'Revenge Porn' legislature - are you following this?

I think it's a good idea, especially in the wake of recent cases where teen rapists shared pictures of the girls they had raped. (A 15 year old girl in Canada killed herself recently after her rapists sent pics of them raping her to the whole school.)

I know that with the reputable amateur sites you already have to sign a form stating that unless the other person in the movie/camming/clip with you is another verified user you cannot include them. I cannot have my hubby in the cam with me or on clips...isn't this the same thing?? Now the government is stepping in...goodbye amateur porn.

I think the whole idea of the revenge porn is a bit...odd, but know this niche and the voyeur/exhibitionist clips are usually set up and regulated at the quality sites. Some of the foreign sites, though...I don't think they are very regulated.

I like you used of accidentally release. hahaha

Some of what I read in that article seems kind of silly. Like restricting the use of identifying info even if it's fake identification used in the video. If it's fake then that just seems stupid to restrict it. It's probably not going to lead back to anyone. If it's real then I would suggest that it's kind of implied consent since if the person wasn't ok with the info being in the video or whatever they would probably protest and walk out of the shoot. Plus I have seen some what of a model release form where info can be added that restrict how the media can be used. I would expect that one could add info saying that the persons real name or address can not be used or must be blurred.

As for the rape and stronger punishment for those who violate people under the age of 16. I would think this would be covered under child porn laws or child sex abuse laws already. Like the laws that say that a person has to be 18 to work in the industry. I also believe that some states if not federal government frown on depictions of rape anyway and may be outlawed. Not sure on that but seems like it is. I know in UT they say that even the depiction of child sex abuse even in cartoon or drawing form is illegal. I have no problem with that. I think that's kind of a good idea. So it seems to me that either they make the current laws have heavier punishments or perhaps do a better job of enforcing current laws. I am speaking as a criminal justice major with a BS. No that's not for bullshit. hahaha

I'm all for being able to go after someone who distributes "revenge porn". Based on a personal situation I had a long time ago that could have ended much worse than it did, I'd be grateful for some recourse if it ever happened again.

You guys have posted a lot of interesting stories that I had not heard.

If some one gives consent and then changes their mind... I would not consider that revenge porn.

If there is a case that involves anyone underage, that has another name & anyone underage is not capable of giving legal consent.

I was reading this the other night, and the wording is a bit odd. While it would likely get rid of the "accidentally released" celebrity sex tapes (in Florida, anyhow), it's not clear what it does to some of the films and the pseudonyms they're taking on. It says the "depicted person" - is that the actual person that's shown in the film, or the person that's being depicted? Not the same thing at all.

It's a great idea. I hope it goes through and people start to take this seriously as a form of assault.

I am sure that most revenge porn based sites are not exactly based on true story's of revenge. Like I doubt Joe Blow really dated had sex with and then posted videos of his GF. Which is kind of what I was thinking of when I talked about implied consent. A pornstar using her real or fake name is her choice and I can't imagine a a girl having sex with her BF would use a fake name if she doesn't expect the video to be posted on the net somewhere. The issue of consent would be in the video being posted and not the act of sex and then would blend into privacy laws or should.

Like if the video is shot in a house then there is an expectation of privacy. If they are out in the open then the expectation of privacy is gone. this is what allows this one guy who take a video camera around his city and film guys with hookers and then posting it on his site to decrease them from doing this is areas near schools and where kids usually hang out or play.

I would think that any person who posts material without consent could be punished by not having a 2257 form filed out by the person or persons in the pictures or video. It's probably a matter of what someone thinks to use against the offender. It also needs someone willing to go through the court system regardless as to how far things have to go so a precedence is set and hopefully in favor of the actual victim.

Last thing I want to say is I think it's nuts those pricks who talked the girl into sending topless pictures of herself were labeled as victims. That would be about as absurd as a rapist being called a victim. It's a fucked up system when people are improperly labeled like that. Sadly schools do retarded shit like that all the time. I recall seeing a story of a girl in a university being told if she pursued prosecution on a guy who raped her then she would be expelled. That's pretty fucked up.