Revenge Porn: Victims’ Rights featured image

Revenge Porn: Victims’ Rights

by John DiGiacomo

Partner

There is currently no federal law regulating the distribution of revenge porn, also known as nonconsensual pornography (NCP). The Cyber Civil Rights Initiative has created a model for what the federal government could eventually adopt. The model essentially lays out that if a person knowingly distributes sexually explicit material about another person, knowing they did not have consent to do so, they will be fined, serve prison time, or both. The model also provides exceptions such as immunity when the explicit material is obtained during a lawful commercial setting, or disclosures made in the public interest (e.g. for criminal reporting, legal proceedings, or medical treatment). Finally, the model provides immunity to service providers who have unknowingly become involved in NCP merely through the nature of their business.

27 states have adopted statutes to combat the recent increase in revenge porn incidents. Eleven of the statutes have created crimes that can result in a potential felony charge, while the rest would be misdemeanors. Examples of the felony charges include unlawful distribution of images depicting states of nudity, violation of privacy, sexual cyberharassment, and video voyeurism, among others. Offenses classed as a misdemeanor include posting a private image for harassment, invasion of privacy, stalking and harassment, distribution of intimate images without or against consent, and representations depicting nudity, among others.

In addition to possible criminal penalties, a victim can often bring a civil action against a person who has posted distributed explicit materials without their consent. The claims would likely stem from copyright infringement (discussed below) or invasion of privacy. Due to certain statutory limitations, owners and operators of sites that do not retain strict control of the content posted to their sites will likely not be held responsible.

Alternative Means of Protection/Response

Criminal and civil proceedings can be very draining on a victim and therefore not everyone will choose to go that route; however, there are other options out there.

If you personally have taken a photo or video, then you own the copyright to that photo or video. Because you own the copyright, you can submit a Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown (DCMA takedown), which is simply when content is removed from a website at the request of the owner of the copyright. To execute a DCMA takedown you (1) must be the copyright owner, (2) provide the original version of the work, and (3) explain where the infringement is occurring.

Another alternative would be to contact Google personally and request that they remove the content. Google has stated that they will comply with a person’s request to remove revenge porn from the search engine. Additionally, you can take personal action through search engine optimization to bury the images that you wish people do not see. By taking things into your own hands you can control what personal content people see when they search your name.

Conclusion

Nonconsensual exposure of pornographic content is rapidly becoming a major issue through the entire country. With it being such a new trend, government and law enforcement are behind the curve in controlling this outbreak, but they are working to fix that. Over half of U.S. states have created laws to penalize revenge porn posters and more legislation is on the way.

For more information about the privacy and how to respond to revenge porn contact Revision Legal’s team of experienced internet privacy attorneys through this form or call 855-473-8474.

Image courtesy of Flickr user Adam Kuśmierz

Extra, Extra!
Recent Posts

2025 Changes to Trademark Fees

2025 Changes to Trademark Fees

Trademark

There are some significant changes coming to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) that will affect trademark filings beginning January 18, 2025. These changes include the introduction of the Trademark Center, new fees, and revised application requirements. Here is an overview of the key changes: The USPTO will retire the TEAS system, which […]

Read more about 2025 Changes to Trademark Fees

Automated Decision-Making Technology: California Releases Proposed Regulations

Automated Decision-Making Technology: California Releases Proposed Regulations

Internet Law

In today’s competitive e-commerce landscape, automated decision-making technology is becoming more and more important. From personalized product recommendations to targeted advertising and streamlined logistics, these systems help ecommerce businesses adapt and grow. But new regulations are on the horizon, and these changes could reshape the way e-commerce businesses use automation. The California Privacy Protection Agency […]

Read more about Automated Decision-Making Technology: California Releases Proposed Regulations

FTC Adopts Final “Click to Cancel Rule”

FTC Adopts Final “Click to Cancel Rule”

Internet Law

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has issued final amendments to its trade regulation rule concerning negative option plans, also known as the “click to cancel rule.” This rule aims to address widespread deceptive practices that prohibit customers from cancelling services in the same manner in which they signed up. Here’s a detailed summary of the […]

Read more about FTC Adopts Final “Click to Cancel Rule”

Put Revision Legal on your side