9 ms·

Revenge porn: More than 200 prosecuted under new law

36 points by cjg 10y ago

Shonky 10y ago
How is this tech news? Oh, was it filmed and distributed using smartphones and internet? Yes, then it's a tech news. Technology how to detect these type of content using AI - that could be a tech news, not merely a fact of some angry ex uploading naughty pics.
- semi-extrinsic 10y ago
  How do you propose AI figure out based on a movie that the person in the movie consented to the making of the movie, but not to distribution afterwards? I would suggest even a skilled human cannot do that.
  - wingerlang 10y ago
    Perhaps it could run facial analysis, find the social media accounts of the person and check the messages. Cross reference with messages of friend and old boyfriends mentioned on e.g. FB relationship status. Run some sentiment analysis towards possible SO's to see if there are bad intentions involved. I am joking, of course.
    - Shivetya 10y ago
      joking now, twenty years or less from now we might not be so sure. when everything is water marked so it can be tracked computers will have an easier time of sorting it out.
    - teraflop 10y ago
      I believe that you're joking, but essentially the same concept -- the idea that someone's public-facing behavior is evidence of what they've consented to in private -- is sadly, disturbingly prevalent in sexual assault cases.
      - circlefavshape 10y ago
        Afaics this is because there are no other forms of evidence available in sexual assault cases where what's being contested is consent. Two people have had sex, but testify differently over whether one of them said "yes". How do you figure out which one is telling the truth? I know it's very distressing for the victim, but if we keep "innocent until proven guilty" while making circumstantial evidence inadmissible then I don't see how anyone could ever be successfully prosecuted for this kind of assault
- PhasmaFelis 10y ago
  New technology enables new crimes, which in turn inspire new laws? Of course that's tech news. (Besides which, Hacker News is not just for tech news. Read the guidelines.)
  - Shonky 10y ago
    I enjoy non-tech news on HN. I should have made myself clearer, that I am kind of disappointed with BBC.
yodsanklai 10y ago
Just curious, suppose you have 'private' pictures of someone that you took with their consent, is it legal show them around (without sharing them?)?
- InclinedPlane 10y ago
  Did they give consent to showing them around?
  - wodenokoto 10y ago
    I think the thought is, that basically no pictures you take of anybody come with any formal consent of showing them around.
    - nl 10y ago
      This maybe true, but some may well come with a expectation of privacy.
    - Jabbles 10y ago
      http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2016/22/enacted http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2016/22/enacted The law relates to "a photograph or film which shows, or appears to show, another person (“B”) in an intimate situation," which is further defined: "a person is in an “intimate situation” if— (a)the person is engaging or participating in, or present during, an act which— (i)a reasonable person would consider to be a sexual act, and (ii)is not of a kind ordinarily done in public, or (b)the person’s genitals, buttocks or breasts are exposed or covered only with underwear."
    - InclinedPlane 10y ago
      Thought? No, the law. As Jabbles points out. How about this. Would you be comfortable with someone who had an intimate/sexual photo of you sharing it around? Don't be shitty to other people. Why is this hard?
- Jabbles 10y ago
  http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2016/22/enacted http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2016/22/enacted Probably illegal, depending on the exact circumstances. "a photograph or film is disclosed if it, or any data or other thing which is capable of being converted into it, is given, shown or made available to a person other than B."
kahrkunne 10y ago
Stupid censorship. The only thing that should make "revenge porn" illegal is the copyright issue of the people who share this material not having the copyright.
- cLeEOGPw 10y ago
  You should leave these kind of issues to the people without Asperger's to take care of. I understand that some people lack social awareness, but I don't understand people who refuse to acknowledge that they have no say on the matter because of, let's say, a certain kind of incompetence.
  - sctb 10y ago
    You can't make these kinds of personal attacks here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- davidcelis 10y ago
  So you'd be okay with a(n ex) partner posting intimate pictures and/or videos of you online for the whole world to see? Without you saying it's okay? Your face totally visible? Many wouldn't. It can be life-ruining.
  - kahrkunne 10y ago
    I wouldn't send intimate pictures to anyone in the first place, because that goes against what I find moral. I respect others' choice to engage in these things, but the last thing we need is more laws that can get people locked up for posting pictures online, when there was already a perfectly usable law in place (copyright).
    - nl 10y ago
      Err.. no. Firstly, the copyright of the pictures is almost always likely to reside with the person taking the pictures who is often the one sharing them. Secondly, in many/most jurisdictions many/most forms of copyright violation fall under civil, not criminal law. However, this is a criminal act and the penalty should be much higher.
throwaway4546 10y ago
Is all revenge porn barred under the law or are there circumstances to take into account? If your longtime spouse cheats on you, turns your world upside, and further abandons you, is not revenge porn some people's last power they have to (equally immorally) strike back?
- JulianMorrison 10y ago
  The law doesn't any more allow "justified" revenge porn than it allows "justified" duelling. You will go to jail.
- xupybd 10y ago
  I don't know if the law should be written to allow people to "strike back". Self defence is one thing but revenge is not a good justification. If you allow revenge for one action where do you draw the line? After generations everyone would have cause to "strike back" at someone.
- cheriot 10y ago
  People uploading revenge porn deserve to be punched in the nose, but I'm still guilty of assault if I do it.
- karmachameleon2 10y ago
  So "revenge porn" is bad because it hurts people's feelings or something, and that's why it should be criminalized! But cheating on someone shouldn't be criminalized even though it hurts at least as much!
  - pjc50 10y ago
    That used to be the case, and it was terrible. Still is in Saudi Arabia.
    - karmachameleon2 10y ago
      The point was the double-standard (that shouldn't exist)
a_imho 10y ago
mitigating responsibility
xupybd 10y ago
Perhaps it's time for law makers to think about going after those who profit by hosting these images? I'd much rather see resources spent taking these guys down, over going after the likes of Mega.
- dsfyu404ed 10y ago
  So Pornhub and every other tube site that allows user submissions?
pjc50 10y ago
A useful step. It's worth carefully parsing this section: "(5)In proceedings for an offence under subsection (1), A has a defence if the following matter is established— (a)B was in the intimate situation shown in the photograph or film, (b)B was not in the intimate situation as a result of a deliberate act of another person to which B did not agree, and (c)when B was in the intimate situation— (i)B was in a place to which members of the public had access (whether or not on payment of a fee), and (ii)members of the public were present." .. which is kind of clunkily worded, but seems to be there to provide a defence for people taking photos of those voluntarily exposing themselves in public. I'm not quite sure how this will be applied to tabloid telescopic voyeurism. A sufficiently aggressive prosecutor could either kill the Daily Mail overnight or force them to admit that most of their "snaps" are in fact staged publicity.
NumberCruncher 10y ago
I listened to the story of Chrissy. My takeaway is "Before drinking until blacking out make sure you are in the right company!" People may change so practically there is no such thing as "right company"...
andythro77 10y ago
hi, am Anderson, i had my friend help me hack my ex's email, facebook, whatsapp,and his phone cause i suspected he was cheating. all he asked for was a his phone number. he's email is (cyberlord7714@gmail.com)..IF u need help tell him Anderson referred you to him and he'll help. Am sure his going to help you do it, good luck

36 points by cjg 10y ago

How is this tech news? Oh, was it filmed and distributed using smartphones and internet? Yes, then it's a tech news. Technology how to detect these type of content using AI - that could be a tech news, not merely a fact of some angry ex uploading naughty pics.

semi-extrinsic 10y ago
How do you propose AI figure out based on a movie that the person in the movie consented to the making of the movie, but not to distribution afterwards? I would suggest even a skilled human cannot do that.
- wingerlang 10y ago
  Perhaps it could run facial analysis, find the social media accounts of the person and check the messages. Cross reference with messages of friend and old boyfriends mentioned on e.g. FB relationship status. Run some sentiment analysis towards possible SO's to see if there are bad intentions involved. I am joking, of course.
  - Shivetya 10y ago
    joking now, twenty years or less from now we might not be so sure. when everything is water marked so it can be tracked computers will have an easier time of sorting it out.
  - teraflop 10y ago
    I believe that you're joking, but essentially the same concept -- the idea that someone's public-facing behavior is evidence of what they've consented to in private -- is sadly, disturbingly prevalent in sexual assault cases.
    - circlefavshape 10y ago
      Afaics this is because there are no other forms of evidence available in sexual assault cases where what's being contested is consent. Two people have had sex, but testify differently over whether one of them said "yes". How do you figure out which one is telling the truth? I know it's very distressing for the victim, but if we keep "innocent until proven guilty" while making circumstantial evidence inadmissible then I don't see how anyone could ever be successfully prosecuted for this kind of assault
PhasmaFelis 10y ago
New technology enables new crimes, which in turn inspire new laws? Of course that's tech news. (Besides which, Hacker News is not just for tech news. Read the guidelines.)
- Shonky 10y ago
  I enjoy non-tech news on HN. I should have made myself clearer, that I am kind of disappointed with BBC.

yodsanklai 10y ago

Just curious, suppose you have 'private' pictures of someone that you took with their consent, is it legal show them around (without sharing them?)?

InclinedPlane 10y ago
Did they give consent to showing them around?
- wodenokoto 10y ago
  I think the thought is, that basically no pictures you take of anybody come with any formal consent of showing them around.
  - nl 10y ago
    This maybe true, but some may well come with a expectation of privacy.
  - Jabbles 10y ago
    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2016/22/enacted http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2016/22/enacted The law relates to "a photograph or film which shows, or appears to show, another person (“B”) in an intimate situation," which is further defined: "a person is in an “intimate situation” if— (a)the person is engaging or participating in, or present during, an act which— (i)a reasonable person would consider to be a sexual act, and (ii)is not of a kind ordinarily done in public, or (b)the person’s genitals, buttocks or breasts are exposed or covered only with underwear."
  - InclinedPlane 10y ago
    Thought? No, the law. As Jabbles points out. How about this. Would you be comfortable with someone who had an intimate/sexual photo of you sharing it around? Don't be shitty to other people. Why is this hard?
Jabbles 10y ago
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2016/22/enacted http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2016/22/enacted Probably illegal, depending on the exact circumstances. "a photograph or film is disclosed if it, or any data or other thing which is capable of being converted into it, is given, shown or made available to a person other than B."

kahrkunne 10y ago

Stupid censorship. The only thing that should make "revenge porn" illegal is the copyright issue of the people who share this material not having the copyright.

cLeEOGPw 10y ago
You should leave these kind of issues to the people without Asperger's to take care of. I understand that some people lack social awareness, but I don't understand people who refuse to acknowledge that they have no say on the matter because of, let's say, a certain kind of incompetence.
- sctb 10y ago
  You can't make these kinds of personal attacks here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
davidcelis 10y ago
So you'd be okay with a(n ex) partner posting intimate pictures and/or videos of you online for the whole world to see? Without you saying it's okay? Your face totally visible? Many wouldn't. It can be life-ruining.
- kahrkunne 10y ago
  I wouldn't send intimate pictures to anyone in the first place, because that goes against what I find moral. I respect others' choice to engage in these things, but the last thing we need is more laws that can get people locked up for posting pictures online, when there was already a perfectly usable law in place (copyright).
  - nl 10y ago
    Err.. no. Firstly, the copyright of the pictures is almost always likely to reside with the person taking the pictures who is often the one sharing them. Secondly, in many/most jurisdictions many/most forms of copyright violation fall under civil, not criminal law. However, this is a criminal act and the penalty should be much higher.

throwaway4546 10y ago

Is all revenge porn barred under the law or are there circumstances to take into account? If your longtime spouse cheats on you, turns your world upside, and further abandons you, is not revenge porn some people's last power they have to (equally immorally) strike back?

JulianMorrison 10y ago
The law doesn't any more allow "justified" revenge porn than it allows "justified" duelling. You will go to jail.
xupybd 10y ago
I don't know if the law should be written to allow people to "strike back". Self defence is one thing but revenge is not a good justification. If you allow revenge for one action where do you draw the line? After generations everyone would have cause to "strike back" at someone.
cheriot 10y ago
People uploading revenge porn deserve to be punched in the nose, but I'm still guilty of assault if I do it.
karmachameleon2 10y ago
So "revenge porn" is bad because it hurts people's feelings or something, and that's why it should be criminalized! But cheating on someone shouldn't be criminalized even though it hurts at least as much!
- pjc50 10y ago
  That used to be the case, and it was terrible. Still is in Saudi Arabia.
  - karmachameleon2 10y ago
    The point was the double-standard (that shouldn't exist)

a_imho 10y ago

mitigating responsibility

xupybd 10y ago

Perhaps it's time for law makers to think about going after those who profit by hosting these images? I'd much rather see resources spent taking these guys down, over going after the likes of Mega.

dsfyu404ed 10y ago
So Pornhub and every other tube site that allows user submissions?

pjc50 10y ago

A useful step. It's worth carefully parsing this section: "(5)In proceedings for an offence under subsection (1), A has a defence if the following matter is established— (a)B was in the intimate situation shown in the photograph or film, (b)B was not in the intimate situation as a result of a deliberate act of another person to which B did not agree, and (c)when B was in the intimate situation— (i)B was in a place to which members of the public had access (whether or not on payment of a fee), and (ii)members of the public were present." .. which is kind of clunkily worded, but seems to be there to provide a defence for people taking photos of those voluntarily exposing themselves in public. I'm not quite sure how this will be applied to tabloid telescopic voyeurism. A sufficiently aggressive prosecutor could either kill the Daily Mail overnight or force them to admit that most of their "snaps" are in fact staged publicity.

NumberCruncher 10y ago

I listened to the story of Chrissy. My takeaway is "Before drinking until blacking out make sure you are in the right company!" People may change so practically there is no such thing as "right company"...

andythro77 10y ago

hi, am Anderson, i had my friend help me hack my ex's email, facebook, whatsapp,and his phone cause i suspected he was cheating. all he asked for was a his phone number. he's email is (cyberlord7714@gmail.com)..IF u need help tell him Anderson referred you to him and he'll help. Am sure his going to help you do it, good luck