California Senate Votes to Ban Online 'Revenge Porn'

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
The California State Senate passed a bill this week that would quite literally take all the fun out of a bad ending to a relationship. :D The State Senate made it a crime to post “revenge porn” with penalties of six months in jail and $1K in fines for first offenders.

The bill would outlaw distributing an identifiable image of an unknowing person that would "cause a reasonable person to suffer serious emotional distress."
Click to expand...
 
Skripka said:
Guy1: Hey what are you in for?
Guy2: Double homicide.
Guy2: And you?
Guy1: I got dumped by my ex, and posted pics of her doing the spread eagle online.
Click to expand...

Jail, not prison and will likely mostly be served in fines anyhow. Do remember county jail is a completely different thing. As for the why? Honestly I think this one if sort of obvious. You don't post pictures/video that can ruin someones reputation and professional career online just because you are mad.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
Jail, not prison and will likely mostly be served in fines anyhow. Do remember county jail is a completely different thing. As for the why? Honestly I think this one if sort of obvious. You don't post pictures/video that can ruin someones reputation and professional career online just because you are mad.
Click to expand...

The USA already imprisons the largest percentage of its population of anybody...mostly over stupid petty non-violent reasons. Further California like many states already has standing room-only prisons/jails.

This one is one of those tacky-ass things to do....that while being classless and tacky, doesn't warrant being put in a government hotel at taxpayer expense for 6 months.
 
It only covers identifiable pictures, so make sure to blur faces before you post...
 
These comments make me sad.
It is a shame that the geek community can be so disgusting.
Posting "revenge porn" should be illegal and it should get you jail time
Anyone that thinks otherwise is a creep or a misogynist
 
Dekoth-E- said:
Jail, not prison and will likely mostly be served in fines anyhow. Do remember county jail is a completely different thing. As for the why? Honestly I think this one if sort of obvious. You don't post pictures/video that can ruin someones reputation and professional career online just because you are mad.
Click to expand...

Yup, lets fuck someone over ... just because they broke my heart. Rather than any sort of civil issue of both parties not agreeing to the publishing of said photos/videos, throw in a criminal element and be done with it.

The upside is maybe your lady would be more open to making naughty videos if you just state "but baby I'd never post it online, I could go to jail!" :D
 
gabhpr said:
These comments make me sad.
It is a shame that the geek community can be so disgusting.
Posting "revenge porn" should be illegal and it should get you jail time
Anyone that thinks otherwise is a creep or a misogynist
Click to expand...

If you were stupid enough to take photos (or have them taken) that are pornographic of yourself....you deserve what you get, when you piss someone off and leave those photos lying around. You don't want illicit pictures posted of yourself floating around-PROTIP-don't have illicit photos taken of yourself. Seriously.

Is "revenge porn":
a) Creepy? yes.
b) Misogynist? Depending on the gender of those involved, possibly/probably.
c) Tacky as hell? 100% Yes.

Worthy of a free expenses paid taxpayer funded government hotel for 6 months to a year @$4,000USD+/month? Hell no.
 
I'm sure nobody in these forums has anything to worry about... am I RIGHT fellas??? *cricket noises and mean faces*
 
The bill does not ban revenge porn in its typical form, which is taking "sexting" images and distributing them. It only bans distributing images that were recorded without the other parties consent.

Sometimes, reading does help.

(4) Any person who photographs or records by any means the image of another, identifiable person without his or her consent who is in a state of full or partial undress in any area in which the person being photographed or recorded has a reasonable expectation of privacy, and subsequently distributes the image taken, where the distribution of the image would cause a reasonable person to suffer serious emotional distress.
Click to expand...
 
Skripka said:
If you were stupid enough to take photos (or have them taken) that are pornographic of yourself....you deserve what you get.
Click to expand...
I'm really tired to read this respond. Its rubbish and dumb. It's like saying to someone: you parked your car in an unsafe neighborhood, if it gets stolen its your fault. Or that you are connected to internet, if you get hacked its your fault. The person doing the crime is responsible, not the victim.

Should the person make sure those pictures are in a safe space, yes. But is it his/her fault if those pictures are leak by an asshole they used to trust, no.
 
Skripka said:
Guy1: Hey what are you in for?
Guy2: Double homicide.
Guy2: And you?
Guy1: I got dumped by my ex, and posted pics of her doing the spread eagle online.
Click to expand...

Well it beats the hell out of the guy serving time for tearing the tags off of pillows and mattresses.
 
MrPatate said:
I'm really tired to read this respond. Its rubbish and dumb. It's like saying to someone: you parked your car in an unsafe neighborhood, if it gets stolen its your fault. Or that you are connected to internet, if you get hacked its your fault. The person doing the crime is responsible, not the victim.

Should the person make sure those pictures are in a safe space, yes. But is it his/her fault if those pictures are leak by an asshole they used to trust, no.
Click to expand...

Sanity Test: Should Anthony Weiner be able to have arrested persons who leaked his compromising photos of his junk to the media? Because under this law, he would be able to have arrested and jailed those persons. Which I think everyone in this thread will agree is thoroughly asinine. Because the Anthony Weiner case never crossed any sane person's mind when this bill was drafted.


Look. a car being stolen or vandalized is criminal and damage to personal property. Apart from being embarrassed...what is the damage to having images taken (and later posted) that were illicit...that quite frankly, at one time, the victim more than probably consented to have taken? Is it really now such that it is a criminal act to embarass someone? Because that is what this bill says, quite literally. You don't want to be fired over your internet postings? Never post anything termination worthy. Never want illicit images of yourself in public? Never take or have taken illicit images of yourself.

Being a jerk is not criminal. This act is being a jerk/creep you name it....but not at all worth spending $4K/month to imprison someone over.
 
Ski said:
I'm sure nobody in these forums has anything to worry about... am I RIGHT fellas??? *cricket noises and mean faces*
Click to expand...

Well luckily for the ladies I've known in the past.... no one has a VCR anymore :D
 
Skripka said:
Sanity Test: Should Anthony Weiner be able to have arrested persons who leaked his compromising photos of his junk to the media? Because under this law, he would be able to have arrested and jailed those persons. Which I think everyone in this thread will agree is thoroughly asinine. Because the Anthony Weiner case never crossed any sane person's mind when this bill was drafted.


Look. a car being stolen or vandalized is criminal and damage to personal property. Apart from being embarrassed...what is the damage to having images taken (and later posted) that were illicit...that quite frankly, at one time, the victim more than probably consented to have taken? Is it really now such that it is a criminal act to embarass someone? Because that is what this bill says, quite literally. You don't want to be fired over your internet postings? Never post anything termination worthy. Never want illicit images of yourself in public? Never take or have taken illicit images of yourself.

Being a jerk is not criminal. This act is being a jerk/creep you name it....but not at all worth spending $4K/month to imprison someone over.
Click to expand...
Harassment
 
Semantics said:
Harassment
Click to expand...

Harassment is a *very* specific thing legally...which this law makes NO mention of harassment.

If someone is harassing you, by all means seek legal recourse. There are already penalties on the books for harassment...but being able to jail someone because you're embarrassed by photos you consented to have made (or made yourself) end up public is moronic. Because if you read the law, all that is required to jail someone for 6 months to a year....a $50,000 taxpayer expense per person....is that an "identifiable photo" be posted that embarrasses someone. There's a reason our jail/prison system is overfilled with too many convicts-because of laws like this.

How many times has the photo of our own Steve wearing a bra been posted? You can identify Steve, the image could well embarrass Steve...and everyone who has ever posted it could be jailed for a year if this moronic law passes. Do you get why this law is moronic yet?
 
Skripka said:
How many times has the photo of our own Steve wearing a bra been posted? You can identify Steve, the image could well embarrass Steve...and everyone who has ever posted it could be jailed for a year if this moronic law passes. Do you get why this law is moronic yet?
Click to expand...

For all that is good and holy, PLEASE post that here!!!
 
gflgs said:
For all that is good and holy, PLEASE post that here!!!
Click to expand...

Get a GenMay subscrip and you'll see it more than you want. ;)

*PS-I do not want to be legally imprisoned for posting it in the state of California, as some in this thread seem to favor.
 
gabhpr said:
These comments make me sad.
It is a shame that the geek community can be so disgusting.
Posting "revenge porn" should be illegal and it should get you jail time
Anyone that thinks otherwise is a creep or a misogynist
Click to expand...

Yes we need to let out real criminals from our already overcrowded prisons/jails so that somebody posting a nude picture of someone who should have known better in the first place can take their place. Yeah, I guess I'm a creep and misogynist.

Sure fine the hell out of the guy. Post nude pics of him all over the intertubes and on every street corner. But we have got to stop making every stupid crime a jailable offence. The only criminals that need to be in jail/prison are the violent ones. There are plenty of other ways to punish everyone else.
 
The original bill as it was introduced may have targeted consensually filmed revenge porn, but the bill that passed differs greatly from the introduced bill and requires that the filming be done without the victim's consent. As far as I can tell this doesn't really change much of anything from the existing California law where it's already illegal to film someone naked without their consent.

This is the actual addition to the existing law, as it passed in the California senate:
(4) Any person who photographs or records by any means the image of another, identifiable person without his or her consent who is in a state of full or partial undress in any area in which the person being photographed or recorded has a reasonable expectation of privacy, and subsequently distributes the image taken, where the distribution of the image would cause a reasonable person to suffer serious emotional distress.
Click to expand...
 
"Lets send MORE PEOPLE to jail and make more MONEY"

In the end, if you allow yourself to have risqué photos/movies taken of yourself, or GIVE someone such things, you're asking for trouble.
 
When I first read that I thought the title said reverse porn. was trying to figure out what the hell that was. lol
 
Just saw that damicatz already pointed out the bill doesn't really do anything way before I did (reading fail on my part). Though you can understand my confusion since you all decided to continue discussing it as though he didn't.
 
damicatz said:
The bill does not ban revenge porn in its typical form, which is taking "sexting" images and distributing them. It only bans distributing images that were recorded without the other parties consent.

Sometimes, reading does help.
Click to expand...
So if the person takes the photo of the other person and the other person at the time consented, what's to prevent them from claiming they didn't consent?
 
jpm100 said:
So if the person takes the photo of the other person and the other person at the time consented, what's to prevent them from claiming they didn't consent?
Click to expand...

I actually run into this issue and not one person has claimed that they didn't consent at the time the pictures were taken. The issue becomes one of "whose pictures are they"? In my state, it is rare for a D.A. to prosecute because they are the poster's pictures taken by a consenting adult at the time the pictures were taken.
 
Skripka said:
If you were stupid enough to take photos (or have them taken) that are pornographic of yourself....you deserve what you get, when you piss someone off and leave those photos lying around. You don't want illicit pictures posted of yourself floating around-PROTIP-don't have illicit photos taken of yourself. Seriously.
Click to expand...

not sure if serious

self made porn is one of the best things about living in the modern age
 
I am under the impression that people who make self-porn of/with their SO are most likely the people who are given to getting-into/causing problems. :confused:
 
Do people really believe that they can have sex videos of themselves NOT wind up on the internet? I would like to sell these people some bridges.
 
This site desperately needs an edit button... EVERY other website on the internet.. =P

Posting pictures like this online, or anywhere else for that matter, even if it's just showing them to a friend, is a violation of ones privacy, and should be illegal everywhere.
 
Flyboat said:
what heck is revenge porn?
Click to expand...

You film yourself and someone you have a beef with fucking (but you act like you don't) , you post it online and sell it , they can't do shit about it other than to bring it to a civil lawsuit and more often then not they get some money but it doesn't halt the spread of the act.

TL;DR version? Its a law for fucking morons that don't have half a brain and require the state government to step in and govern shit they shouldn't have to. I feel ZERO sympathy for idiots that film themselves fucking and expect to remain civil from a bad break up. Filming yourself having sex is like adding a check to a question on the fucktard quiz.

So many dumb fucks in this world and it seems like the numbers are just constantly swelling.
 
gabhpr said:
These comments make me sad.
It is a shame that the geek community can be so disgusting.
Posting "revenge porn" should be illegal and it should get you jail time
Anyone that thinks otherwise is a creep or a misogynist
Click to expand...

5bHWXxH.gif
 
Better somebody get satisfaction from watching fictional revenge porn performed by consenting adults than to enact that revenge. Of course, this is a value judgement derived from logic, which is a banned phenomenon in every sitting parliament in the world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top