Should revenge porn web sites be made illegal?

If NAMBLA is allowed to keep their site, this guy should keep his. That's my 2 cents. And the fact that any idiot in this day and age allows him/herself to be photographed naked by ANYONE is asking for trouble.

MarineTpartier said:

If NAMBLA is allowed to keep their site, this guy should keep his. That's my 2 cents. And the fact that any idiot in this day and age allows him/herself to be photographed naked by ANYONE is asking for trouble.

Click to expand...

Unless you don't care who sees your birthday suit.

MarineTpartier said:

If NAMBLA is allowed to keep their site, this guy should keep his. That's my 2 cents. And the fact that any idiot in this day and age allows him/herself to be photographed naked by ANYONE is asking for trouble.

Click to expand...

NAMBLA is a disgusting and evil organization. They do have the right to have a web site advocating their views. They do not have the right to post any actual child pornography or copyrighted material that they don't own.

I agree with you for the most part about getting photographed naked. I wouldn't allow it to be done to me. The one exception would be a highly skilled photographer taking artistic nudes. However, in that case it had better be someone you really trust, and there had better be a signed contract specifying exactly how the photos may and may not be used.

Luna Tick said:

NAMBLA is a disgusting and evil organization. They do have the right to have a web site advocating their views. They do not have the right to post any actual child pornography or copyrighted material that they don't own.

I agree with you for the most part about getting photographed naked. I wouldn't allow it to be done to me. The one exception would be a highly skilled photographer taking artistic nudes. However, in that case it had better be someone you really trust, and there had better be a signed contract specifying exactly how the photos may and may not be used.

Click to expand...

The North American Marlon Brando Look-Alikes club?

What is wrong with them?

Luna Tick said:

Um ... no. Your posts aren't even worth reading because you refuse to acknowledge fact.

Click to expand...

Just more deflection and dishonesty on your part here.
And I too could do the childish "babble, babble, babble," thing back to you. But I choose to be more of an adult at this point.
And what you said was dishonest because I have acknowledge fact. It is you who haven't yet.

Luna Tick said:

Your own quote of the law proves that, though you highlighted the wrong part.

Click to expand...

False. Wrong!
Dishonesty on your part.
What I quoted applied to the comment I made. You do not seem to understand that for some reason. Go figure!
I guess you just like misrepresenting what another has posted. What a shame.
And as that was the part that applied to the comment I made, it also wasn't the wrong part as you seem to think. Which is really hilarious of you to even say because your comment defies logic.

Luna Tick said:

It is a fact that whoever takes a photograph owns the copyright and does so whether it's registered or not. Your own quote of the law proves that, though you highlighted the wrong part. This is not a matter of opinion.

Click to expand...

Again with the defying of logic. Absolutely puzzling.
Well you are wrong. The part I quoted applied to the comment I made, and could not be wrong.

Luna Tick said:

It is fact, and you don't have the right to make up your own facts. If you published without my consent a photo that I took, I could sue you and I would win. I've done it to another person before.

Click to expand...

Did you intentionally take the photo for them and give it to them as a gift without any preconditions?
Of course you didn't. So stop trying act like you have knowledge of what we are really talking about here. Because you obviously don't.

Like I said, ask your lawyer that specific question and you will receive an answer in the affirmative.

Luna Tick said:

I'm a photographer. I know what I'm talking about. I consult with an attorney to make sure my work doesn't get stolen. If you refuse to acknowledge the fact of what the law says, your posts aren't even worth reading.

Click to expand...

:naughty
No, you do not know what "we" are talking about.
"You" are talking about initial ownership. Of that, I have no doubt that you are familiar with Copywriting. But that in no way makes you familiar with what we are talking about.

What you fail to acknowledge is that "we" are talking about a different scenario where the image was given as a gift without any preconditions. And even a transfer of ownership. Once that has been done, the other person can do with it as they wish.

Luna Tick said:

In case you're not familiar with the case, there was a web site run by a sleazy and unethical man named Hunter Moore in which people angry at their ex's would post nude photos of them against their will, photos that were originally intended to be private. They were photos that usually resulted from "sexting." Very often the victims of the unwanted uploads protested and tried to get their photos removed. Moore, predictably, refused. That site was called Isanyoneup. I can say that because it's since been taken down. Moore had been confronted by some of his victims and had always shirked responsibility with the line, "I didn't upload those photos. Someone else did." Yeah, but you set up the site that encouraged them to. Fortunately, his site is now gone. He chose to get rid of it, maybe because of pressure or guilt or legal threats. I'm not sure. That's the good news. The bad news is someone else put up the same kind of site to replace it. I won't say that site's name. The twist with the new site is it includes a link to a "lawyer" that can help them get their photos removed. Of course it's not a real lawyer. It's just the site owner getting people to pay hundreds of dollars to get the photos removed that belong to them anyway and that they never authorized being published.

The poll is whether it should be illegal to put up revenge porn sites like this. "Yes" means they should be made illegal. "No" means they should be legal.

Click to expand...

Yes - porn is only ok if it's consensual.

That doesn't just mean the act a the time of filming (etc) - it means the posting of said film (etc) as well.

Luna Tick said:

I won't say that site's name.

Click to expand...

I find it hard to make a well considered decision if I don't have all the evidence. Tell me the name of the site and I'll tell you what I think.

don't want your nudie pics ending up on the web, don't take them in the first place...

StillBallin75 said:

don't want your nudie pics ending up on the web, don't take them in the first place...

Click to expand...

This is very practical advise, but doesn't really address whether those pics are placed without one's consent into the possession of those who mean ill will with them.

The biggest issue of this is morality and this should be in no way illegal. Although I find the idea of sharing someone's nude pictures without their knowledge highly reprehensible, this cannot be deemed illegal. The easiest argument to make would be: If your significant other gave you a necklace (piece of their property given with consent to another person) and their is a break up on less than reasonable terms, should it be illegal for you to give that necklace to someone else?
I see that this may seem to some as an unfair comparison, and in the sense of morality it may be, but in sense of the law it should not (and will never be) illegal to pass on property, that was give with 100% consent, to another person.
Now some of you argue it is the intent that matters. But intent is a moot point in this as the sole legal intent was to pass a naked picture to person X, once that piece of property becomes person X's all intent with that picture is now theirs and no longer the original owners. It is as if you gave someone a birthday gift with the sole intent of only them using it, but after a year they decide to give it away at a yard sale. Do you believe this should be illegal? I'm going to guess no.

Again to summarize and hopefully end this a little; despite that these sites are morally wrong, there are in no way illegal. (Unless you are discussing pictures that were taken and spread without consent, then that is 100% illegal and regarded as stalking, stealing of property, and distribution of stolen property which will carry a nice little prison sentence)