Large Scale Hack Results in Nude Photes of Celebrities on the Internet

[alfred russel]

Apparently one of the celebrities who had nude photos on the web was McKayle Maroney, of 2012 London Olympics "pouty face" fame.

Trouble is she only just turned 18, and the nude photos that were hacked and released were when she was under 18.  Which means they were child porn, and anyone who distributed those pics is guilty of distributing child porn.



I hope they nail those pervs to the wall.

Actually, why stop at the distributers? What about the downloaders? We could possibly put 10s of millions in jail for years, and add as many to the sex offender registeries. Think how much safer our streets will be. 

If any of you grabbed any nude pics of McKayla Maroney I'd be formatting your hard drive about now.

Could one could interpret this as a crown prosecutor giving potential child pornographers advice on how to destroy the evidence of their crimes.

[The Brain]

I for one haven't considered looking at the pics. It would be tacky.

[Jacob]

I for one haven't considered looking at the pics. It would be tacky.

Use kleenex.

[Berkut]

This article is not too far from how I feel about this: http://www.playboy.com/articles/jennifer-lawrence-nudes

I did a quick search for the pictures when they first came up, but the first few links were empty. Since then, I haven't looked; though I'm still interested.

But even though I'm interested - and even though I might in fact look at some of those pictures at some point, it doesn't make doing so not wrong. It's pretty clearly wrong to hack those pictures in the first place, to distribute them, to look at them, and to celebrate looking at them.

Is there really any debate about that?

I mean, among actual rational people?

[Jacob]

Is there really any debate about that?

I mean, among actual rational people?

Well, there certainly seems to be a fair bit of celebratory content generated in response. Whether you consider those people, or the people who ignore the issue all together and just discuss the aesthetics of the pictures, as rational is your call.

[derspiess]

For one thread I get to avoid Jake's judgment

[Berkut]

Is there really any debate about that?

I mean, among actual rational people?

Well, there certainly seems to be a fair bit of celebratory content generated in response. Whether you consider those people, or the people who ignore the issue all together and just discuss the aesthetics of the pictures, as rational is your call.

People who rationalize this are basically the same as people who rationalize speeding regularly.

Personally, I am ok with accepting that (like speeding) this is something that is clearly morally wrong, yet the evaluation of added harm done to the victim is trivial enough that I probably would not let it me deter me from checking them out if I find them interesting.

So I think I am fine with accepting that I should not look at this in a strictly moral sense, but willing to live with it. I think most people, even those who try to rationalize, know that it is, of course, wrong to look at someone private stuff if they don't want you to do so.

[Barrister]

Apparently one of the celebrities who had nude photos on the web was McKayle Maroney, of 2012 London Olympics "pouty face" fame.

Trouble is she only just turned 18, and the nude photos that were hacked and released were when she was under 18.  Which means they were child porn, and anyone who distributed those pics is guilty of distributing child porn.



I hope they nail those pervs to the wall.

Actually, why stop at the distributers? What about the downloaders? We could possibly put 10s of millions in jail for years, and add as many to the sex offender registeries. Think how much safer our streets will be. 

If any of you grabbed any nude pics of McKayla Maroney I'd be formatting your hard drive about now.

Could one could interpret this as a crown prosecutor giving potential child pornographers advice on how to destroy the evidence of their crimes.

I view it as advising people who are in the possession of child pornography a way to destroy said child pornography.

[Jacob]

For one thread I get to avoid Jake's judgment

It is touching that my judgment means more to you than BB's

[Malthus]

For one thread I get to avoid Jake's judgment

It is touching that my judgment means more to you than BB's

Truly, the judgment of Canadians is a mighty force. 

[Ideologue]

Has BB gotten around to shopping the whole membership list of Languish to the 'authorities' yet?  Just to be on the safe-side, as after all some of us did read this thread on the pictures and all of us would have seen the thread title on the Index page.

There's nothing wrong in discussing this (it's a valid news story), and there's probably nothing wrong with sharing a link - what's against the law is possessing child porn (and AR is right - having a pic in your cache probably counts as possessing).

Whoosh.

Whoosh is right - whatever point you were trying to make completely escapes me.

That you have an authoritarian streak running through you're character.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

It's only his morality that's inadequate.  His character is sterling.

[Ideologue]

For one thread I get to avoid Jake's judgment

It is touching that my judgment means more to you than BB's

Truly, the judgment of Canadians is a mighty force. 

WWJD: the right thing condescendingly

WWBBD: the wrong thing well

WWMD: buy something

[Grallon]

Any male nudes made it out?  Zac Efron to start with - Nicholas Hoult?  OMG! Logan Lerman!  !

Really in this day and age, posting nudes online should be a big no-no for anyone - especially for celebrities!



G.

[DontSayBanana]

There's nothing wrong in discussing this (it's a valid news story), and there's probably nothing wrong with sharing a link - what's against the law is possessing child porn (and AR is right - having a pic in your cache probably counts as possessing).

Such is the rule, from what I've heard.  Which is absolutely stupid, since just clicking an unlabeled link and then immediately closing the image when you realize what it is would still leave a copy in the cache.  So an accidental click can leave you fucked if you're not a total paranoid nut who's erasing the cache and overwriting the specific hard drive sectors to erase the residual data.

I start having issues with heavy-handed and sometimes completely disingenuous definitions of "possession" when the users in question could legitimately not even know that they're in "possession" of the data in question.

[viper37]

Could one could interpret this as a crown prosecutor giving potential child pornographers advice on how to destroy the evidence of their crimes.

No, he knows perfectly well that formatting isn't enough.  If the NSA can crack the Tor network, any agency can easily unformat a drive.