3 ms·
I don't think it would do that, unless the original was an "intimate visual depiction." However, I do think it would allow, say, Trump to sue people who made o
by tivert 2y ago
I don't think it would do that, unless the original was an "intimate visual depiction."
However, I do think it would allow, say, Trump to sue people who made or distributed an image of him appearing in a diaper (IIRC I think that has been a fairly common way to mock him as a crybaby).
- Laremere 2y agoINAL, not legal advice: The existing legal code which this bill modified is linked from the bill and available here: http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:15%20section:6851%20edition:prelim) http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:15%20section:6... In this, it defines "intimate visual depiction". I see nothing here that would qualify in an image of Trump being in a diaper.