^This is *exactly* how I thought about the issue, Santa. I was (and still am) expecting a wave of animosity from the community for thinking that way, but I whole heartedly agree.

I think there might be civil recompense especially if its done with malice, but criminal is too much

+1 santa

Really, you two think you should be able to distribute intimate photos of former partners to the public without their consent? You two think that people should be able to predict the future if they ever send such a thing to someone they completely trust?

Disturbing.

This is not what I think of when seeing the term "revenge porn." They should come up with another name.

I think that when you take a picture of your dong and send it to someone, you are ceding rights to that picture of your dong. Absolutely.

What if it's a hidden camera, SantaClausowitz? Or not involving sex at all, but just someone changing clothes?

This is a hard issue. It's not as simple as telling people to just live with their decisions.

No, I believe that the absence of legislation on this topic is a healthy sign to the population:

Be CAREFUL.

PS: that was no Re: Putin33.
Lol THM.

Hidden camera is a completely different issue, that does not involve consent

By the way, for clarity:

I think this conversation should be restricted to A) Consensual sex and B) Consensus on the sex being recorded.

That's the particular case that interests me personally (80% of the cases apparently involved material produced by the victim him/herself)

And to answer Putin, I don't think people can predict the future, which is why you should be very careful. And if you aren't that's not the taxpayer's problem

And what about psychiatric information? If you tell your significant other of your mental health history, do they get to broadcast it to the public? How far does this line of thinking go?

" that does not involve consent"

Neither does the distribution of the photos to the public.

"And what about psychiatric information? If you tell your significant other of your mental health history, do they get to broadcast it to the public? How far does this line of thinking go?"

That's not the issue here Putin33. If you want to change the subject open a thread about revealing medical information about a former partner.

No but in sending the photos or making the video you are granting ownership to that person. Perhaps if you sent it in an email and the email clearly said "delete after enjoying these" then you would have a case.

I'm interested in where the line is drawn. People reveal lots of personal details to their partners, I'm wondering how much is now fair game for distribution. Or is just explicit photos?

I think in case of psychiatric problems you're hitting a hard zone automatically, because the person's sharing the details of his psychiatric problems could very well be symptomatic of these same problems, in which case the victim would deserve legal protection for that very reason. That's why I'm not prepared to debate that particular variation to my debate topic here.

"No but in sending the photos or making the video you are granting ownership to that person."

Are you granting ownership to be used for whatever purpose that person wants?

People "consent" to having their pictures taken at schools, they do not consent to the schools using these pictures for any purpose they wish. People "consent" to giving personal information to companies all the time. They do not consent to it being sold without their knowledge and for whatever purpose the companies wish.

Call me a bluff old traditionalist, but I've always thought it generally a good idea to get to know the girl/guy really quite well before creating porn together. I really find it hard to drum up any sympathy at all for the victims of this non-crime. I also strongly agree with the principle that if you give someone a photo you should have no legal rights to demand it back. Naturally anyone with half an ounce of decency would do so, but if we arrested people for lacking decency half of the left wing would live permanently in jail.

@Oct
11/10, perfect composition

I'm sure the same people with the 'devil may care' attitude about distributing photos without people's consent aren't much bothered about the NSA collecting phone logs of European leaders? No, thought not.

@Putin
A perfectly fair comparison, between two completely comparable situations. I'm going to ignore it all the same.

I once had a dream that I had committed murder, and in that dream I convinced myself that the only way to defend myself from the lie detector and from the police was to completely convince myself that I didn't do it, to be in a state of complete denial.
When I awoke from the dream and for a few days thereafter I thought I had actually killed someone, it was a real creepy strange feeling.
I haven't seen my hated step-brother in years, he went missing, I'm still not sure whether I had anything to do with his disappearance or not

You're right, it's not fair. In the one case we're talking about *phone logs* which have never been protected information to begin with. In the other we're talking about ruining people's careers.

Naturally you'd be outraged about the former and not the latter. It's big gubmint, everything they do is dastardly, and everything private citizens do should be legal.

Sending naked pictures of yourself over the internet is a pretty stupid thing to do, but do we really want to set things up in a way where one snapchat when you're 19 ruins the rest of your life? There should be deterrence on both ends of the transaction.

@ Invictus

A couple of points on that. Firstly there are countless opportunities to ruin your life in your late teens. You could catch a nasty STD, hit someone in a car whilst drunk, join the Navy, or join the Communist party whilst hung over in fresher's week. A 19 year old is a fully fledged adult, and along with all the great things that brings comes the ability to screw everything up in a moment of madness.

Secondly I am not convinced it will ruin the rest of your life. It will potentially be a major onconvenience and huge embarassment, but the vast majority of people you know will never even become aware of it.

It can't be the case that there are no repercussions for the poster, Octavious. We can sue people for libel and fraud but not putting revenge porn on the internet for the whole world to see? Does that really make sense to you?

There are reprecussions for the poster. He or she is shown to be a complete arse of the highest order. besides, the whole world doesn't see. The people who see are the handful of lonely little gits who like revenge porn.

Now, if the poster actively posted the images in places so that the victim's friends and family would see them that's a different matter, and I think would be covered by current stalking or sexual harassment laws.