Earlier this week, Rob Kardashian published explicit photos of ex-fiancee Blac Chyna on Twitter and Instagram. Now, lawyers and experts say he could face criminal charges for revenge porn.

On Wednesday, Kardashian uploaded a series of posts to Instagram, accompanied by nude photos of Chyna, accusing her of cheating on him, taking advantage of him financially, and using drugs and alcohol in the presence of their seven-month-old daughter, Dream Renee Kardashian.

Instagram shut down Kardashian’s account almost immediately, but the reality star quickly moved to Twitter to continue the rant.

I truly thought Chyna wanted to be a family and that’s why I was so loyal to her but I learned my lesson and everyone else was right

— ROBERT KARDASHIAN (@robkardashian) July 5, 2017

The public feud quickly entranced all of Twitter, with the least-famous Kardashian sib’s tweets receiving hundreds of thousands of likes and retweets. “Poor Dream” even became a trending topic along with both of her parent’s names.

Chyna used social media to respond to Kardashian’s attacks, sharing since-deleted accusations to her Snapchat story that Kardashian physically abused her.

“Rob u did all this but u beat me up and try act it never happen!!!!!” Chyna wrote on Snapchat. “U put hand on me I swear on god!!!! On my kids but I’m supposed to be quiet because you’re a Kardashian.”

Kardashian and Chyna’s tumultuous relationship has been the primary source of their fame over the past year and a half. The pair first went public as a couple in January 2016, and Kardashian proposed three months later. Soon after, the couple announced they were expecting a child. Chyna has a child with rapper Tyga, who dated Kardashian’s sister, Kylie Jenner. Part of Kardashian’s Twitter post accused Chyna of having their child “out of spite” over Jenner’s relationship with Tyga.

Reports surfaced in February that the on-and-off-again couple had called off their engagement. The couple’s unlikely pairing and tumultuous relationship was the basis of their reality show spin-off “Rob & Chyna.” The show has been renewed for a second season, but it’s unclear how this development will affect it.

Was it Revenge Porn?

The nude photos Kardashian posted online without Chyna’s consent could be considered revenge porn, especially if Kardashian’s intent was to “cause substantial emotional distress or humiliation” to Chyna. Revenge porn is illegal in two-thirds of the U.S., including in California, where both celebrities reside. The misdemeanor crime carries a penalty of up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine.

Revenge porn is also known as non-consensual pornography, or cyberexploitation, since it does not always involve an act of “revenge,” like in Kardashian’s case. Several instances have involved hackers leaking nude photos of victims, which can also fall under the revenge porn laws.

Though no charges have been officially brought as of yet, several experts have said Kardashian’s posts were most definitely an act of revenge porn.

Chyna’s lawyer Lisa Bloom, who represented actress Mischa Barton in a similar case, warned Kardashian on Twitter that revenge porn is a crime and a form of violence.

Note to Rob Kardashian: revenge porn is a crime. And in my Mischa Barton case judge agreed it’s a form of domestic violence. Knock it off.

— Lisa Bloom (@LisaBloom) July 5, 2017

“It’s disgusting,” Bloom told the Washington Post. “It’s a very modern way of being misogynistic.”

“The main point of it is that even if Chyna sent him nude photos, if she didn’t want them posted publicly, the law protects her,” Bloom told The Post.

Carrie Goldberg, an attorney who specializes in sexual privacy and started a firm dedicated to the topic, told the Post that Kardashian’s “slut shaming” posts show that he intended to harm Chyna.

“With the accompanying words, there can be no misgivings about his intent,” Goldberg said.

Chyna’s lawyers are reportedly exploring “all legal remedies and protections available,” and are pursuing a restraining order against Kardashian.

I represent Blac Chyna. I just gave Rob Kardashian notice that we’ll be in court Monday seeking restraining orders against him. More to come

— Lisa Bloom (@LisaBloom) July 7, 2017

Avery Anapol

Avery Anapol is a blogger and freelancer for Law Street Media. She holds a BA in journalism and mass communication from the George Washington University. When she’s not writing, Avery enjoys traveling, reading fiction, cooking, and waking up early. Contact Avery at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Rob Kardashian Could Face Revenge Porn Charges, Experts Say appeared first on Law Street.

ICYMI, last week we taught you how to fight revenge porn, a woman sued Chipotle after the company used her photo, and Sen. Jeff Sessions faced a pro-marijuana group during his confirmation hearing. Learn more about these trending stories below!

How Can We Fight Revenge Porn?

Online sexual harassment and revenge porn have become relatively commonplace. Here at Law Street, we’ve written a number of articles on the topic in the last couple of weeks alone. From the lawyer fighting revenge porn to the online harassment of journalist Lauren Duca, there are concerns that this kind of behavior has become the norm in America. In fact, in September, President-elect Donald Trump was accused of something revenge-porn-like himself, when he encouraged his Twitter followers to look for Alicia Machado’s sex tape. This is clearly something that we’re going to have to deal with in coming years. But what exactly is revenge porn? And what do you do if it happens to you?

California Woman Files $2 Billion Lawsuit Against Chipotle After Company Uses her Photo

A California woman is suing the popular fast-casual burrito chain Chipotle, alleging that the company used a photo of her in its advertisements, but that she never gave it permission to do so. Leah Caldwell, the plaintiff, is asking for over $2 billion, specifically $2,237,633,000, arguing that the company has made that much money off of the use of her photo that was taken in 2006.

Pro-Marijuana Group Gives Jeff Sessions an Earful Before Confirmation Hearing

Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for attorney general, will face the Senate in a confirmation hearing on Tuesday. In an effort spearheaded by the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), pro-marijuana groups are asking supporters to call their senators on Monday, and let them know that they will not stand for any aggressive enforcement actions taken by Sessions, who once said “good people don’t smoke marijuana.”

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Online sexual harassment and revenge porn have become relatively commonplace. Here at Law Street, we’ve written a number of articles on the topic in the last couple of weeks alone. From the lawyer fighting revenge porn to the online harassment of journalist Lauren Duca, there are concerns that this kind of behavior has become the norm in America. In fact, in September, President-elect Donald Trump was accused of something revenge-porn-like himself, when he encouraged his Twitter followers to look for Alicia Machado’s sex tape.

This is clearly something that we’re going to have to deal with in coming years. But what exactly is revenge porn? And what do you do if it happens to you?

What is Revenge Porn?

This phenomenon is also known as nonconsensual pornography (NCP), and is defined as the distribution of sexually explicit photos or videos of someone else, without that person’s permission. This has become an increasingly worrisome problem in the age of technology. Many young men ask their girlfriends to send them explicit photos, many women comply, and vice versa. But a breakup with the wrong kind of person could mean that those photos end up publicly available on some website, often with the subject’s name and personal information. In most cases, men post the photos or media online as a response to a perceived wrongdoing. Not only is revenge porn a form of online harassment, it can also lead to further harassment for the victim.

Though most cases of revenge porn involve photos that women take themselves for private use, or those taken by a partner, some cases are more complicated than that. In 2009, 32-year-old hacker Luis Mijangos gained access to multiple people’s computers by sending them files with malware that hijacked their webcams. He was able to see whatever was going on in front of the camera and saved pictures and videos of people nude or having sex. Sometimes he sold his services to men who wanted to spy on their girlfriends or wives, sometimes he extorted the victims for money. But in some cases, he just wanted to watch people, and that’s creepy enough.

Today, more and more states have legislation that criminalizes these acts, but as it is a relatively new concept, many do not, and many law enforcement officials don’t know how to handle it. In those cases, victims often need to rely on federal laws and related criminal statutes that may apply.

What do you do if it happens to you?

According to Cyber Civil Rights, you should make sure to save any evidence of the revenge pornography, like results from Googling your name, screenshots of the pages, texts, or emails that were sent to you–basically anything that proves you are a victim of NCP. When you have saved the proof you need, most social media websites restrict nudity, so you can report any photos or videos you want taken down. When it comes to other websites though, it can be trickier than that.

The Communications Decency Act protects websites from prosecution if they are a mere medium for others to post information. If the website has no “opinion” and doesn’t affect the content whatsoever, it is not liable for anything that is found on there. But as soon as someone representing the website publishes or edits any content, they can no longer claim immunity and you can likely go ahead and sue them.

Another option is to take advantage of existing copyright law. This only works if you took the photo yourself. A photo taken by a person is automatically protected under copyright law and the “author” of it can demand that it be taken down from any website simply by sending a letter, quoting the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. But if someone else took the photo in question, or if you want to claim damages, you would have to file a lawsuit.

You could try utilizing some other laws, depending on your location. In some states it’s a crime to take nude photos of someone else without their knowledge and it can be punishable as disorderly conduct. Harassment laws could also be an option, though they require repeated actions, not singular incidents. If you are under 18 and someone shares nude photos of you, that is a crime, as it’s likely considered child pornography and could lead to prosecution, a considerable prison term, and require that person to register as a sex offender. As cases of revenge porn, and the backlash against them, become more prevalent–this is good info for all of us to have.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post How Can We Fight Revenge Porn? appeared first on Law Street.

Revenge porn–the non-consensual posting of someone’s explicit photos or videos, usually by an ex–is deeply problematic. And as our technology evolves, we need lawyers willing to help out those, often women, who fall victim to this kind of online harassment. Brooklyn attorney Carrie Goldberg specializes in sexual privacy and focuses on fighting revenge porn, and recently made headlines after being featured in a New Yorker profile. She was once the victim of online sexual harassment, and basically had to start her own law firm in order to become the kind of lawyer that was needed. She mainly represents young women who are trying to get photos off the internet, are being extorted, or have endured sexual abuse.

ACTIVIST SPOTLIGHT (USA): Carrie Goldberg is a Brooklyn attorney with a practice specialising in sexual privacy,… https://t.co/jNGmstSmH2

— The Pixel Project (@PixelProject) December 12, 2016

Many of her clients feel shame, even though they didn’t do anything wrong. One of the youngest is an African-American girl who is only 15 years old. When she was 13, she was raped by a classmate who filmed it and spread the video around the school. Instead of punishing the boy, the school sent the girl home and later transferred her to another school. She was in effect punished for being raped and harassed. Most other clients are women in their twenties who have ex-boyfriends or husbands who have spread or threatened to spread photos or videos online.

Goldberg has, sadly, seen a steady uptick in the number of clients seeking her help since the emergence of Donald Trump as a serious political contender. By this summer she had 35 active clients and had to hire a colleague. She said that many people seem to believe that a Trump presidency might mean a “license to be cruel.” And it’s not all revenge porn–for example she represents a family whose kids’ pictures were used in memes about the Pizzagate conspiracy.

Abuse on the internet flourishes easily, as it is hard to punish. In the case where someone just sends verbal threats it’s basically impossible to find the perpetrator. But we’re making progress. According to the New York Daily News, Goldberg has already done a lot:

She estimates she’s removed more than 900 pieces of revenge porn from the internet, protecting 72 victims. She’s also lobbied for legislation across the country and 34 states now have it — though not New York.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post How One Lawyer is Fighting Revenge Porn and Why that Fight Matters Now appeared first on Law Street.

Revenge porn is a real problem, especially in the age of the internet. But now, one of the go-to destinations for internet smut is taking action against revenge porn, by making it easier for victims to get the videos and photos taken down. While this big change by PornHub certainly won’t prevent all cases of revenge porn, it’s definitely a strong symbolic move.

Revenge porn can take a few forms, but the most traditional are videos or pictures in the possession of an individual’s former partner that are posted online or shared in an attempt to get “revenge” for some perceived wrongdoing, or even just embarrass the individual. The victims are usually, but certainly not always, female.

While PornHub has always had policies in place to get rid of any revenge porn that was posted or taken without an individual’s knowledge, the company just announced that that process will be streamlined with the introduction of a new form that will allow users to report abuses right away. Previously, the appeals process was done via email, but PornHub wants to cut through that “red tape” and also deter the posting of non-consensual content.

Corey Price, the PornHub Vice President said in a press release:

With nearly 60 million visitors to Pornhub daily, it’s imperative that we remain ahead of this perpetuating victimization of innocent individuals and continue to combat this illicit behavior. We will persist in enacting measures that we believe will strongly reinforce Pornhub’s stance against revenge porn. We are fully committed to the removal of this type of content from our site, in the pursuit of instilling a sense of safety and community that keeps our users’ minds at ease.

This certainly won’t lead to a complete removal of all revenge porn from PornHub’s site, much less the internet as a whole. Given the ease with which new videos can be uploaded, as well as the fact that the system to take it down relies on user participation, revenge porn will probably still make its appearances. There are also more things the company could be doing–according to Mary Anne Franks, who teaches law at the University of Miami and works as the Vice President of the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative–sites should be more proactive about making sure that illegal content doesn’t become publicly available in the first place. According to the Verge:

The deterrents she suggests seem easy to implement: a clearly displayed reminder that revenge porn is illegal in most US states, or a simple checkbox for users to verify that the materials they upload are being distributed with the full consent of all parties.

So it’s not perfect. But as a company that saw 18.5 billion visits in 2014 alone, PornHub is making a rather visible statement that revenge porn is wrong, and should not be tolerated.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post PornHub Takes a Stand Against Revenge Porn appeared first on Law Street.

It’s been a good week for tech sites looking to prevent harassment. Earlier this week, Reddit banned revenge porn. Essentially, what that means is that it’s now prohibited to upload a naked or otherwise compromising photo to the site without the subject’s consent. That obviously won’t stop all instances of abuse and revenge porn, but it’s certainly a step in the right direction. But it wasn’t just Reddit that took such steps–Twitter also has announced its plan to combat abuse on the site.

Twitter has long been plagued by “trolls.” For the uninitiated to the Twittersphere, we’re not talking about the kind of trolls that live in dungeons or under bridges. A Twitter troll is someone who constantly and incessantly posts inflammatory or abusive posts with the intent to rile or incite a reaction. It’s usually, though not always a form of internet harassment.

Twitter has consistently been the home to many trolls–and the recent #GamerGate discussion brought many out to play. #GamerGate is a virulent movement that attacks women, particularly a few vocal feminist critics of the misogyny inherent in the gaming industry and certain games. The #GamerGate trolls have consistently and repetitively attacked women, tweeting horrible threats of abuse, rape, and murder. The women attacked by #GamerGate aren’t alone–many people, men and women alike, have reported being harassed.

Twitter wants to help put a stop to that, and the company has realized that it’s done a pretty bad job of combating abuse in the past. CEO Dick Costolo wrote in a memo:

I’m frankly ashamed of how poorly we’ve dealt with this issue during my tenure as CEO. It’s absurd. There’s no excuse for it. I take full responsibility for not being more aggressive on this front. It’s nobody else’s fault but mine, and it’s embarrassing.

It’s no secret and the rest of the world talks about it every day. We lose core user after core user by not addressing simple trolling issues that they face every day.

He also wrote:

So now we’re going to fix it, and I’m going to take full responsibility for making sure that the people working night and day on this have the resources they need to address the issue, that there are clear lines of responsibility and accountability, and that we don’t equivocate in our decisions and choices.

It’s in light of these revelations that Twitter is introducing more tools to combat these trolls. For example, it’s started tracking the phone numbers of those who are reported as abusers. How will this help combat harassment? Well, often when users are banned, they are able to easily make new accounts by creating new email addresses. It’s much harder to obtain a new phone number than a new email address. In addition, Twitter is streamlining its process for reporting harm. The company also announced some other “enforcement actions” that will be rolled out in the weeks to come.

The fact that Twitter is trying to take more actions to combat abuse is a good thing, especially in light of the news from Reddit also coming in this week. That being said, it’s not going to solve all problems. Twitter has promised to be more vigilant–let’s hope it actually owns up to the promise.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Twitter Sets New Goals to Combat Trolls appeared first on Law Street.

Users looking to post a nude photo or video to Reddit will soon have to do something they’ve never done before–get consent!

Reddit is taking a stand against revenge porn and sexual exploitation by making revisions to its digital privacy guidelines that will become effective March 10. The user-curated news and social networking site is banning sexually explicit images or videos where those photographed or filmed haven’t given their permission. These changes come as a somewhat delayed response to Reddit’s major role in the massive iCloud hack of celebrity nude photos in August.

Yesterday morning Reddit executives addressed their mission to protect users’ digital privacy in a post writing:

Last year, we missed a chance to be a leader in social media when it comes to protecting your privacy — something we’ve cared deeply about since reddit’s inception. At our recent all hands company meeting, this was something that we all, as a company, decided we needed to address.

No matter who you are, if a photograph, video, or digital image of you in a state of nudity, sexual excitement, or engaged in any act of sexual conduct, is posted or linked to on reddit without your permission, it is prohibited on reddit. We also recognize that violent personalized images are a form of harassment that we do not tolerate and we will remove them when notified

The “missed chance” the post is referring to was when a subreddit called “TheFappening” was created to link to curate all of the criminally obtained images procured in the 2014 celebrity photo hack. Some of the celebrities targeted included Jennifer Lawrence, Kate Upton and Olympic gold medalist McKayla Maroney, whose images may have constituted child pornography since they were taken while she was reportedly underage. The subreddit garnered thousands of followers in just one day and stayed live until September 6 when it was banned by the site after being widely chastised.

The whole nude photos leak controversy definitely led to some backlash against Reddit, including this entertaining flowchart by New York Magazine:

Should we ban that subreddit? A flowchart by Reddit admins: http://t.co/RhS9wKEyI1 pic.twitter.com/Tz54dsWdr8

— New York Magazine (@NYMag) September 9, 2014

But all that’s changing. Now, if you feel like you have been a victim of involuntary pornography a new section added to Reddit’s privacy policy asks you to send an email to contact@reddit.com with a link to the image or video in question and they will “expedite its removal as quickly as possible.”

The real question is whether or not other social sharing sites will join Reddit in improving their digital privacy policies. Tumblr will be one of those sites to watch, as it was also used to distribute the controversial and illegal leaked nude photos. While the site nicely urges members to not upload sexually explicit content in its community guidelines, it essentially operates as a unofficial porn site in many ways–nude photos and videos are regularly and eagerly shared. Adopting a policy like the one Reddit is looking to implement would drastically change its microblogging platform and potentially anger users. Still a precedent needs to be made to protect both women and men from having their personal photos become public either unknowingly or unwillingly.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Reddit Finally Prohibits Revenge Porn appeared first on Law Street.

It’s been a busy year, with a lot of technology developments, scandals, and big stories. Read on to check out the top 15 tech stories of 2014.

1. New York Court OKs Revenge Porn; Will the Legislature Act?

Revenge porn was one of the hottest legal topics of 2014. “Revenge porn” most frequently occurs when a person posts nude photographs of an ex-lover on the internet as a way to embarrass or degrade the ex. The photographs are often exchanged willingly, but after the relationship goes sour, a jilted ex may post the pictures in a public forum. The practice disproportionately targets women, and can truly damage someone’s life. In March, a New York court dismissed a revenge porn case, signaling that it may have been time for the legislature to step in.

2. The Dark Side of Snapchat Lands the Company in Hot Water

Snapchat, the messaging service that claims data instantly disappears upon receipt, found itself in hot water with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) based on violations of the company’s own privacy and security policies in May. The FTC complaint mainly focused on accusations that Snapchat misled their customers by promising certain security and privacy features. Snapchat eventually settled the FTC case, but remains on probation and will require monitoring.

3. Technology and the Bullying Epidemic: The Case of Yik Yak

Between laptops, cellphones, tablets, and iPads, students have more access to technology than ever before. This comes with numerous benefits — but it also comes with a lot of responsibility. One app that took the college and high school technology scene by storm this year was Yik Yak, which allows users to post anonymously to a regional “virtual bulletin board.” While the app was invented in presumably good fun, there are concerns that the anonymity enables cyberbullies.

4. New Orleans Police Attempt to Regain Public Trust by Wearing Patrol Cameras

The Department of Justice investigation into the New Orleans Police Department following Hurricane Katrina resulted in sweeping reforms of the department, including the requirement that patrol officers wear body cameras in an effort to regain trust of the citizens. They hope to guarantee police accountability, as well as provide a resource for officers when they write their reports and testify. While how exactly to deal with implementing police cameras remains a question, it will be interesting to see what happens in New Orleans as a result.

5. Internet Fast Lanes Will Change How You Use the Web

Another hot tech topic this year was the concept of “net neutrality.” There’s been a lot of back and forth, and each major player–the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and our politicians, such as President Barack Obama, have their own takes. The legality of fast lanes is a tricky question–one that the FCC had to contend with this year.

6. Massive Celebrity Nude Photo Leak is Major Privacy Breach

Late this summer, a major leak of female celebrities’ nude photos hit the web. It was dubbed the “Fappening”–a form of crude wordplay. It included superstars such as Jennifer Lawrence, Ariana Grande, Rihanna, and Kate Upton. While some celebrities denied the validity of the photos and others embarked on conversations with the public, the whole scandal said a lot about the potentially false security of the internet, as well as the degrading way in which women are often treated on the web.

7. The Alibaba IPO: What Does Going Public Mean?

Chinese e-commerce giant Alibaba decided to go public this fall, and had the largest Initial Public Offering (IPO) in history. Alibaba’s success raised a lot of questions about what IPOs are, how they work, and what the various advantages and disadvantages are for companies. Alibaba’s extreme success is a sign that the stock market remained strong in 2014.

8. #GamerGate Takes Misogyny to a Whole New Level

Anita Sarkeesian and Brianna Wu, feminist cultural critic and video game developer, respectively, are two among a community of feminist gaming figures. They spoke out against misogyny and sexism in the gaming industry, and received threats, hatred, and truly vile responses. Sarkeesian had to cancel speaking appearances, and Wu was actually forced out of her home when her personal address was revealed. Sarkeesian and Wu were just a few of the players attacked in the #GamerGate trend that raged on late this fall.

9. AirBnB Winning Over San Francisco, With Some Rules

Airbnb is an innovative service for modern travel. It focuses heavily on community, flexibility, and the power of the internet. For many travelers, it’s been a great new tool. But not all governments feel the same way. There was a big debate this year in San Francisco, Airbnb’s home, over whether or not to pass a bill that would legalize the room-sharing network, with some caveats. It eventually passed, meaning that Airbnb will continue to operate in San Fran.

10. Privacy Board Calls NSA Eavesdropping Illegal 

One name has been making headlines around the country since June 2013. There have been many terms used to describe him, whether you see him as a traitor or a patriot, Edward Snowden has become a well known character within the United States. However, whether or not Snowden’s actions were legal is a completely different question.

11. Rideshare Infighting: Lyft Sues Uber Executive

Ridesharing rivals Lyft and Uber are going at in the courtroom as Lyft sues a former employee, now a current Uber exec, for stealing proprietary information. As the two leading companies in ridesharing–although Uber is quite a bit ahead of Lyft–there’s plenty of reason for the two to be competitive. The case in question regarded proprietary information that former Lyft executive Tyler VanderZaden may have taken with him when he moved from Lyft to Uber.

12. Bitcoin: What’s Next?

Bitcoin has grown into a major player in techno-currency, but what’s up next for the digital coin? Bitcoin is still trying to drag itself away from the perception that it’s used exclusively for criminal activities, and firmly establish a role in the mainstream. Regulations are also slowly starting to be put in place–it will be interesting to see Bitcoin’s future.

13. KKK vs. Anonymous: Cyberwar Declared over Ferguson Protests

The group of unnamed “hacktivists” Anonymous and the Ku Klux Klan have engaged in an apparent all-out cyber war over the events in Ferguson, Missouri. Anonymous was trying to prevent the KKK’s involvement in Ferguson-inspired protests, and took over many of the KKK’s social media accounts. The KKK responded with threats, and tensions continued to run high in Ferguson.

14. Aereo: The Martyr Files for Bankruptcy

Aereo, once hailed as a game-changer in the cable industry,  filed for bankruptcy. Despite valiant efforts, Aereo just could not overcome the legal and regulatory opposition that came after the Supreme Court decided Aereo’s business model was illegally violating copyright. Despite high hopes for the innovative idea, Aereo is now essentially dead in the water.

15. Please Stop Posting the Facebook Copyright Status

You know that Facebook copyright declaration you just posted? It’s useless. Seriously, it’s time to stop posting it. Every so often Facebook changes their terms and policies, and a bunch of people post a weird, incorrect disclaimer stating that they have copyright over their own content. The problem is that the notice does nothing, except confuse your Facebook friends who see it.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Top 15 Technology Stories of 2014 appeared first on Law Street.

Today’s “wow, people really suck” story comes straight to you from the California highways. Or, to be more specific, California’s Highway Police. Apparently, a few officers from Contra Costa County, California, have created a new, sick game to pass the time. They began accessing the cell phones of female suspects brought into custody, and then sending nude or semi-nude photos of these women to themselves. Allegedly, the pictures were then passed to the other officers playing the “game.”

The practice was uncovered when a 23-year-old woman from San Ramon, California, was arrested on DUI charges. While she was being processed, her belongings — including her iPhone — were in police possession. Five days after being released she noticed something strange on her iPad — nude photos that she had on her phone had been sent to an unknown number. While the record was deleted from her iPhone, the phone had synced with the iPad, and the record was not deleted from there.

It was discovered that CHP Officer Sean Harrington was the one who had the woman’s cellphone, and appears to be the center figure of this sick game. Dublin CHP Officer Robert Hazelwood is allegedly one of Harrington’s partners in crime, according to texts between the two. The text messages are lewd, and contain insulting and sexist remarks about the women whose photos were stolen. One exchange states, “Nudes are always better with the face,” and “Maybe she knows she has a jacked-up horse face?!?!?”

A third officer is believed to be involved, or at least was witness to the behavior. The case is now under serious investigation and scrutiny, and there is believed to be other women whose photos were stolen by Harrington.

Golden Gate Division Chief Avery Browne responded to his officers’ disgusting behavior at a press conference late Saturday night in which he claimed the practice was limited to the Dublin office. That being said, this may not be as isolated of an incident as Chief Browne claims. According to Senior Contra Costa district attorney inspector Darryl Holcombe:

Harrington said he first learned of this scheme when he was working in the Los Angeles office. Harrington said when he was assigned to the Dublin office, he learned from other officers that they would access the cell phones of female arrestees and look for nude photographs of them. Harrington said if photographs were located, the officers would then text the photographs to other sworn members of the office, and, to non-CHP individuals. Harrington described this scheme as a game.

There’s a lot that’s disturbing in that comment. Harrington could just be trying to cover his ass, yes, but I also think that it’s a real possibility that this is a systemic issue. After all, earlier this year a Long Island woman sued the NYPD arguing that photos of her were taken off her phone while she was in custody.

In a world where an average women can easily find herself fired because her photos are posted on a “revenge porn” site and celebrities’ nudes are stolen and shared on the internet with no regard for personal privacy, I suppose this isn’t too surprising. There’s something about a woman choosing to take nude photos in private that apparently renders her right to privacy null and void. And a woman who commits some other transgression — in the case of the San Ramon woman, driving under the influence — apparently loses any other right to privacy she had. The San Ramon woman committed a crime, yes, and she deserves to receive whatever punishment for that crime that justice decrees. However, that does not mean that Harrington and Hazelton suddenly became entitled to invade her privacy — her crime does not render her any less human. Harrington and Hazelton committed a crime, and they deserve to pay for it.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Gordon Mei via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post California Police Officers Found Stealing Suspects’ Nude Photos appeared first on Law Street.

Hey y’all!

Last week Rachel Craig, 28, from Waynesboro, Virginia was convicted under the state’s new revenge porn law. She faces up to one year in jail and a $2,500 fine. The revenge porn law went into effect in July and it criminalizes posting nude pictures of someone on the Internet without the individual’s consent. Craig was said to have been in an argument with her former boyfriend when she allegedly stole a picture of his current girlfriend from his phone and posted it on Facebook. Craig even took full credit for the act and warned the victim “not to mess with her” according to Sgt. Brian Edwards of the Waynesboro, Virginia Police Department.

Okay. I’m sorry. What!?! I have so many questions. First of all, if he is your former boyfriend why are you still even communicating with him? Secondly, what was she doing with his phone at all? Third, don’t you think at 28 you would be mature enough to not take this to Facebook? I don’t get it. I don’t get the blatant disregard for an innocent bystander and the maturity level of this woman. I also kind of wish there was a stupid clause tacked on to the law to give this girl an extra six months to sit in solitude and think about how dumb this whole situation is. Craig might go to jail and have to fork over $2,500 for something petty that could have been avoided if she just stopped and thought about what was the real issue and not harming an innocent bystander.

Two months ago another woman in Virginia — Crystal Cherry — was also charged with revenge porn because she posted nude photos of her boyfriend’s former girlfriend on Instagram and Twitter just days after the new law went into effect. Again, another one of these women who is dumb enough to take to social media and create issues that could be avoided at all costs if she could just handle her problems like an adult.

I like this law. The only thing that concerns me is that if this is a first-time offense, both Crystal and Rachel will probably not do any time and will just pay the fee. I know prisons are crowded and our tax dollars are hard at work with sustaining life for idiots who like to break the law, but maybe there should be something a little bit more that we could do. Maybe a class on how to not be so stupid? Or teach kids the proper way to use social media?

I like Facebook and Instagram and I admittedly have a serious love of Twitter, but I don’t need to know everything that you are doing. I don’t need to read about your daily drama. And I definitely don’t want to see you posting nude photos of another woman just because you’re mad at some dude who probably won’t matter to you in five years. Craig and Cherry get to be reminded of that every day now for the rest of their lives when they have to include their misdemeanor convictions on any application they fill out.

This month Jennifer Lawrence is on the cover of Vanity Fair and in her interview she mentions the celebrity nude hacking scandal that she was a part of. J-Law called it a “sex crime not a scandal,” and I tend to agree with her. Not only did this hacker violate someone’s privacy but also committed a cyber crime. Hundreds of celebrities’ nude photos were splashed across the internet, violating their privacy. Some people say that when you choose the life of a celebrity you choose to give up your privacy, but I completely disagree. Celebrities are still people. But I will criticize anyone who is dumb enough to take nude photos and save them anywhere. iCloud is not secure. Your computer is not secure. There is always someone trying to hack into something that will violate you in some way and they may just be doing it for the fun or just because they can.

Even some idiot Pasadena, Texas school teacher gave nude photos to a student she was having an affair with who ultimately ended up sharing them with others. Ashley Zehnder, 24, had reported that nude photos of her were being shared throughout the school where she taught. An investigation revealed that she was sleeping with a student who shared them. Will anything happen to the student who was having the affair and sharing the nude photos? Probably not. But Zehnder lost her job, will go to jail, and will probably have to register as a sex offender. Can we say Mary Kay Letourneau?

I think that there is a lesson in all of this. People need to be more cautious about what they are doing and where it is being saved. Craig and Cherry’s victims are on the same side as Jennifer Lawrence and other celebrities. The only difference is Craig and Cherry got caught. Zehnder is the predator and the victim. Her private nude photos were shared with an entire school but she also preyed on a student.

Word to the wise: if you are going to take nude photos use a Polaroid and burn them when you are done if you don’t want them to be shared. Or better yet, just don’t take them. Have a little modesty and respect for yourself. If you want to share being nude do it in person where the only other person looking at you can only use their memory, not a hard copy that could be sent out to the world.

Allison Dawson

Allison Dawson was born in Germany and raised in Mississippi and Texas. A graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University, she’s currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative. Get in touch with Allison at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post PSA: Nude Photos Will Send You to Jail appeared first on Law Street.

People tend to do some pretty clinically insane things to get back at their exes. Disgruntled men dumped by the girls of their dreams have posted naked pictures of them online, dated their best friends, and other concerning but far-from-deadly actions. However, the men starring in recent headlines have taken revenge to a whole new and disturbing level.

Recently, a dude was so peeved when his girlfriend left him that he concluded that feeding her dog to her was the best means of revenge. What ever happened to the saying “living well is the best revenge”? Not anymore, apparently.

That has to be one of the most messed up ways to get back at someone in recent history. It wasn’t just her beloved pet, but one of the most adorable dog breeds around — a Pomeranian — with one of the most adorable names possible, Bear. He fed her precious pooch to her during a “reconciliation meeting.” He then bombarded her with disturbing text messages asking her how her pet tasted and saying he thought BBQ sauce would have been a welcome addition benefiting the flavor. As if that weren’t a massive enough blow to the poor girl, he left the poor pup’s paws in a box at her doorsteps a few days later.

Apparently, you don’t need to be suspicious just of exes, but of your current significant other as well. In England, a teenage guy killed his girlfriend in an attempt to emulate Dexter, the character from the hit TV series. The young man says he was overcome by an alter-ego who made him stab and dismember his girlfriend. I guess the people concerned about the effect of such violent television series wasn’t all wrong, though the teenage boy suffered from various mental problems including schizophrenia.

Another cringe-worthy incident is the recent case in which 18-year-old Aston Robinson murdered his pregnant girlfriend and wrote a letter to her mother with the acronym “LOL.” After the couple sneaked into Robinson’s house, he strangled her and abandoned her corpse. While awaiting trial, Robinson wrote multiple letters to the mother of his deceased girlfriend to really twist the metaphorical knife in her gut.

The bone-chilling element of these stories is amplified by the pathetic sentences the criminals received. In the case of the teenager killing his pregnant girlfriend, his prison time could be as low as 14 years. The juvenile who killed his girlfriend Dexter-style is only looking at about 25 years. The dog-murder’s punishment is not yet known.

Seriously? It is cases like these where judges need to get their hands dirty and lay down the law. These terrifying tales certainly reveal how messed up people can be when they are dumped. So, who CAN you trust these days? Who knows…

Marisa Mostek

Marisa Mostek loves globetrotting and writing, so she is living the dream by writing while living abroad in Japan and working as an English teacher. Marisa received her undergraduate degree from the University of Colorado in Boulder and a certificate in journalism from UCLA. Contact Marisa at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Be Careful Who You Love appeared first on Law Street.

You can’t make everyone happy all the time. That’s an old principle that Arizona is learning this week as its new revenge porn law draws ire, outrage, and even a few lawsuits. Most critics are claiming that the law is way too broad and will criminalize people for things that probably don’t qualify as revenge porn.

Revenge porn is absolutely a real problem. There are countless stories of women whose jilted exes, or men they rejected, submit nude photos of them to be ridiculed by the denizens of the internet. Or the women whose faces are flawlessly photoshopped onto naked bodies. Or the women who have their emails hacked, and their nude photos stolen for no apparent reason other than that the hacker wanted to shame, ridicule, or ogle them.

Revenge porn has made headlines recently because its victims have gotten notably more high profile. Two releases of nude photos in the past month have targeted celebrities such as Jennifer Lawrence, Gabrielle Union, and Ariana Grande. Sometimes a threat of revenge porn is enough to make headlines. After Emma Watson’s inspirational speech on feminism earlier this week, internet trolls have been threatening to release nude photos of her…because speaking out about inequality is clearly a crime punishable by public humiliation and degradation.

It’s within this context that Arizona passed a new revenge porn bill this week. The idea behind the bill is good, truly. But the execution is a little rough. As Wired summed it up:

The law makes it criminal to disclose, display, publish, or advertise any images of a person who is ‘in a state of nudity or engaged in specific sexual activities’ if the person who shares or publishes the images ‘knows or should have known’ that the person depicted in the image did not consent to ‘the disclosure.’

The worry is that this could criminalize a whole bunch of stuff — for example a picture of a woman whose breast is partially exposed while breast feeding, or a historical book that includes a nude photo, or that iconic image of the “Napalm girl” from the Vietnam War, or hundreds of other things that certainly aren’t revenge porn. It also will cause problems for book stores and libraries, as they’ll have to make sure that everything they receive, including magazines, have pictures with specific consent. While they probably do, the off chance that this law could be accidentally broken will probably make book sellers air on the side of caution.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has now filed a suit against the Arizona law. The organization claims that the law violates the First Amendment. Legal Director of the Arizona ACLU Dan Pochoda, stated,

On its face it will affect a goodly amount of protected speech that has nothing to do with the prototypical revenge porn scenario. There’s a reason why so many media folks, bookseller folks, have joined (the lawsuit,) because a number of things they do in a normal course would be criminalized by this law.

On Arizona’s part, it really does get an A for effort. In an environment where many people are not only accepting but encouraging the release of the nude photos of those young female celebrities, it’s important that states take serious action against revenge porn. But the issue with this law is that it seems to fundamentally misunderstand what revenge porn is.

Revenge porn isn’t just about the sharing of nude photos without explicit consent — that seems to be more of a copyright issue. Revenge porn is about the intent behind it, and that’s usually revenge. It’s used to put a woman in her place, or shame her for being sexual, or put her in a compromising position with family and friends and work. It’s not necessarily about the nakedness, it’s about the vulnerability and helplessness that comes with it. So while Arizona’s law is a really, really great start, it fails to focus the criminalization, and instead criminalizes everything. Some narrowing could fix these problems; let’s hope that Arizona gets that and focuses on what really matters: making sure those who legitimately distribute revenge porn are punished.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Arizona’s Well Intentioned Revenge Porn Law Totally Misses the Point appeared first on Law Street.

As revenge porn gains steam across the internet, it’s unsurprising that it has started to make its way to social media sites. Facebook, for example, just received its first lawsuit on the subject — a woman named Meyem Ali is suing the social media company for not appropriately handling revenge porn posts created about her on the site.

The idea behind revenge porn is as simple as it is disgusting. It is essentially nude pictures of a person posted online, without the person’s consent, by someone who has the intention of hurting them. It can take the form of pictures that an individual sent to a former partner, pictures that were stolen, or even photos that were photoshopped to appear nude. It’s important to note that the title “porn” is pretty misleading. It’s not so much porn as it is public humiliation. The “revenge” aspect comes from the fact that the explicit photos are often posted by a jilted ex-partner.

Revenge porn has existed ostensibly since the beginning of the Internet, perhaps longer, but it has only crept into public consciousness relatively recently. In 2010, a man named Hunter Moore created a site called IsAnyoneUp.com. It quickly became a the go-to platform for revenge porn, given that the site allowed submitters to annotate the photo with the subject’s name, address, and other personal information. It was an easy way for people who wanted to get “revenge” to really pinpoint their targets, because the person’s photo being posted on the site would often lead to ridicule, public-shaming, and harassment. Moore encouraged the postings, alleging that the women who were featured deserved it because they had taken pictures of themselves in compromising positions. IsAnyoneUp.com also contained some stolen and fabricated photos. Moore has since been arrested and indicted on charges of identity theft, among other things. But revenge porn still exists, and has started to creep into other corners of the internet.

This is how we get to Meyem Ali’s story. The Texas woman discovered a page in 2013 under her name. It contained multiple photos of her face photoshopped onto a nude woman’s body. In one of the pictures her body double was performing a sex act. She repeatedly asked Facebook to take the photos down, but they pretty much ignored her requests for nearly five months. Eventually she got the police involved, and after receiving a subpoena the company took down the pictures. Ali also found who had posted the account in the first place — a man with whom she had a casual relationship years before. Now, she is suing both the man and Facebook for the ordeal, arguing that for her completely public humiliation, she is entitled to 10 cents for each user Facebook has — totaling $123 million.

As sad as it sounds, Ali is somewhat lucky. Her concerns were taken seriously by the police, and some sort of action was taken. When it comes to revenge porn, that doesn’t always happen. Take the story of Charlotte and Kayla Laws — a mother and daughter pair from California. Kayla Laws had a topless picture of herself saved on her personal computer that she had never shared with anyone. Upon emailing the image to herself, the picture was stolen from the server and posted on IsAnyoneUp.com. At the time, only one state — New Jersey — had any sort of legislation criminalizing revenge porn. She and her mother fought back, especially after they were pretty much denied help from the police. One detective, missing the point so completely that he ended up on another planet, asked Kayla why she would even take a photo like that if she didn’t want people to see it. Eventually the Laws did gain the help of the FBI, but only after spending copious amounts of their own time and money trying to bring down Moore.

Since then, revenge porn legislation has gotten better…albeit slowly. Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Maryland, New Jersey, Idaho, Pennsylvania, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin all have some sort of law prohibiting it. Ali’s lawsuit against Facebook is another important marker — it acknowledges that in some cases, the posting of revenge porn isn’t just the action of the person who posts it, but also the sites that provide platforms for its proliferation.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post $123 Million Facebook Lawsuit Could Mark Turning Point for Revenge Porn appeared first on Law Street.

Revenge porn is now legal in New York. The issue occurs when a person posts nude photographs of an ex-lover on the internet as a way to embarrass and degrade the ex. The photographs are often exchanged willingly while love blossoms, but when that same love wilts, the images change from intimate gifts to dangerous weapons that can seriously damage a person’s reputation.

For example, in the New York case People v. Barber, the defendant tweeted a nude photograph of his ex-girlfriend and shared it with her sister and employer. While the court acknowledged the “reprehensible” nature of the defendant’s conduct, it nonetheless found him innocent of any crime.

The problem concerns the specific language of New York’s law. In most states, you cannot take a nude photograph of a person without that person’s knowledge or consent. This rule does not apply, however, to situations where a person willingly gives a naked photograph to another. The New York court latched onto this distinction and dismissed the case.

While this particular dismissal was based on the language of the statute, some critics wonder if legislation specifically targeting revenge porn might violate freedom of speech rights. The American Civil Liberties Union opposed a draft to California’s revenge porn bill on the grounds that “the posting of otherwise lawful speech or images even if offensive or emotionally distressing is constitutionally protected. The speech must constitute a true threat or violate another otherwise lawful criminal law, such as stalking or harassment statute, in order to be made illegal.” Those who oppose a statute criminalizing revenge porn highlight the fact that the photographs were freely given and are, in essence, the property of the receiver to do as he wishes.

In contrast, another angle to the problem concerns the ubiquity and permanence of the internet and anything posted to it. Search engines allow anyone to instantly access everything ever posted about a person. Employers, colleagues, and friends all have the ability to discover information about you posted online. This makes a naked photograph in the hands of a scornful ex-flame particularly dangerous and powerful. Put simply: there is no real way to remove something from the internet, and search engines organize what is on the internet with terrifying accurateness and efficiency. An individual risks permanent reputational damage from revenge porn.

While anyone can suffer from revenge porn, the pernicious practice more often negatively affects women. Drafters of revenge porn statutes must also analyze this issue focusing on how it relates to sexual harassment and the discrimination of women. The issue does not affect men in the same way, and drafters need to scrutinize whether or not their stance on revenge porn has any latent sexist, misogynistic, or patriarchal impulses.

Revenge porn constitutes a particularly modern problem. Numerous themes percolate, including changing mores, technological advancement, sexual harassment and discrimination, freedom of speech, and the chaos of unreciprocated love. In New York, the court has signaled to the legislature to fix the problem. Whether and how the state chooses to draft a statute speaks to which themes the state decides to value.

—

Imran Ahmed is a writer living in New York City whose blog explores the legal implications of social media and the internet. Contact him via email here.

Imran Ahmed

Imran Ahmed is a writer living in New York. Contact Imran at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post New York Court OKs Revenge Porn; Will the Legislature Act? appeared first on Law Street.

In the moment, it may seem harmless to share a provocative photo with a significant other during the comfortable times of a relationship. However, when in emotional turmoil these photos can spread across the internet like wildfire, ruining your reputation and in some cases your life. There is one specific type of public humiliation with regards to nude photos and while not everyone may be aware of this new trend called revenge porn, others are reaping the legal ramifications for it. Revenge porn consists of sexually explicit material shared publically through the media and is often posted by either exes or in some cases hackers. Before rushing to Google to make sure that one of your own compromising photos has not been leaked across the web, you can feel some comfort in the fact that one of the key contributors for these revenge porn sites was arrested by the FBI on Thursday, January 23, 2014.

Hunter Moore, created a business out of revenge porn through the foundation of his website IsAnyoneUp.com, lasting for sixteen months. This site was originally intended to be an outlet for angry exes to post nude pictures of their previous partners, accompanied by the subject’s full name, city of residence, profession and links to their social media profile. As if all of this humiliation was not enough, Moore would also guarantee that the posted photos be displayed across Google for everyone to see, including bosses, professors or even parents. In its prime, IsAnyoneUp.com boasted around 350,000 views daily and 15 to 30 unlucky victims featured on the site per day ranged from infamous celebrities such as the real housewives to mothers and schoolteachers. All of this spiteful sharing of photos, has earned Hunter Moore the title; the most hated man on the internet. Not to worry though, this revenge site was shut down in April 2012, when it was bought by Bullyville.com

Moore and his hacker associate Charles Evens, spent their work days not only receiving photos of unfortunate victims but also hacking into the email accounts of chosen victims to steal sexually explicit photos to fuel their website. The two are currently facing the consequences as they are being charged with a 15 count indictment, involving identity theft, conspiracy and computer hacking. If the pair of hackers are found guilty of the accumulation of charges, they have the possibility of facing up to 42 years in prison.

The specific date of this hacking has not been completely uncovered, but there is email evidence dating back to October 2011. This emailing back and forth between Moore and Evens consisted of conversations regarding how to hack email accounts as well as plans to exchange up to $250 for nude photos of 6 males and 6 females. It is documented that as the ringleader of the website, Moore paid his hacking assistant up to $900 in individual installments through March 2012.

Officially, the indictment involves seven counts of unlawful entry into a computer to obtain personal information, seven accounts of identity theft and charges the two men with conspiracy. The indictment includes a list of seven victims, identified by their initials, all of whom had email accounts containing “among other things, nude pictures of themselves and others.” The indictment is signed by four attorneys within the United States, working in intellectual, cyber and property crimes as well as the United States attorney’s Criminal Division.

Those affected by Moore are not the only ones facing an issue with publicized explicit content on the web. Embarrassing situations revolving around the topics of sexting and nude photos have become a point of debate across the United States legal system. Many victims are attempting to eradicate revenge porn sites, such as Maryland woman, Annemarie Chiarini. On January 28, 2014 Chiarini begged the Maryland House Judiciary Committee to create new criminal laws preventing revenge porn, after her ex boyfriend published her explicit photos across the internet. Actions are actually being taken to prevent the defamation faced by victims such as Chiarini, as Dels. Luiz R.S. Simmons (D- Montgomary) and Jon S Cardin (D- Baltimore County) are attempting to extend protection against sexual harassment on the Internet. Such legislation would stop someone from sharing explicit material featuring another person without their consent as well as requiring proof that publicizing this content was meant to cause emotional pain. Chiarini is pushing her state to move forward in revenge porn legislation, while other states such as New Jersey and California have labeled this type of public sharing of explicit photos as a crime.

These cases present the idea that not everything on the internet is private and something shared in confidence can easily become publicly viewed. It is ridiculous to me that a revenge porn site that was secretly stealing nude photos from email accounts could even last for sixteen months. The government is supposedly watching everything that is happening online so why did this slip past their view for so long? Privacy needs to remain sacred over the internet. The fact that images of your body can be exposed to the public without your consent makes me question what else can be so easily leaked about you. Just imagine what other information that you believed to be private is actually floating around the web at this very moment. While some states such as Maryland have begun creating legislation regarding revenge porn, others have fallen completely behind or believe that certain cases of sharing explicit photos do not fall under the category of crime. This is neither right nor just. Legislation regarding revenge porn and maintaining the privacy of Internet users needs to happen, now.  It just makes sense that if a picture or private information is being shared without your consent and with the intent to undermine someones career or reputation, steps need to be taken by the court. Victims of this injustice should be allowed the right to fight back against wrongdoing. Embarrassment is one thing, but an alteration in your entire lifestyle for the worst is another. This violating action happened to innocent victims, that never believed their information would be spread online. It could have been anyone and one day if the courts do not step in, it could be you.  

[Rolling Stone]  [The Guardian] [The Washington Post]

—

Taylor Garre (@TaylorLynn013)

Featured image courtesy of [Cory Doctorow via Flickr]

Taylor Garre

Taylor Garre is a student at Fordham University and formerly an intern at Law Street Media. Contact Taylor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post FBI Finally Takes Action on Revenge Porn: Sign of Things to Come appeared first on Law Street.