Should there be laws against uploading amateur porn without consent?

The Dom

So called victims of ‘revenge porn’ in the U.S. are pressing for new laws in the area of amateur porn.

I know this as I have just read it with my own eyes in the Japan Times:

Sexually explicit photos uploaded on Net without person's consent

Annmarie Chiarini’s long-distance boyfriend was goading her to pose nude. The pictures would be for his eyes only, Chiarini recalls him saying, because she was so beautiful and because he missed her so much. He promised, she said, they would be stored on a compact disc and hidden in his drawer.

Chiarini believed him — until they broke up and the CD was auctioned on eBay with a link emailed to her friends and family. Copies were later mailed to her son’s Catholic school kindergarten teacher and the department head at the college where Chiarini taught English. The images eventually wound up on a pornographic video-sharing site, earning 4,000 views in less than two weeks.

It’s called “revenge porn,” and it is legal everywhere in the United States but California and New Jersey. An increasing number of states are considering whether to make it illegal to post any sexually explicit image online without that person’s permission. But groups like the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation say they worry such proposals run afoul of the First Amendment of the Constitution, which protects free speech.

“We generally don’t think that finding more ways to put people in prison for speech is a good thing,” said Adi Kamdar, an activist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “A lot of times, these laws — if they aren’t narrowly focused enough — they can be interpreted too broadly.”

Chiarini, a single mother from Maryland, said the night her boyfriend said he was going to post the photos, she “called the police in an absolute panic and tried to explain what was going on. The police, she said, responded, ” ‘So?’ ”

In a particularly disturbing twist to the revenge porn phenomenon, some of the sites appear to be running side businesses offering “reputation protection services”: Dump $500 into a PayPal account and maybe they will take down your photo.

Mary Anne Franks, a law professor at the University of Miami who is helping states draft revenge porn laws, argues that sharing a nude picture with another person implies limited consent similar to other business transactions. “If you give your credit card to a waiter, you aren’t giving him permission to buy a yacht,” Franks said.

The precise scope of the problem is unclear because many victims never come forward or are frequently turned away by the police. Two of the most popular revenge sites have gone dark in recent years amid hacking allegations and a class-action lawsuit. But advocates estimate there are dozens of other sites that continue to post pornographic images without that person’s consent.

Law enforcement officials have been stumped on how to respond. Website operators are not liable for content provided by others, unless the images are child pornography. And anti-harassment and cyberstalking laws do not apply unless the ex-partner threatens the victim or attempts repeated contact.

Chiarini says she remembers one police officer thumbing through a black book at his desk before finally shrugging his shoulders and telling her no crime had been committed.

Copyright protections, too, will not help because she wasn’t the one who took the photos. And even if she had, victim advocates say, most revenge sites routinely ignore “take-down” infringement complaints, knowing that the victims can’t go to the expense of pursuing further legal action.

Maryland delegate Jon Cardin is among the latest of several state legislators to propose a new revenge porn law. His proposal will make it a felony to intentionally distribute sexually explicit digital images of another person without consent, punishable by up to five years in prison and a $25,000 fine.

The bill will exclude images deemed to have “public importance” — an exemption carved out in response to critics who say such laws will criminalize journalists who publish explicit photos. The legislation also wouldn’t hold liable anyone who links to a revenge posting.

So, what you make of that then?

I think it's all a load of codswallop. If you get your kit off for some gezzer and let 'em take durty snaps of you, or you let someone video you with their mobile blower, getting up to pure filth, then tough testicle. Why should we be deprived of our amateur porn cause you suddenly sober up and regret what you've gone and done with yourself while in the nuddy with a bunch of strangers in some seedy hotel across the road from Connolly Station? It's your own fault.

I think that Jon Cardin legislator bloke sounds like a right kn.. busybody to me. Giving it large with his: "My proposal will make it a felony to intentionally distribute sexually explicit digital images of another person without consent". Feck off. I'm with Adi Kamdar, from the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Sounds like a stand up sort to me. Well sound.

So, whatcha think?

dodderangler

How much on eBay?

kneemos

Who wants their nudie pics all over the web.
Should be locked up imo.

My name is URL

Maybe people could be more careful with deciding who they trust to share pornographic images and videos of themselves with.

In a particularly disturbing twist to the revenge porn phenomenon, some of the sites appear to be running side businesses offering “reputation protection services”: Dump $500 into a PayPal account and maybe they will take down your photo.

Isn't that blackmail and already illegal?

Zab

Adi Kamdar doesn't agree with your terrible reasoning at all.

Red Crow

No. Ask yourself what would the world be like without amateur porn? *shudders*

Arawn

Title fail, whats wrong with uploading porn with consent?

joe stodge

It's her own fault, if ya don't want pics on the net don't take them in the first place.

PizzamanIRL

No. Amateur is the best. I hate all that professional stuff.

Killer Wench

F*ck the whole "so called" aspect.

Recording a sexual act between two consenting adults is one thing. Uploading the video to the internet without the consent of both parties is another.

Here in the States, where I am, it is illegal in many jurisdictions to record a video and/or audio without the consent of both parties. Consent has to be explicit or implicit depending on the state.

These revenge sites are based on taking these videos and shaming the woman involved. There is no consent involved.

And, frankly, I know too many cases where someone was videotaped without their knowledge and consent.

http://www.sexlaws.org/answer_board_question-secretly_videotaping_sex

AckwelFoley

This is an outrage. Some of the best porn is amateur.

ardinn

I say Amateur porn should be compulsory and taught to everyone at third level.

That way we can have a "view before you buy" kinda thing before we head out on the piss!!!

Einhard

There'll be lots of posts here along the lines of people shouldn't be stupid enough to share naked pictures of themselves etc, and that they should assume they could go viral. This misses the point though, that such people are often very much in love, and while it may seem stupid in hindsight, it needn't be so when in a loving relationship with someone you trust.

I believe there should be laws prosecuting this form of behaviour. It's absolutely despicable, and of course, it really only affects women. They become victims of their ex's vile behaviour, and of society's double standards. It must be absolutely horrible to know that such intimate pictures can be viewed by millions without your consent, and to have them posted to family and friends, and employers? F*ck that. Anyone who stoops to such scumbaggery needs to be taught a lesson. So yeah, make it illegal, and go to town on c*nts who seek to abuse their former partners like that. Psychological abuse can be every bit as bad as physical abuse, and anyone who doesn't see such actions as psychological abuse needs their heads examined.

ardinn

Killer Wench wrote: »

These revenge sites are based on taking these videos and shaming the woman involved.

Incorrect - According to my "research" women are also doing this to take revenge on cheaters etc by banging 44 men at a time.

Its empowerment i tells ya!

hsianloon

Don't want it somewhere on the internet, don't take the photos or videos in the first place.

Might break the mood, but go sign a contract first then about what to do with the stuff.

There seems to be an effort the police as being unconcerned. It's not his job to interpret the law in excess. He's a cop, not a lawyer. He'd get into trouble taking to many liberties of his own.

Streisand effect. Just don't blow it up further. See, now even us know about her name and some will go to look up her pics

The Dom

Killer Wench wrote: »

And, frankly, I know too many cases where someone was videotaped without their knowledge and consent.[/url]

I don't think anyone would think that being filmed without consent should be legal though.

There is a ton of it online mind.

Lots of it fake of course but just as much of it looks very real. Or eh, so I'm told.

2nd Row Donkey

Tell us more about this hotel across from Connelly Station.

Killer Wench

Einhard wrote: »

There'll be lots of posts here along the lines of people shouldn't be stupid enough to share naked pictures of themselves etc, and that they should assume they could go viral. This misses the point though, that such people are often very much in love, and while it may seem stupid in hindsight, it needn't be so when in a loving relationship with someone you trust.

I believe there should be laws prosecuting this form of behaviour. It's absolutely despicable, and of course, it really only affects women. They become victims of their ex's vile behaviour, and of society's double standards. It must be absolutely horrible to know that such intimate pictures can be viewed by millions without your consent, and to have them posted to family and friends, and employers? F*ck that. Anyone who stoops to such scumbaggery needs to be taught a lesson. So yeah, make it illegal, and go to town on c*nts who seek to abuse their former partners like that. Psychological abuse can be every bit as bad as physical abuse, and anyone who doesn't see such actions as psychological abuse needs their heads examined.

Exactly.

If two parties make a tape and two parties agree to share the tape, then that's amateur porn.

However, within the bedroom, there is a reasonable expectation of privacy and both parties should consent to the video and how it will be used.

Killer Wench

The Dom wrote: »

I don't think anyone would think that being filmed without consent should be legal though.

There is a ton of it online mind.

Lots of it fake of course but just as much of it looks very real. Or eh, so I'm told.

Many of these revenge sites do involve women being videotaped without their knowledge. I had a friend who was giving her ex-bf a blowjob and when she glanced up, she found him taping her at it. She didn't give consent. All it would take was a press of a few buttons and that tape could have been uploaded.

The Dom

Einhard wrote: »

It's absolutely despicable, and of course, it really only affects women.

Tell that to Colin Farrell, Tom Sizemore and Gene Simmons.

Killer Wench

ardinn wrote: »

Incorrect - According to my "research" women are also doing this to take revenge on cheaters etc by banging 44 men at a time.

Its empowerment i tells ya!

Much like rape, there are male victims, but those who suffer most are women. Congrats on using the internet, though. I'm sure your parents are mighty proud.

ardinn

The Dom wrote: »

Tell that to Colin Farrell, Tom Sizemore and Gene Simmons.

As if women didnt like him enough he turns out to have a giant flute aswell!


The cúnt

Einhard

The Dom wrote: »

Tell that to Colin Farrell, Tom Sizemore and Gene Simmons.

I meant the "slut-shaming" that often accompanies such videos. And celebs don't count. They live on a different planet. Some random lady has a video uploaded, and her career is probably ruined. Paris Hilton uploads her own, and her career booms.

kneemos

joe stodge wrote: »

It's her own fault, if ya don't want pics on the net don't take them in the first place.

I think the law would wholeheartily disagree.

My name is URL

Will this only apply to sites set up for the purpose of shaming people or to all porn sites? What's to stop someone from making complaints against another person and wrongly accusing them of uploading a video without their consent?

SeanW

I'm in favour of all things filthy, porn, hookers, you name it. But I agree with the premise of the thread - the people involved MUST give their consent before this stuff is used in any public way.

frag420

I am keeping my sex tape hidden until I am famous..........

The Dom

My name is URL wrote: »

Will this only apply to sites set up for the purpose of shaming people or to all porn sites?

The law was drafted to deal with the revenge sites but I fail to see how the legislation won't affect all amateur porn sites.

Here's a news report with an interview with the woman (and another woman that similar happened to):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOGpxFOu6jo

Wacker The Attacker

I really dont want to go back to buying dvds and skinny mags for all my **** needs

Overheal

Theres a difference between consensual amateur porn and revenge porn or even hidden cam porn.

Even some of those casting couch videos are a bit iffy, and some other types of videos definitely appear that way, like the ones that get either a bit too real or really are cab drivers stranding women in the middle of nowhere and pressuring them into things they don't want to do.

Online porn is very much an open field and that's a problem when you have cases like this where you can easily defame someone, bully, or even blackmail them, and have very little protection in your favor.

The only people this legislation would hurt are porn sites (boo hoo, a little more red tape), people who get off on revenge porn, rape, hidden camera or coercion fantasies, and celebrities that may deliberately "leak" their videos to increase their fame.

Grayson

Einhard wrote: »

There'll be lots of posts here along the lines of people shouldn't be stupid enough to share naked pictures of themselves etc, and that they should assume they could go viral. This misses the point though, that such people are often very much in love, and while it may seem stupid in hindsight, it needn't be so when in a loving relationship with someone you trust.

I believe there should be laws prosecuting this form of behaviour. It's absolutely despicable, and of course, it really only affects women. They become victims of their ex's vile behaviour, and of society's double standards. It must be absolutely horrible to know that such intimate pictures can be viewed by millions without your consent, and to have them posted to family and friends, and employers? F*ck that. Anyone who stoops to such scumbaggery needs to be taught a lesson. So yeah, make it illegal, and go to town on c*nts who seek to abuse their former partners like that. Psychological abuse can be every bit as bad as physical abuse, and anyone who doesn't see such actions as psychological abuse needs their heads examined.

I know a girl who would send videos and get her boyfriend to do the same. She initiated the whole thing. The videos were never uploaded online but they were shown to her friends and this was when they were still going out. When he found out she pretended it was nothing and wouldn't even apologise.

The fact is that you're right, it's pure scumbaggery. There's a problem every time you trust anyone like that. It doesn't even require a break up or the internet for it. I'm never going to allow someone to get possession of something like that and I think that you're incredibly naive to allow someone to. Having said that, before that girl I would have said that what happens between couples was their own business and it was ok.

My name is URL

If the problem is as widespread and as serious as people are making out then I don't see why advising against making sex tapes is viewed as such a bad thing.

If there's even a tiny chance that I could lose my job or have my name dragged through the mud by a jilted former partner of mine uploading a video which I agreed to partake in, then I bloody well won't be doing it in the first place.. it's very basic personal responsibility and common fcuking sense. But those things are too often confused for 'victim blaming' etc these days.

The world is a lot different than it was 20 years ago, and as things change so to do our own responsibilities. Maybe people should embrace those responsibilities instead of expecting the state to come up with new laws (which often lead to as many problems as they fix) every time someone acts like a dick.

Chiarini believed him — until they broke up and the CD was auctioned on eBay with a link emailed to her friends and family. Copies were later mailed to her son’s Catholic school kindergarten teacher and the department head at the college where Chiarini taught English.

Is there not already a heap of laws which could have been used to prosecute the guy above? Aren't there laws against sending obscene and unsolicited communications to people... harrasment and stalking laws etc?

Grayson

My name is URL wrote: »

If the problem is as widespread and as serious as people are making out then I don't see why advising against making sex tapes is viewed as such a bad thing.

If there's even a tiny chance that I could lose my job or have my name dragged through the mud by a jilted former partner of mine uploading a video which I agreed to partake in, then I bloody well won't be doing it in the first place.. it's very basic personal responsibility and common fcuking sense. But those things are too often confused for 'victim blaming' etc these days.

The world is a lot different than it was 20 years ago, and as things change so to do our own responsibilities. Maybe people should embrace those responsibilities instead of expecting the state to come up with new laws (which often lead to as many problems as they fix) every time someone acts like a dick.



Is there not already a heap of laws which could have been used to prosecute the guy above? Aren't there laws against sending obscene and unsolicited communications to people... harrasment and stalking laws etc?

The problem is that people tend to trust people they're in love with. Even if they are not trust worthy at all. And they tend to have complete trust more than they'd trust anyone else.

ALiasEX

They also aren't accounting for the possessor of the tape getting robbed or a friend of the possessor finding it.

Muise...

Grayson wrote: »

The problem is that people tend to trust people they're in love with. Even if they are not trust worthy at all. And they tend to have complete trust more than they'd trust anyone else.

Also, risk is sexy.

Infini

ALiasEX wrote: »

They also aren't accounting for the possessor of the tape getting robbed or a friend of the possessor finding it.

Malicious intent would be the key here. Regardless putting porn up to shame someone it just pathetic tho.

enfant terrible

Grayson wrote: »

The problem is that people tend to trust people they're in love with. Even if they are not trust worthy at all. And they tend to have complete trust more than they'd trust anyone else.

Do you have to be in love to make a sex tape?

Grayson

enfant terrible wrote: »

Do you have to be in love to make a sex tape?

Nope. I doubt half the celebrities that did were in love. What i mean is that even if everyone is clued up about the risks involved, some will still make that mistake because they love and trust that person.

enfant terrible

Grayson wrote: »

Nope. I doubt half the celebrities that did were in love. What i mean is that even if everyone is clued up about the risks involved, some will still make that mistake because they love and trust that person.

True just hard to feel sorry for someone when the dangers are so obvious.

looking_around

I have no problems letting my OH take pics of me.
Heck I've sold some.

But by no means do I want them up there for free or without my consent.

Just because you're alright with a vid or photos taken, doesn't mean you want the world to see them. And you shouldn't have to worry about that either.

My name is URL

So say if someone posts on Reddit's 'Gonewild' section and then someone else saves and rehosts the images somewhere else... do you think they should be held to account in the same way that someone using pictures to blackmail a person should be..? because that's what it sounds like this legislation will mean.

How can consent work if a person has already uploaded pictures or videos of themselves to the world wide web?

looking_around

My name is URL wrote: »

So say if someone posts on Reddit's 'Gonewild' section and then someone else saves and rehosts the images somewhere else... do you think they should be held to account in the same way that someone using pictures to blackmail a person should be..? because that's what it sounds like this legislation will mean.

How can consent work if a person has already uploaded pictures or videos of themselves to the world wide web?

Should be seen the same as stealing copyrighted images.

The person consented to have them up on a site, they did consent to have them taken/linked on to another, by somebody else.
________---
I hope the 19 people who voted for the first option, think the people consented to it being uploaded. And not that if you're ok with a videa, you should be ok with nonconsensual upload.

wendell borton

They who can give up amateur porn to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither porn nor safety.
-Benjamin Franklin

My name is URL

looking_around wrote: »

Should be seen the same as stealing copyrighted images.

The person consented to have them up on a site, they did consent to have them taken/linked on to another, by somebody else.

That's grand if you're taking the pictures yourself, but I'd hazard a guess that a lot of the time it's someone else taking them or recording the video. And that's the person who legally owns the copyright.

It just seems like a stupid thing to try legislating for.. there should already be ample laws which stop the kind of obvious harassment and abuse that's outlined in the OP.

looking_around

My name is URL wrote: »

That's grand if you're taking the pictures yourself, but I'd hazard a guess that a lot of the time it's someone else taking them or recording the video. And that's the person who legally owns the copyright.

It just seems like a stupid thing to try legislating for.. there should already be ample laws which stop the kind of obvious harassment and abuse that's outlined in the OP.

But, clearly there isn't adequate laws.

Also, they own the video yes, but need consent to use it from the people in it. (This is the case for normal/clothed images..)
Like, you go for a family portrait, they own that image..but they don't have permission to use it anywhere until you give it to them.

looking_around

wendell borton wrote: »

They who can give up amateur porn to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither porn nor safety.
-Benjamin Franklin

Butchered
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin
__
Most of the people didn't consent to the porn or give into it..for any safety..
Would just find themselves at the world viewing pleasure by angry spouse.

~stupid "quoting" is stupid.~

My name is URL

looking_around wrote: »

But, clearly there isn't adequate laws.

Clearly there aren't adequate enforcers of the law tbh

Chiarini, a single mother from Maryland, said the night her boyfriend said he was going to post the photos, she “called the police in an absolute panic and tried to explain what was going on. The police, she said, responded, ” ‘So?’ ”

Chiarini says she remembers one police officer thumbing through a black book at his desk before finally shrugging his shoulders and telling her no crime had been committed.

looking_around wrote: »

Also, they own the video yes, but need consent to use it from the people in it. (This is the case for normal/clothed images..)
Like, you go for a family portrait, they own that image..but they don't have permission to use it anywhere until you give it to them.

I don't have a Facebook account yet there are literally tens of pictures of me on Facebook.. I have no legal right to have them taken down, but if one of them is used to blackmail or otherwise harass me then I have the grounds to make a legal complaint. And any law enforcement officer worth their salary would know that.

looking_around

My name is URL wrote: »

Clearly there aren't adequate enforcers of the law tbh







I don't have a Facebook account yet there are literally tens of pictures of me on Facebook.. I have no legal right to have them taken down, but if one of them is used to blackmail or otherwise harass me then I have the grounds to make a legal complaint. And any law enforcement officer worth their salary would know that.

Actually you do. If you didn't consent to be uploaded.

And I've had numerous photos taken down from Facebook, by contacting them about said photo.

hansfrei

Massdebate over amature porn pictures controversy

hansfrei

My name is URL wrote: »

Clearly there aren't adequate enforcers of the law tbh







I don't have a Facebook account yet there are literally tens of pictures of me on Facebook.. I have no legal right to have them taken down, but if one of them is used to blackmail or otherwise harass me then I have the grounds to make a legal complaint. And any law enforcement officer worth their salary would know that.

Would you tell a gard you were nude on the web?

The thoughs of 15 fat old men ogling/laughing while looking at the pictures would put me off.

looking_around

Chiarini says she remembers one police officer thumbing through a black book at his desk before finally shrugging his shoulders and telling her no crime had been committed.

Also, noticed the bold? Enforces can't do anything, if there aren't laws to enforce.