Revenge porn—the non-consensual distribution of intimate images—has become one of the most prevalent forms of online harassment. Before the Internet, physical photographs and videotapes could only be shown to a small group of people. Today, a single post can reach millions within hours, be cached by search engines, and resurface for years after the original content is removed. If you are a victim of non-consensual pornography, legal options exist that can help you remove the content, identify the perpetrator, and pursue meaningful legal remedies.
Revenge porn—more properly termed non-consensual pornography—is the distribution of sexually explicit images or videos of a person without their consent. The term “revenge porn” captures the most common scenario: a former intimate partner who posts private images to retaliate for the end of the relationship. But non-consensual pornography is committed not only by ex-partners. Hackers who access cloud storage or devices, individuals who receive images under circumstances that do not authorize redistribution, and websites that aggregate stolen content all participate in the harm.
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, 47 U.S.C. § 230, provides broad immunity to websites for content posted by third-party users. This immunity has historically made it difficult to hold hosting platforms directly liable for non-consensual pornography. However, FOSTA-SESTA carved out exceptions for platforms that facilitate sex trafficking, and several states have enacted statutes imposing direct platform liability for revenge porn that platforms fail to remove after notice. The primary legal focus remains on pursuing the individual who posted the content.
The majority of U.S. states have enacted criminal statutes specifically targeting non-consensual pornography. These laws vary in their elements and penalties, but most criminalize the intentional disclosure of sexually explicit images of an identifiable person without consent and with intent to harm, harass, or cause emotional distress. Penalties range from misdemeanor charges in some states to felony prosecution with substantial prison exposure in others.
Federal criminal liability is available when the distribution crosses state lines or involves threats to disclose images as a form of extortion. The federal SHIELD Act established a federal criminal offense for the non-consensual disclosure of intimate visual depictions. Victims should report the conduct to local law enforcement and, where federal law applies, to the FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3).
If you took the intimate photographs or videos yourself—using your own phone or camera—you own the copyright. The copyright owner has the exclusive right under 17 U.S.C. § 106 to reproduce, distribute, and publicly display the work. Posting your intimate images without your authorization is copyright infringement, and copyright law provides powerful tools: DMCA takedown notices that require platforms to remove the content quickly, and the right to sue for statutory damages between $750 and $150,000 per infringed work against the person who posted the images.
Several invasion of privacy theories apply in revenge porn cases. The tort of public disclosure of private facts covers the intentional public disclosure of private information—including intimate images—that a reasonable person would find highly offensive and that is not of legitimate public concern. The intrusion upon seclusion tort covers unauthorized access to private information or private spaces. Many states have codified these common law torts in digital privacy statutes that provide additional statutory damages.
The intentional or reckless infliction of severe emotional distress through extreme and outrageous conduct is actionable in most states. Posting intimate images of a former partner with intent to harm them satisfies the outrageous conduct element in virtually every jurisdiction that has addressed the question. Documented psychological harm—counseling records, medical records, evidence of depression or PTSD—strengthens a damages claim based on emotional distress.
Beyond common law torts, many states have enacted civil statutes specifically authorizing damages actions for non-consensual pornography. These statutes often provide for actual damages, injunctive relief, attorney’s fees, and in some cases enhanced statutory damages. State-specific civil remedies can be more powerful than common law claims because they eliminate some of the traditional elements of common law torts and provide clearer remedial frameworks.
Preserve all evidence immediately: screenshots of the posts, URLs, usernames, and any communications from the perpetrator. Do not reach out to the perpetrator to request removal—this alerts them and rarely produces reliable results. File DMCA takedown notices if you hold the copyright. Report to law enforcement with documentation of the criminal conduct. Contact platforms directly through their trust and safety reporting mechanisms with supporting documentation.
Most importantly, contact an attorney. The legal options available to revenge porn victims are substantial, but they must be pursued strategically and promptly. Search engines deindex content more readily when presented with legal documentation. Platforms respond more reliably to attorney-drafted demands than informal reports. And the window for certain legal actions—including certain injunctive remedies—can be affected by delay.
Revision Legal’s Internet attorneys handle revenge porn matters with the urgency and sensitivity these situations require. Contact us today for a confidential consultation about your options.
Mercedes-Benz was sued for featuring street art in a photo shoot without permission under the Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act. Here’s what the case decided.
Read more about Street Art, Architectural Copyright, and Mercedes
eSports tournaments and streaming raise complex copyright questions around game footage, broadcasts, and player likenesses. Here’s how copyright law applies in competitive gaming.
Read more about Copyright Infringement and eSports
VR developers face uncharted copyright territory around virtual environments, user-generated content, and real-world replications. Here’s how existing copyright law applies to VR.
Read more about Virtual Reality and Copyright Law for Developers