Anyone else had their vids/pics put online by an ex?

6/4/2013 8:33:56 AM

Quote :

"I will post in your thread, since no one else will."

6/4/2013 7:01:37 PM

Tough crowd

6/4/2013 7:02:27 PM

my ex destroyed the tape

6/4/2013 7:57:58 PM

i had all of mine on a phone (2 girls) and got pushed off of a boat with my phone in my pocket

so all of mine is gone

6/4/2013 8:06:38 PM

6/4/2013 8:08:53 PM

I haven't, but Ms. Sprint Cup did about 2 years ago. She sent them to her Boyfriend when she was a freshman at Clemson.









[Edited on June 4, 2013 at 9:38 PM. Reason : .]

6/4/2013 9:38:23 PM

She needs to clean her goddamn room

[Edited on June 4, 2013 at 9:39 PM. Reason : I thought this thread would stay sfw]

6/4/2013 9:39:22 PM

California is thinking about making revenge porn illegal

8/30/2013 11:33:12 PM

I don't see how banning revenge porn could pass constitutional muster. Not sure how New Jersey's ban is still viable.

If anyone can find NJ's statute, could you please post it?

8/31/2013 7:52:22 AM

sup tball?

I'm Krallum and I approved this message.

8/31/2013 8:50:52 AM

anyone that emails or text nudes of themselves now a days is a fucking idiot.

8/31/2013 9:04:37 AM

dis nigga dont know about snapchat

I'm Krallum and I approved this message.

8/31/2013 9:15:27 AM

Quote :

"I don't see how banning revenge porn could pass constitutional muster. Not sure how New Jersey's ban is still viable. "

I don't see why they needed a law to ban this kind of stuff in the first place. I doubt the posters of the videos/pictures have copyright agreements or model releases to publish these on commercial sites.

8/31/2013 9:51:49 AM

I'm not sure who actually gives a shit about the Constitution anymore, anyway.

8/31/2013 11:12:36 AM

Supporting the Constitution can actually get your ass put on terrorist watch lists

8/31/2013 4:18:34 PM

Quote :

" I don't see how banning revenge porn could pass constitutional muster. Not sure how New Jersey's ban is still viable. "

Well, under one scenario... Without additional laws being passed, it is copyright law.

Person A takes tit pics, sends them to person B. Person B posts pictures without permission. Person A is the copyright holder of the images , can issue a lawful take down, and presumably seek damages.

In a situation where person b takes pictures of person a's tits... it does get complicated. You could argue posting it is free speech or something, but I suppose the subject could argue they entered into a verbal contract that the photographs would not be distributed.

Making it criminal, yeah, I'm not sure whether that would hold up... But I feel as though there's substantial civil recourse.

8/31/2013 4:57:57 PM

Quote :

"Person A is the copyright holder of the images , can issue a lawful take down, and presumably seek damages. "

I'm no copyright law expert, but without registering it it's probably pretty difficult to claim infringement. I mean, I know it's automatically copyrighted when you create it, but you have to seek protection before you can go after someone for infringement in most cases.

8/31/2013 5:15:10 PM

That will probably limit damages, which is why I said presumably... I don't know the full scope or what you could claim. but I do know its been a tactic used to successfully remove material, and is sufficient for issuing a take down request.

8/31/2013 5:33:07 PM

This Big4Country dude is creepy as shit

8/31/2013 5:47:42 PM

Quote :

"I'm no copyright law expert, but without registering it it's probably pretty difficult to claim infringement"

I wouldn't say it's difficult, but it's a WHOLE lot easier if those images/videos are registered with the copyright office. With digital technology it's actually a lot easier and quicker to find out the copyright owner since a lot of exif data travels with all digital photos and search engines like tineye and Google images has made reverse image search easier.

It's also not the only avenue you can pursue. Most commercial uses of images/videos require all persons in the image to sign a model release that allows certain right holders the permission to use that person's likeness.

For example. If boyfriend (A) take a photo of himself plowing girlfriend (B), he holds the copyright. But if he sells or releases that photo (with a few exceptions), he needs permission from B to do so, since it's her likeness getting plowed that makes that image profitable.
The exceptions would be for mainly editorial use, but since most porn sites are commercial enterprises, they tend to stay away from these kind of pictures and videos.

The big problem with any of this is that most of these sites are hosted outside the jurisdiction of the US, where US copyright law and civil suits involving model releases can be difficult to prosecute. The only course of action would be to target the original content holder (Boyfriend A), which is usually unfruitful for most victims. If states wanted to do something about this though, all they would need to do is to provide a small sliver of support for victims instead of the usual "This is a civil matter, hire an attorney (which most can't afford) to sue your ex, but chances are the legal fees will be worth more than any judgement you'll be awarded."

8/31/2013 6:55:46 PM

Quote :

"since it's her likeness getting plowed that makes that image profitable."

I want this to be written into a supreme court opinion.

8/31/2013 7:55:35 PM

Copyright? If I publish the pic to a free website and don't make any money, what type of damages could you get from me?

Plus, the states are talking about making it criminal. It must be some sort of harassment or something. I initially thought it may go along the lines of making a private fact public, but that's usually just civil, and pictures aren't really facts.

Anyway, if anyone has any tax issues hit me up!

8/31/2013 11:08:31 PM

Quote :

"With digital technology it's actually a lot easier and quicker to find out the copyright owner since a lot of exif data travels with all digital photos and search engines like tineye and Google images has made reverse image search easier."

I would think this is trivially/automatically removed if published on some site used for revenge porn. Sure it would trace it back to location/date/camera if you just uploaded it to Flickr. But even that doesn't settle much for copyright questions. It's of some forensic value but that's it.

8/31/2013 11:15:02 PM

as simple as

jpegoptim --strip-all *.jp*

9/1/2013 2:22:53 AM

I bet the UT girl is just waiting for this

9/1/2013 10:45:29 AM

http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/10/justice/california-revenge-porn-arrest/index.html?hpt=hp_t2


Man charged for running revenge porn website, extortion, etc...

[Edited on December 10, 2013 at 10:51 PM. Reason : MOAR]

12/10/2013 10:50:41 PM

When I read about it on Ars I thought it was Craig Brittain of IsAnybodyDown? but it's some idiot who must have heard about what he was going through a year ago and thought it was a good idea to copy him: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/12/revenge-porn-operator-arrested-charged-with-id-theft/

12/11/2013 4:34:54 AM