"Revenge Porn", outlawed in California. Is this a First Amendment Issue or not?

haarvik
If you want to be perverted and have nudie pics taken of yourself, right or wrong really doesn't play into it. You consented. Do I agree with someone posting it? No. But then again I have enough common sense not to have them taken in the first place. If you are depending on the state to protect you from your own stupidity, then I'm sorry but you are apparently to ignorant to be on the loose in the open.

Firstly, perverted, lol. secondly consenting to taking photos and consenting to them being posted are two different things.

Hopefully this will lead to the paps being forced out of work

I never understood the thought pattern of taking picture during an intimate moment.

Why? Are you assuming that it will go away? then it is better not to do it.

I barely let anyone take a picture of me with my shirt off.

And people let people take picture doing "stuff"? nothing goes inside the head when that is happening?

No matter how many years i been with someone, im not letting anyone(my partner, my family, girl friend, the "extra") take any intimate pictures.

You play the game, you pay the price.

One good thing about this thread.... it shows how messed up peoples morals are

reply to post by luciddream


Wish I could star this more! Exactly my point. If you take these images/have them taken of you, then you can assume at some point these will become public. Happens all too often to be naive enough to think they won't. An ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure.

This is why we continue to lose our freedoms. This is why we have things like the TSA etc. People don't think for themselves and get into trouble. Instead of admitting the mistake, they want to blame someone else and then push for the government to pass a law protecting others who lack the same common sense.

reply to post by haarvik


How could that ever be the assumption? I would never assume that. Especially not in the context I provided in my last post.

It would be way different if I was having something casual and allowed something like that to happen, in that context, it would be reckless.

benrl
If you are stupid enough to trust someone with nudes of you, well you deserve what ever happens.

It's called the consequences of your own actions, and it's not governments job to protect you from that.

I agree 100%.

Professionals have to sign a "release" document to appear, this grants the person who took the film the rights to do as they please with it.

I full well plan on having a sitdown with my two daughters (well, the oldest is six, so...might be a *little* while), but I intend to do something to graphically illustrate to them exactly how the consequences of such a thing can play out.

And frankly, the whole idea of a "REVENGE PORN LAW" is just silly. The simple fact is, you GAVE someone something with NO (NONE, NADA, ZILCH) legal stipulation as to what they can or cannot do with it later on.


Does it absolutely suck? Yes. Is it amazingly low and cretonous to do such a thing, YES!.


Is it actually worthy of having a law? No. Not IMHO.



- SN

reply to post by haarvik


I was at one at my friend's place, i usually don't drink beer when im outside(especially when im driving, even if its 1 beer).. but there was bunch of people around and i didnt wanna be "that" guy who put the mood down, so i took a beer.

Someone took a picture of us together(it was sort of like a 3 yr reunion)... and posted on Facebook.


One Monday i had to call in sick for work, when i came on Tuesday, my boss asked me what happen(i alrdy called in on Monday morning abt the sickness), i said i had Vertigo which lasted 3 days(sat/sun/mon).

He told me "sure you didn't have a hangover!?" he did it in a joking manner so it doesn't look like he is accusing me.

I said "nope, i barely drink"... he said "ah it must be someone else i saw on the picture having fun".

Sadly one of the friend at the reunion also works in the company and is friend with boss's son.


I don't take pictures with alcohol in my hand anymore.

reply to post by SadistNocturne


I disagree. Within the context that I have described throughout this thread is that this type of activity that I have been associated with was under the complete understanding that it was between my husband and I.

That is a contractual agreement albeit a verbal one. There is civil law that would protect individuals under these circumstances. However a breach of this contract walked through the civil court system would never make me whole again which is the purpose of contract law. The damage would be irreparable.

I don't think you are considering all of the different circumstances in which such an event could occur.

reply to post by GrantedBail


Seriously? Have you watched the news in the last 9 or 10 years? How many stars have had their "private" videos show up online? Paris Hilton ring a bell? Pamela Anderson? Should I go on? People will do a lot of things if they think they are going to gain something from it. If you don't put yourself in that position, then it can't happen.

As a photographer (yes, I am one), when I do a shoot I own those images. Unless a written contract specifically stating the usage of said photos exists, then I am free to do what I wish with those photos. Anything less than a written contract is he said/she said and will not hold water in court.

Do I have sympathy for those it happens to? Sure, but it doesn't change the fact that they exercised extremely poor judgement to allow it to happen in the first place. Just because they lacked good judgement doesn't mean we need to government to police it.

reply to post by haarvik


An oral contract is indeed enforceable unless it is prohibited under the Statute of Frauds.

Is An Oral Contract Legally Enforceable?

Generally speaking, an oral contract is indeed legally enforceable (although for most complicated contracts such as those in complex commercial transactions, the contractual parties usually create agreements in writing in order to avoid any dispute regarding the terms). However, certain types of contracts, for example those creating rights and obligations in and over real property, must, as a matter of law, be in writing to be legally enforceable.

reply to post by GrantedBail


And which one of you is going to have a witness that will testify what you say happened was actually what happened?

It also sounds like this happened to you once before, and you are looking for support because you feel the law will protect you when/if you decide to do this again with another mate. Do I exaggerate?

reply to post by haarvik


I think the terms expressed and implied would be applicable here in that the photos were not published for the years prior to divorce proceedings. It would be a judge that would decide. I doubt you would have difficulty convincing a judge that there was an agreement between the parties that the images were private.

reply to post by haarvik


No, it never did happen to me. But, I couldn't even imagine the horror if it had. I see nothing wrong with protecting people from this type of behavior.

GrantedBail
reply to post by SadistNocturne

 

I disagree. Within the context that I have described throughout this thread is that this type of activity that I have been associated with was under the complete understanding that it was between my husband and I.

That is a contractual agreement albeit a verbal one. There is civil law that would protect individuals under these circumstances. However a breach of this contract walked through the civil court system would never make me whole again which is the purpose of contract law. The damage would be irreparable.

I don't think you are considering all of the different circumstances in which such an event could occur.

edit on 2-10-2013 by GrantedBail because: (no reason given)

First of all, sorry about not agreeing with you. I wasn't aware this was an "I agree" thread.


Second, I *personally* think you trusted someone, and they betrayed your trust. Happens every single day. I've had my trust betrayed NUMEROUS times, some times gravely seriously. Am I out seeking legal ramifications? A lawsuit? A new law?


No.


My daughters will be raised, that in this digital age, if there is something you want to do privately, you DO IT PRIVATELY. Not in any way shape or form that could be copied digitally. If it's copied digitally, it is as good as gone around the world and back. I will also inform them of the fact that it is also likely that even *I* might end up seeing photos or videos. I don't think the average child would want that.

I genuinely feel bad that this happened to you. I think the guy who did this to you is a complete ass.

But, *I* personally do not feel he broke the law. If you do, then take him to court. If you feel that civil court cannot "make you whole", perhaps you should consider what being "made whole" is to you.

Is it financial damage awards? What price would make you feel better?

Is it public shame and humiliation? Really? How would you propose going about this?

Is it jailtime? Really? What do *you* think is an appropriate amount of time to spend in jail for this?

If these things seem to be too much, or if you can't quite come to an answer in your own mind on the matter, perhaps you should try to come to some form of peace with the situation. Live and learn, and never, ever do something like this again.

Now, obviously this is not the same as a picture of your naked flesh, but I once saw a friend who genuinely needed help. His car broke down, and he was not quite able to afford a rental. My family had an additional vehicle, my prized 1999 Pontiac Firebird, candy apple red. I said, you can use my car. Keep it full of gas, and return it full of gas. Use it as long as you need it.

Three months went by, and he's not returning phone calls, I start hearing a few rumors, etc. I contacted him several ways and made it clear that if my car was not returned by X date, that I would be contacting the police. X date came and went, he did not return the car.

I called the police. I explained the situation. The officer asked me if I voluntarily gave him the keys, and I said yes. He said then it was a civil matter, and there was absolutely nothing the police department could do to help.

I consulted an attorney, to the tune of $450, and was informed that civil court could not necessarily force him to return my car, or reimburse me for the cost of the car. They could award a judgement against him, but, if he couldn't pay or wouldn't return the vehicle, there was only *so* much that could be done. I was advised to try to talk to my friend and do what it took to get him to return the vehicle voluntarily.

Good news, I eventually got my prized 1999 Pontiac Firebird back. A few months later, I got about $500 worth of parking tickets in the mail, just because I'm a nice guy.

Do you know what I learned from this?


You have to be AWFULLY certain you can trust someone. And if they end up untrustworthy, there is almost nothing you can do.


Sorry.

Of course there is always the option to say no to such pictures and video during the relationship. Now wouldn't that be the easiest thing to do?

Last post on the subject and then I am done.

I think I have stated my position fairly clearly:
Don't engage in it and it won't happen.
Photographer owns any images taken with his camera.
Government should not be in the business of protecting someone who lacks morals or has poor judgement.

When we allow these types of laws to be passed, we set ourselves up for unintended consequences. As someone eluded to earlier, when will our news cease to have images in them because they are no longer allowed to show it without your written consent? I don't agree with someone doing this, but as long as people don't think before acting, it is going to happen. It should be taken as a lesson not to engage in something you may regret later.

reply to post by SadistNocturne


Just another casualty of the Me Generation. There is absolutely no honor among people these days. A man's word used to be his bond. I miss the old days.

Now, nothing is either sacred or private.

reply to post by SadistNocturne


I didn't happen to me. But I am defending other people that it has happened to or that may have happen in the future. I am like that.

You don't have to agree. I knew there would be a debate the moment I decided to start this OP. You and I are disagreeing and that is OK.

Your girls are young. I betcha you change your mind later on since it is normally females who are victimized. You need look no further than the Steubenville High School case to find a reason to perhaps agree with the law. That didn't even include consensual behavior but you can see how this law most likely has provisions for these types of incidences as well. This stuff goes on in college as well when our children are legally adults.

GrantedBail
It is an assault as far as I am concerned and has already been codified into criminal law statutes.

At common law, an assault is an intentional act by one person that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent harmful or offensive contact.

edit on 2-10-2013 by GrantedBail because: (no reason given)

Umm, yeah.

Here's a legal definition of "assault". Check all you want, I doubt you'll find much deviance.

assault

1) v. the threat or attempt to strike another, whether successful or not, provided the target is aware of the danger. The assaulter must be reasonably capable of carrying through the attack. In some states if the assault is with a deadly weapon (such as sniping with a rifle), the intended victim does not need to know of the peril. Other state laws distinguish between different degrees (first or second) of assault depending on whether there is actual hitting, injury or just a threat. "Aggravated assault" is an attack connected with the commission of another crime, such as beating a clerk during a robbery or a particularly vicious attack. 2) n. the act of committing an assault, as in "there was an assault down on Third Avenue." Assault is both a criminal wrong, for which one may be charged and tried, and civil wrong for which the target may sue for damages due to the assault, including for mental distress.


As a society, we need to learn that not EVERYTHING makes you a VICTIM.

There are some things you simply need to work through, pick up, learn from, and move on.




- SN

Calif will not be able to enforce the law in many cases.

All someone has to do is report a break in to there home and "missing computer" or DVD" with the photos on them and then take the photos on a disk to a public site and download them and claim that a thief did it.

Another feel good nanny state law that is worthless.