because he had not explicitly solicited others to stalk her.

Criminal law should have a role in deterring and punishing revenge porn. It's not new that certain types of privacy invasions are crimes. Many states prohibit the nonconsensual taking of sexually explicit images -- the disclosure of someone's naked images should be criminalized as well.

But in all but one state, New Jersey, turning people into objects of pornography without their permission is legal. A single post, however, can go viral and ruin someone's life.

Revenge porn and its ilk raise the risk of offline stalking and physical attack. Fear can be profound. Victims don't feel safe leaving their homes. Jane, who is a nurse, did not go to work for days. As many victims have told me, they struggle especially with anxiety, and some suffer panic attacks. Revenge porn victims withdraw from online engagement, shutting down their social media profiles and blogs to prevent strangers from finding them online. They cannot participate fully in our networked age.

Opinion: Make 'revenge porn' a crime - CNN.com

 

[emilynghiem]

I can’t see how the site can be held responsible for keeping the post up when the actual perpetrator (the original publisher of the photo) is somehow exempt.

Is this like asking if a kidnapper stashes a victim in a rental home, is the owner of the property responsible for releasing the victim even if the kidnapper refuses to comply?

I'd say this is a form of relationship abuse, or psychological rape.
So yes, both parties who continue actions that are causing someone
else to feel "violated" are proportionally responsible for their respective share,
especially after they are informed that the victimization is occurring, and objections are documented and reported.

The other thing I could see happening in teh future, is pre-screening people
for mental or criminal ill tendencies, such as pre-screening for cancer or diabetes
or any other disease.

Right now there is such a stigma about criminal illness, it is not diagnosed
by early intervention and treated as other dangerous diseases.
As the science and technology advances, maybe by then people's attitudes will be more
forward thinking toward solutions and quit this stigma which prevent early diagnosis.

If this woman and other victims of relationship and sexual abuse or other frauds/crimes had a better way for their partners to be screened in advance, the same way we might check for alzheimer's or schizophrenia if it runs in the family, maybe we could catch real predatory and stalking illness in advance. Remember, it's not just this guy doing it, but each person who takes advantage and deliberate stalks or harasses her may also have some sickness that could be diagnosed and treated to be managed if not completely cured.

 

[Uncensored2008]

They post porn with grandmas, they would post it.

???

Grandma porn? You've got to be kidding?

 

[emilynghiem]

They post porn with grandmas, they would post it.
???

Grandma porn? You've got to be kidding?

__________________

Not! I went to an adult store near work to look for a joke gift for Valentine's Day,
there were REALLY freaky videos of midgets and big big wrinkled old ladies whose V's
took up the whole cover photo. I had to leave the store, I was laughing so hard!
People who were trying to be inconspicuous themselves, were staring at me, which made it funnier.

I later laughed it off, confessing to my boyfriend I did intend to buy him a hideous joke gift, but couldn't stop cracking up at the images of midgets and big wrinkly old women.
He didn't care about that. He just wanted to know where his video was!

Guys are so funny!

 

[emilynghiem]

The moral of the story:

Don't pose for pictures you don't want the public to see.

Yes, her ex was an asshole. But really? "It'll be for my eyes only, honey. Honest!"

They broke up for a reason. She had no business trusting the asshole.

Which is usually something you learn after you have made the leap of faith in the person unfortunately.

Just because a person turns out to be rapist
does not give them the right to rape you.

I understand it's because people believe in justice and want to be able to explain why wrong things happen "to other people" it's easy to blame the victim to make the equation work. but in reality, that doesn't solve the problem but shuffles it away conveniently.

 

[emilynghiem]

Make it a criminal and civil invasion of privacy offense.

This makes no sense.

There is no 'expectation of privacy' when one willingly provides another party personal information, or images.

So when you give your information to a company "with the agreement it won't be sold to other parties," they can still do "whatever" because it's in their possession?
Even if you change your mind later? Or the terms weren't clear when you signed up?

Maybe for all such cases, whether private photos or information, there should be a general policy that "in case of dispute" the benefit of the doubt is given to protect the person whose information or images are either being exposed or contested.

Just agree to rule in defense of privacy if there is any dispute. So given that condition, then people who want the information from the other party become responsible for proving otherwise, and requiring getting it in writing with dates where it is clear what the terms are. Similar to a warrant that has to name the "specific items" to be waived.
The burden should be put on that party, not on the other person to "prove they didn't or don't consent," where the default assumption is to protect privacy. How hard is that?

 

[emilynghiem]

Does it count when they hung a nude painting of me in the college art museum without me getting paid?

Depends what the painting looked like, ultimately.

If it constitutes harassment or terrorism,
or violates the rights of students not to suffer extreme emotional anguish and PTSD.

Ha! Just kidding, I hope!

I think the combined actions of the person exposing the photos and information,
knowing the victim objects to the harassment caused,
would constitute "conspiracy to violate civil rights."

People have the right to security in our persons, houses, and effects
and the right to petition for redress of grievances in case of breach.

If there is no remedy at law to stop the breaching effects if such actions
continue, then if the govt allows it to go on, it becomes a party by omission.
If the parties are "abusing" the rights under the Constitution to violate
equal rights of others under the same.

So we either need to teach laws as carrying a reciprocal responsibility,
or pass an amendment that makes it clear that no rights, freedoms or laws under the Constitution shall be enforced,
applied or interpreted so as to abridge the equal rights of others to the same protections.
And any conflicts arising shall be resolved by mediation and consensus by all
parties affected or involved, in order to guarantee equal protection of the law for all parties.
And that should be the criteria for invoking Constitutional privileges anyway, an agreement to respect the same.
Not to take laws out of context to violate others. Duh!
Some kind of reciprocity agreement or respect for "consent of the governed" which is the spirit of the law anyway.
Without consent, there is no basis in law for enforcing social contracts; that is what makes it binding, is mutual consent.

 

[Uncensored2008]

__________________

Not! I went to an adult store near work to look for a joke gift for Valentine's Day,
there were REALLY freaky videos of midgets and big big wrinkled old ladies whose V's
took up the whole cover photo. I had to leave the store, I was laughing so hard!
People who were trying to be inconspicuous themselves, were staring at me, which made it funnier.

I later laughed it off, confessing to my boyfriend I did intend to buy him a hideous joke gift, but couldn't stop cracking up at the images of midgets and big wrinkly old women.
He didn't care about that. He just wanted to know where his video was!

Guys are so funny!

I like the female form. I particularly like it naked. BUT never been a fan of porn. You just gave me another reason why.

 

[Luissa]

They post porn with grandmas, they would post it.

???

Grandma porn? You've got to be kidding?

Nope! And I am talking 70 year old grandmas, not young ones. Lol

 

[BlueGin]

The moral of the story:

Don't pose for pictures you don't want the public to see.

Yes, her ex was an asshole. But really? "It'll be for my eyes only, honey. Honest!"

They broke up for a reason. She had no business trusting the asshole.

Which is usually something you learn after you have made the leap of faith in the person unfortunately.

Just because a person turns out to be rapist
does not give them the right to rape you.

I understand it's because people believe in justice and want to be able to explain why wrong things happen "to other people" it's easy to blame the victim to make the equation work. but in reality, that doesn't solve the problem but shuffles it away conveniently.

I agree. But... I also buy the bravado being put forward about as far as I can spit.

These same people will blame the victim up until it happens to someone they know or like. Then the tune changes pretty quick I'm sure.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Which is usually something you learn after you have made the leap of faith in the person unfortunately.

Just because a person turns out to be rapist
does not give them the right to rape you.

I understand it's because people believe in justice and want to be able to explain why wrong things happen "to other people" it's easy to blame the victim to make the equation work. but in reality, that doesn't solve the problem but shuffles it away conveniently.

I agree. But... I also buy the bravado being put forward about as far as I can spit.

These same people will blame the victim up until it happens to someone they know or like. Then the tune changes pretty quick I'm sure.

"She forced me post her nude picture on a porn site 3 years after we broke up, you honor" sounds like the kind of defense that would sway a judge...to throw the book at him!

 

[Uncensored2008]

You did not use the term illegal, I did. I was stating that I think making him civilly responsible is essentially equivalent to illegal in my mind. In essence, I was trying to agree with you on a single contention and one that you have not addressed.

You reiterated that you think the site should be held responsible but you have still failed to comment (as far as I can tell) on whether or not the perpetrator (the man who uploaded the picture in the first place) should be held civilly liable as well.

I can’t see how the site can be held responsible for keeping the post up when the actual perpetrator (the original publisher of the photo) is somehow exempt.

The question is of consent. When the woman poses for the picture, she gives consent. IF the man swears he will not share them, then that is a contract and yes, he should be sued for breach of contract.

 

[strollingbones]

They post porn with grandmas, they would post it.

???

Grandma porn? You've got to be kidding?

nope...no matter how old you are....some asshole on webcam is yelling....show me your tits.....

 

[Katzndogz]

You did not use the term illegal, I did. I was stating that I think making him civilly responsible is essentially equivalent to illegal in my mind. In essence, I was trying to agree with you on a single contention and one that you have not addressed.

You reiterated that you think the site should be held responsible but you have still failed to comment (as far as I can tell) on whether or not the perpetrator (the man who uploaded the picture in the first place) should be held civilly liable as well.

I can’t see how the site can be held responsible for keeping the post up when the actual perpetrator (the original publisher of the photo) is somehow exempt.

The question is of consent. When the woman poses for the picture, she gives consent. IF the man swears he will not share them, then that is a contract and yes, he should be sued for breach of contract.

If a man swears that he will not share those pictures, get it in writing. While oral contracts are enforceable, forcing a man to sign a contract that he agrees to be liable for monetary damages in the event of a breach would give him pause to think about it first.

 

[BlueGin]

Revenge porn legislation was passed by both the house and senate this week in my state. Yay for Progress.

 

[GHook93]

Revenge porn legislation was passed by both the house and senate this week in my state. Yay for Progress.

Absolutely this should be crime. Unless you get the person's consent IN WRITING, you should not be able to post the video online and ruin someone's life out of spite.

In college I made a video with an ex of mine and when she cheated on me with a friend I thought about publicizing the video, but chose not to. She would have been devastated and it would have been utterly wrong regardless of what she did to me.

I am glad I never did it.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I can totally believe the highlighted portion.

*****************************************************************



(CNN) -- "Jane" allowed her ex-boyfriend to take her naked photograph because, he assured her, it would be for his eyes only. After their breakup, the man betrayed her trust.

On the revenge porn site UGotPosted, he uploaded her naked photo and contact information. Jane received calls, e-mails, and Facebook friend requests from hundreds of strangers, many of whom wanted sex.
After the site refused to take down the post and the anonymous calls and e-mails intensified, she turned to law enforcement. According to the officers, nothing could be done because her ex had not engaged in a harassing "course of conduct," as required by criminal harassment law, and because he had not explicitly solicited others to stalk her.

Criminal law should have a role in deterring and punishing revenge porn. It's not new that certain types of privacy invasions are crimes. Many states prohibit the nonconsensual taking of sexually explicit images -- the disclosure of someone's naked images should be criminalized as well.

But in all but one state, New Jersey, turning people into objects of pornography without their permission is legal. A single post, however, can go viral and ruin someone's life.

Revenge porn and its ilk raise the risk of offline stalking and physical attack. Fear can be profound. Victims don't feel safe leaving their homes. Jane, who is a nurse, did not go to work for days. As many victims have told me, they struggle especially with anxiety, and some suffer panic attacks. Revenge porn victims withdraw from online engagement, shutting down their social media profiles and blogs to prevent strangers from finding them online. They cannot participate fully in our networked age.

Opinion: Make 'revenge porn' a crime - CNN.com

Old thread I note, but there's a lot going on now about it being made illegal. As well it should be. Can google revenge porn legality for links.