California "Revenge Porn" law.

Quote by lafayettemister



Then they can sue in civil court for damages. And that doesn't protect something created by the "offender". If my gf and I go to a nude beach, I take pics of her naked body, on a public beach and then post it online; have I broken this supposed law? Do I not have the same copyright protection you mention?

Post a pic of an ex online is more of a revenge motivated attack than a sexually motivated one, to me. The tool of the attack may be sexual in nature but doesn't necessarily qualify as sexually motivated. I understand your point and I respect your opinion, I just disagree this time.

Quote by slipperywhenwet2012
I think it's great, and yes more states should adopt it. Nothing sicker than putting anyone's private stuff out there, no matter how bitter the break-up was.

And not just revenge porn. Any situation where someone is filmed seemingly in confidence and said film is put out for all the public to see. If all parties don't consent to it, then it shouldn't be out there. And if it does come out somehow, there should be consequences...and not just the consequences the victims suffer.

Quote by Kinkykiwi80
I think it is a ridiculous idea and a complete waste of time and money. Our society has gotten to comfortable with playing the blame game and not taking responsibility for our own actions. Would you rather see your local cop running around trying to find a scorned ex that is posting a titty pic of his ex gf on line or watching and catching the drug dealer who is selling meth to the 14yr old on the corner. Would you rather have our jails filled with people that made a stupid mistake in the heat of the moment and posted a pussy pic on tumblr or with the kiddie fiddlers and rapists. I know what I would prefer.
If I send someone a pic weather it be an ex lover or someone I'm talking to on here, I am taking that risk that something *may* happen to my pic. Would that said person be a complete fucktard for posting it elsewhere? Absolutely they would. Would I be absolutely deviated that it happened? Of course, but it was my mistake and a risk I was willing to take. It's not something that should be wasting tax payers dollars, policemans time and spots in the jail over.

Yeah, it's a waste of time until it happens to you. Then I bet you'd want something done about it.

It's a sad day when you can't feel secure about sending a lover something to spice things up without them being able to do what they want with it and add further insult to injury by making a profit from it. The issue isn't with responsibility. It's with the lack of responsibility on the part of the person who decides to abuse certain privileges.

Drugs and murder are all terrible crimes, but so is violating someone's right to privacy. And I for one am glad we're moving towards the direction of protecting one's right to privacy. One crime shouldn't be ignored just because others are taking place. That's preposterous.

Quote by slipperywhenwet2012


Yeah, it's a waste of time until it happens to you. Then I bet you'd want something done about it.

It's a sad day when you can't feel secure about sending a lover something to spice things up without them being able to do what they want with it and add further insult to injury by making a profit from it. The issue isn't with responsibility. It's with the lack of responsibility on the part of the person who decides to abuse certain privileges.

Drugs and murder are all terrible crimes, but so is violating someone's right to privacy. And I for one am glad we're moving towards the direction of protecting one's right to privacy. One crime shouldn't be ignored just because others are taking place. That's preposterous.

Quote by lafayettemister


There is something she can do about it, she can sue in civil court. Whether or not she would win is anyone's guess.

The only way to protect one's privacy is to not share what you don't want to be public.

There's not much difference between sharing a private shared picture and sharing other privately shared intimate information. What would be more hurtful? If a person shared pics of an ex's body or sharing secrets shared between lovers? Such as if a person tells a bf or gf about past abuse, something they were arrested for, molested as a child, had an abortion, something private and not for public consumption and then after the couple breaks up, the ex shares that information verbally or in print? Would that person also be charged with a crime? The victimized person's privacy has been destroyed, but if it's true then no law was broken.

There are lots of people on Lush that have topless and/or nude pictures open for everyone to see. Or open only to Lush friends. I have several friends who I've seen their bits and pieces. But, in chatting with them I've learned some very intimate and personal details about their lives. Those details getting out to the masses would be more hurtful to them and more of a betrayal to them than if I shared a picture of boobs. (of course I'd do neither) I'd have violated their confidence and their privacy, but I wouldn't not have violated the law.

Plenty of ex spouses have spread private details about their former husbands and wives, stuff that was meant to never be shared. And is more damning than boobie or dick pics. Privacy isn't just about pictures and images, it's about lives. If you criminalize freely given/taken pictures then you'll have to criminalize the spoken and written word in relation to privately shared personal information.

Quote by slipperywhenwet2012


This is all a lovely notion. But it's along the same lines as saying don't wear certain clothing if you don't want bad things to happen to you. Or saying stay off the internet if you don't wanna get bullied via the internet. It's victim blaming.

Yes it's important to be wise and cautious...but mistakes happen...or we trust the wrong people. And said people having the power to publicly humiliate and cause severe emotional damage as a result is much too severe of a punishment for petty mistakes.

Adding consequences and repercussions to this type of behavior will go a long way in PREVENTING it...so civil suits and dragging things through the mud and bringing even more attention to the situation won't need to happen.

Quote by lafayettemister


Publicly humiliating someone is an asshole thing to do, but it's impossible to objectively criminalize it. If that is the standard... public humiliation.

Then any husband that's publicly caught cheating on his wife, thereby public humiliating her.. criminal
And woman that post-breakup goes onto facebook and says something like, "Bob has a 3in dick and cums in 20 seconds", publicly humiliating him... criminal
Any kid that goes online and says, "Betsy is a fat cow and needs to go on a diet".. public humiliation.. criminal
Any college kid sitting in class and says, "Mark farted and it stinks".. public humiliation.. criminal
Any exboyfriend that goes online and posts that his ex has fake breasts.. criminal

The person that took this picture and shared it online...
I bet that guy felt humiliated

Or this girl...

Quote by slipperywhenwet2012


Oh, please.

Quote by lafayettemister


Which proves my point. You may not find any of that to be humiliating. But for something to be humiliating, the subject's opinion is all that matters. Think that boy in that picture wasn't humiliated when his friends at school saw it? I bet he was, and therefore since HE felt humiliated he should have the photographer charged with a crime? No, I don't think so. That's the thing about this possible law, not everyone will agree on what is or isn't humiliation. Humiliation is an emotion, emotions are subjective and change from person to person.

Quote by lafayettemister


Which proves my point. You may not find any of that to be humiliating. But for something to be humiliating, the subject's opinion is all that matters. Think that boy in that picture wasn't humiliated when his friends at school saw it? I bet he was, and therefore since HE felt humiliated he should have the photographer charged with a crime? No, I don't think so. That's the thing about this possible law, not everyone will agree on what is or isn't humiliation. Humiliation is an emotion, emotions are subjective and change from person to person.

Quote by LadyX
There should be no revenge jpg laws.

Also, drunk girls have it coming, and bully victims are crybabies.




You're doing a decent job finding the gray areas in the margins. Those are present with all laws; it's up to law enforcement, prosecutors, and grand juries to separate wheat from chaff on those cases that "could go either way". Some say there are worse crimes to prosecute; and they are right. But that doesn't preclude the validity of this issue. Some say it's a stupid issue, and if you're "dumb enough" to have issued a pic of yourself then you deserve it. Those people lack the ability to think critically, and mask it with meat-head machismo and/or a worldview that punishes the weak because they see some sort of Darwinian justice in it. Have fun with that, gang.

Lots of cases aren't gray at all. Lots of cases are nothings short of character assassination. An assault on one's pursuit of happiness, and as long as NightMan's not around to talk about orwellian totalitarianism in modern life, the victim's freedom is very much curtailed. It's a new(ish) issue, but better to get our heads around it and protect real victims than pretend it's 1979 and it doesn't exist.

Quote by lafayettemister


I never said drunk girls have it coming, never said bully victims are crybabies. Those are serious issues where the victim has no choice in what happens.

Quote by LadyX


I know you didn't- but since you bring it up, the victim has no choice in the matter of their exploited videos and images, either. Surely you're not venturing into "they did it to themselves" meatball-territory by claiming otherwise. Those who do are the types likely to believe the other two statements I typed atop my last post.

Do you believe physical assault should be against the law? How about vandalism or property theft?

Quote by lafayettemister



I don't think they did it to themselves, no. I don't think a person who becomes a victim intended it to happen nor are they responsible for someone else's actions.

Quote by lafayettemister



I don't think they did it to themselves, no. I don't think a person who becomes a victim intended it to happen nor are they responsible for someone else's actions.


edit... if this ever does become law where i live, the first thing I'd do is to delete any and all pictures i've received on Lush or via email. If I ever were to get hacked somehow I wouldn't want to be legally and criminally responsible for the pictures being leaked for public viewing

Quote by overmykneenow


But as far as you're concerned they don't deserve any assistance from the law.

Quote by lafayettemister


No.

Quote by LadyX


but this is where the gray areas, the marginal cases, come into play. There are always legal judgment calls in any law. Was it murder or self-defense? Was it theft or was it actually his rightful property?

If Joe and Jen had a horrible breakup and Joe sent revengeporn.com the videos he has of Jen sucking his cock while wearing kitty ears and meowing each time she comes up for air, then perhaps that's a clear-cut case that the prosecutor will choose to act on. Less clear is the case of the man formerly known as Lafayettemister, who was once forwarded pics that he didn't take, who once sent those pics to somebody else, and three years later the subject of the photos finds them on wouldyoubonethisbroad.com and flips out.

All of which is to say- yes, I'd delete lush pics too, law or no law. But if you're not actively shaming another person by doing something you know will hit them like an atom bomb, you're not in realistic danger of becoming a felon.

Quote by lafayettemister


Lafayettemister would be responsible for the crime because he forwarded the picture. Sharing with one person or one million, still sharing and victimizing someone.

Quote by LadyX


I doubt that would be the case in a criminal inquiry. Either way, the possible anomaly case is a poor reason to not offer protection to victims.

Do you believe physical assault should be a criminal offense? How about theft? Or maternal/paternal kidnapping?

Quote by lafayettemister


If the person in the forwarded photo felt victimized and wanted police to press charges, they would.

Yes, of course those things are crimes.

Quote by overmykneenow


It's a shame the law couldn't help this girl

http://www.aftab.com/index.php?page=jessie-logan-s-story

Quote by LadyX


Yes they could want that all they want. It's just unlikely the police would find a compelling case, as you describe it. It also wouldn't likely stand up even if they did. They could also sue you in civil court.

As for the crimes I mentioned: why are those things crimes? If you were physically assaulted, you could sue them for medical damages as well as pain and suffering. Why make criminal laws? They'll get theirs if you feel victimized and want to hire a lawyer, right?

Quote by lafayettemister


Apples and oranges. Not the same thing in my mind.

Quote by LadyX


Help me understand how they are fundamentally different. According to your logic thus-far, both sets of victims have civil routes to justice available to them, no?