The Off Topic Topic

[Martinus]

I'm not sure if a new law is needed for this, though. Surely posting very personal movies/pictures, even if produced with consent, but published without consent is already illegal? Because unless the couple agreed to put the stuff on the internet from the get go, I would think the implication is that this material is for personal use only.

Publishing without consent is illegal (although there are some grey areas) but I think this is more about the sanction. In most cases, publishing someone's image without consent is simply grounds for damages for an unauthorised use of someone's image - in revenge porn cases, both the motive is more reprehensible and the damage more severe, which is why a criminal law enters the picture. 

[Maladict]

Because so many Dutch prison cells are empty we are apparently going to import prisoners from Norway.

[CountDeMoney]

A Brunswick man became the first person in Frederick County and possibly the first in Maryland to be charged under the state's new revenge porn law.

Patrick E. Himebaugh, 29, of the 1200 block of Volunteer Drive, was taken into custody Tuesday on several counts of failure to comply with the terms of a peace order as well as a single count of placing intimate sexual images or material on the Internet, according to documents filed in Frederick County District Court.

The documents accuse Himebaugh of posting sexually explicit videos of his ex-girlfriend to pornographic websites and in online accounts, including her address, while encouraging men to rape her.

I'd say that qualifies.

Yes, although I'd say that probably violates half a dozen other laws even without revenge porn being criminalised.

Maybe in Libel Land, Europe, but here at Free Speech Headquarters, things are different.  Pretty sure the open encouragement of the raping of an ex has never been considered a crime here.

[Valmy]

Well, I don't think there is any overriding public interest in people publishing intimate images of their exes or other former sex partners without their consent, so I am not bothered with that particular "chilling effect".

I assume you still have to prove mens rea so if there is an accidental posting or a misunderstanding, it would not lead to a conviction.

Yeah I think I phrased that poorly.  I do agree these guys need to be stopped, but it still makes me nervous or perhaps a bit sad to see criminalizing of posting stuff online.  People clearly abused the privilege.  Once law enforcement needs to monitor what people are posting online, that eventually could end the party.

[Valmy]

Because so many Dutch prison cells are empty we are apparently going to import prisoners from Norway.

What makes Dutch people so law-abiding?

[CountDeMoney]

Yeah I think I phrased that poorly.  I do agree these guys need to be stopped, but it still makes me nervous or perhaps a bit sad to see criminalizing of posting stuff online.  People clearly abused the privilege.  Once law enforcement needs to monitor what people are posting online, that eventually could end the party.

Bad enough that companies do it.

[Valmy]

Bad enough that companies do it.

Yep.

[Maladict]

Because so many Dutch prison cells are empty we are apparently going to import prisoners from Norway.

What makes Dutch people so law-abiding?

It's a bit of a mystery. The prison sentences for major crimes have been reduced, but oddly enough the number of major crimes then went down as well.
The aging population might be a factor, too.

There are now more guards than prisoners.

[CountDeMoney]

There are now more guards than prisoners.

Damn unions.

[garbon]

A year without Dorsey.

[Jacob]

I'm not sure if a new law is needed for this, though. Surely posting very personal movies/pictures, even if produced with consent, but published without consent is already illegal? Because unless the couple agreed to put the stuff on the internet from the get go, I would think the implication is that this material is for personal use only.

Why would it be illegal under pre-existing laws?

I expect most laws regarding displaying pictures you don't have the rights to involve handing over any royalties to the rights-holder and compensating for any commercial losses, but that's not going to deter anyone whose primary goal is humiliation.

Most laws about that sort of stuff have been written with a mind to make IP generation profitable, not to protect individuals from humiliation.

[Syt]

I'm not sure if a new law is needed for this, though. Surely posting very personal movies/pictures, even if produced with consent, but published without consent is already illegal? Because unless the couple agreed to put the stuff on the internet from the get go, I would think the implication is that this material is for personal use only.

Why would it be illegal under pre-existing laws?

I expect most laws regarding displaying pictures you don't have the rights to involve handing over any royalties to the rights-holder and compensating for any commercial losses, but that's not going to deter anyone whose primary goal is humiliation.

Most laws about that sort of stuff have been written with a mind to make IP generation profitable, not to protect individuals from humiliation.

According to a German website if the pictures/videos were published without consent, then damages for the trauma/suffering can also be awarded by civic courts. Additionally, German punitive law allows monetary fines and jail up to one year for "publishing images of a highly peronal/private nature." The situation is similar in Austria.

[mongers]

Because so many Dutch prison cells are empty we are apparently going to import prisoners from Norway.

What makes Dutch people so law-abiding?

It's a bit of a mystery. The prison sentences for major crimes have been reduced, but oddly enough the number of major crimes then went down as well.
The aging population might be a factor, too.

There are now more guards than prisoners.

A bit more of a relaxed society, less people getting in each other's faces, as over here or elsewhere?

[alfred russel]

Because so many Dutch prison cells are empty we are apparently going to import prisoners from Norway.

What makes Dutch people so law-abiding?

It's a bit of a mystery. The prison sentences for major crimes have been reduced, but oddly enough the number of major crimes then went down as well.
The aging population might be a factor, too.

There are now more guards than prisoners.

A bit more of a relaxed society, less people getting in each other's faces, as over here or elsewhere?

Also less exposure to lead.

[Josquius]

Because so many Dutch prison cells are empty we are apparently going to import prisoners from Norway.

What makes Dutch people so law-abiding?

It's a bit of a mystery. The prison sentences for major crimes have been reduced, but oddly enough the number of major crimes then went down as well.
The aging population might be a factor, too.

There are now more guards than prisoners.

A bit more of a relaxed society, less people getting in each other's faces, as over here or elsewhere?

The Dutch are famous for being very blunt and in your face.
Maybe that's what helps?

But surprised they would be able to import Norwegians. Is there not some kind of human rights moan the Norwegian crooks can have?