Examine individual changes

''''Pussy Nigger bItchRevenge porn''' or '''revenge pornography''' is the [[sexually explicit]] portrayal of one or more people that is distributed without their consent via any medium.<ref name=W346>{{harvnb|Citron & Franks|2014|p=346}}</ref> The sexually explicit images or video may be made by a partner of an [[intimate relationship]] with the knowledge and consent of the subject, or it may be made without his or her knowledge. The possession of the material may be used by the perpetrators to blackmail the subjects into performing other sex acts, to coerce them into continuing the relationship, or to punish them for ending the relationship. Halder and [[Karuppannan Jaishankar|Jaishankar]] (2013) define revenge porn as: ''"an act whereby the perpetrator satisfies his anger and frustration for a broken relationship through publicizing false, sexually provocative portrayal of his / her victim, by misusing the information that he may have known naturally and that he may have stored in his personal computer, or may have been conveyed to his electronic device by the victim herself, or may have been stored in the device with the consent of the victim herself; and which may essentially have been done to publicly defame the victim".''<ref>Halder, D., & Jaishankar, K. (2013). Revenge Porn by Teens in the United States and India: A Socio-Legal Analysis International Annals of Criminology, 51(1-2), 85-111, 2013.</ref> In the wake of civil lawsuits and the increasing numbers of reported incidents, legislation has been passed in a number of countries and jurisdictions to outlaw the practice, though approaches have varied. The practice has also been described as a form of [[psychological abuse]] and [[domestic violence]], as well as a form of [[sexual abuse]].<ref>{{cite thesis|url=http://summit.sfu.ca/item/15668|title="Stripped": An analysis of revenge porn victims' lives after victimization|first=Samantha|last=Bates|publisher=Simon Fraser University|date=2015-08-04|accessdate=2016-01-23}}</ref> The term "revenge porn" generally refers to the uploading of this sexually explicit material to [[humiliate]] and [[intimidate]] the subject, who has broken off the relationship.<ref name= W346/> The term is also often misused to describe non 'revenge' scenarios, including nonconsensual pornography distributed by [[hacker (term)|hackers]] or by individuals seeking profit or notoriety.<ref>{{harvnb|Hayward & Rahn|2015}}</ref> The images are usually accompanied by [[doxing|sufficient information]] to identify the pictured individual, typically names and locations, and can include links to [[social media]] profiles, home addresses and workplaces.<ref>Emily Bazelon, [http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2013/09/revenge_porn_legislation_a_new_bill_in_california_doesn_t_go_far_enough.html Why Do We Tolerate Revenge Porn?"], ''[[Slate (magazine)|Slate]]'' (Sept. 25, 2013).</ref><ref name="larson">Eric Larson, [http://mashable.com/2013/10/21/revenge-porn/ "It's Still Easy to Get Away With Revenge Porn"], ''[[Mashable]]'', 21 October 2013.</ref> Victims, whose images expose them to [[workplace discrimination]], [[cyber-stalking]] or physical attack, can have their lives ruined as a result. Given the practice by some companies of searching for potential sources of bad publicity, many victims of revenge porn have lost their jobs and found themselves effectively unhirable.<ref name = Citron>Danielle K. Citron, [http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/29/opinion/citron-revenge-porn/index.html "‘Revenge porn’ should be a crime"], ''CNN Opinion'' (Aug. 30, 2013).</ref> Jurisdictions which have passed laws against revenge porn include [[Israel]], [[Germanyeatmytits]], the [[United Kingdom]], thirty-four states of the [[United States]],<ref>{{cite web|last1=Cyber Civil Rights Initiative|title=34 States + DC Have Revenge Porn Laws|url=http://www.cybercivilrights.org/revenge-porn-laws/|website=ccri.org|accessdate=11 July 2016}}</ref> and the [[Australia]]n states of Victoria, New South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory,<ref name="auto">{{cite newspaper|url=http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/now--a-crime-in-act-to-share-an-intimate-photo-without-consent-20170816-gxx8sa.html|title=Canberrans who publish, or threaten to publish, 'revenge porn' now face jail|first=Katie|last=Burgess|date=16 August 2017|newspaper=The Canberra Times}}</ref> and South Australia.<ref name="abc.net.au">{{cite news|url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-05/criminalising-'revenge-porn'-in-nsw-a-step-closer/7813446|title='Revenge porn' to be criminalised in response to NSW privacy inquiry|author=Lucy McNally|date=4 September 2016|publisher=Australian Broadcasting Corporation|accessdate=7 September 2016}}</ref> ==Background== In the 1980s, ''[[Hustler]]'' magazine began a monthly feature of reader-submitted images of naked women called "Beaver Hunt".<ref name=artporn>Kelly Dennis, ''Art/Porn: A History of Seeing and Touching'', Oxford International Publishers (2009)</ref> Beaver Hunt photographs were often accompanied by details about the woman, like her hobbies, her sexual fantasies, and sometimes her name.<ref name=artporn /> Not all of the women featured in Beaver Hunt submitted their own images and several women sued the magazine for publishing their photographs without their permission, or without verifying information on forged consent forms.<ref>See, e.g., [http://leagle.com/decision/19841820736F2d1084_11634.xml/WOOD%20v.%20HUSTLER%20MAGAZINE,%20INC. ''Wood v. Hustler''], 736 F.2d 1084 (5th Cir. 1984).</ref> Two decades later, Italian researcher [[Sergio Messina]] identified "realcore pornography", a new genre consisting of images and videos of ex-girlfriends distributed through [[Usenet]] groups.<ref name=history>Alexa Tsoulis-Reay, [http://nymag.com/news/features/sex/revenge-porn-2013-7 "A Brief History of Revenge Porn"], ''New York Magazine'' (July 21, 2013).</ref> In 2008, amateur porn aggregator [[XTube]] began receiving complaints that pornographic content had been posted without subjects' consent. Several sites began staging consensual [[pornography]] to resemble revenge porn, as well as hosting "authentic" user-submitted content.<ref name=history /><ref name=twsEconomist>{{cite news|title=Revenge porn: Misery merchants|url=https://www.economist.com/news/international/21606307-how-should-online-publication-explicit-images-without-their-subjects-consent-be|work=[[The Economist]]|date=5 July 2014}}</ref> Revenge porn began garnering international media attention when [[Hunter Moore]] launched the website ''[[IsAnyoneUp]]'' in 2010.<ref name=frontier>On The Media, [http://www.onthemedia.org/story/173718-revenge-porns-latest-frontier/transcript "Revenge Porn’s Latest Frontier"], WNYC (Dec. 2, 2011).</ref> The site featured user-submitted pornography,<ref name=frontier /> and was one of the first sites to adopt the model initiated by Beaver Hunt: ''IsAnyoneUp'' often included identifying information, such as the subjects' names, employers, addresses and links to social networking profiles.<ref name=frontier /> Activist [[Charlotte Laws]] was the first person to speak out against Moore and one of the first people to publicly support revenge porn victims. This prompted backlash from some of Moore's devotees, who stalked Laws and sent her death threats.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2014/mar/30/charlotte-laws-fight-with-internet-revenge-porn-king|title=Charlotte Laws' fight with Hunter Moore, the internet's revenge porn king|author=Carole Cadwalladr|work=the Guardian}}</ref> In February 2015, the [[social media]] site and [[Internet forum|online bulletin board]] [[Reddit]] announced a change to its privacy policy to ban the posting of sexually explicit content without the consent of those depicted. The announcement was made after a company meeting at which the issue of "illicit pornography—pictures and video—was a burning one".<ref name=2015Reddit>{{cite news|last1=Pardon|first1=Rhett|title=Reddit to Ban Sexually Explicit Content Posted Without Consent|url=http://www.xbiz.com/news/191561|accessdate=25 February 2015|publisher=XBIZ.com|date=February 24, 2015}}</ref> In March 2015, [[Twitter]] followed suit with new rules to address the posting of unauthorized content and specifically revenge porn. Starting March 11, Twitter stated it would immediately remove "any 'link to a photograph, video, or digital image of you in a state of nudity or engaged in any act of sexual conduct' that has been posted without consent."<ref name=2015TwitterChange>{{cite web|last1=Hymes|first1=Tom|title=Twitter Targets Revenge Porn with New Abusive Behavior Policies New tougher prohibitions start today.|url=http://business.avn.com/articles/technology/Twitter-Targets-Revenge-Porn-with-New-Abusive-Behavior-Policies-591209.html|website=AVN.com|publisher=Adult Video News|accessdate=12 March 2015}}</ref> According to a ''[[Washington Post]]'' article, the changes were in response to growing concerns "that [Twitter] has not done enough to prevent bad behavior on its site."<ref>{{cite news|last1=Tsukayama|first1=Hayley|title=Twitter updates its rules to specifically ban ‘revenge porn'|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2015/03/11/twitter-updates-its-rules-to-specifically-ban-revenge-porn/|accessdate=12 March 2015|publisher=Washington Post|date=March 11, 2015}}</ref> In June 2015, [[Google]] announced it would remove links to revenge porn on request.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Golbeck|first1=Jennifer|title=Google to Remove Revenge Porn from Search Results|url=http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2015/06/19/google_announces_plan_to_remove_revenge_porn_from_search_results.html|website=slate.com|publisher=[[Slate (magazine)|Slate]]}}</ref> [[Microsoft]] followed suit in July.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Beauchere|first1=Jacqueline|title=‘Revenge porn:' Putting victims back in control|url=http://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2015/07/22/revenge-porn-putting-victims-back-in-control/|website=blogs.microsoft.com/|publisher=[[Microsoft]]}}</ref> Both have placed forms on-line for victims to complete.<ref>[https://support.google.com/websearch/troubleshooter/3111061#ts=2889054,2889099 "Remove information from Google"]. Retrieved December 24, 2015.</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Report Content to Microsoft|url=https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/getsupport?oaspworkflow=start_1.0.0.0&wfname=capsub&productkey=RevengePorn&ccsid=635737542193040502|website=support.microsoft.com|publisher=[[Microsoft]]}}</ref> Together the two organizations account for nearly 90% of the internet search market in the US.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Chavez|first1=Ronald|title=Microsoft joins Google in removing links to revenge porn|url=http://mashable.com/2015/07/22/microsoft-joins-google-will-remove-links-to-revenge-porn/|website=mashable.com|publisher=[[Mashable]]}}</ref> ==Advocacy== The website ''endrevengeporn.org'', founded by [[Holly Jacobs]], a revenge porn victim, campaigns for the criminalization of revenge porn and considers it to be a form of [[sexual abuse]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.endrevengeporn.org/petition/|title=End Revenge Porn: Petition|website=www.endrevengeporn.org|accessdate=1 January 2015}}</ref><ref name="CCRI FAQ">{{cite web|title=Frequently Asked Questions|url=http://www.endrevengeporn.org/faqs/|website=.endrevengeporn.org|publisher=[[Cyber Civil Rights Initiative]]|quote=Revenge porn, n. – A form of sexual abuse that involves the distribution of nude/sexually explicit photos and/or videos of an individual without their consent. Revenge porn, sometimes called cyber-rape or nonconsensual pornography, is usually posted by a scorned ex-lover or friend, in order to seek revenge after a relationship has gone sour.}}</ref> Jacobs is also the founder of the [[Cyber Civil Rights Initiative]] (CCRI), a nonprofit organization that seeks to challenge cyber harassment. [[Danielle Citron]], known for her discourse on cyber harassment as a civil rights issue, is an advisor for the CCRI.<ref>{{cite web|title=CCRI: About us|url=http://www.cybercivilrights.org/about|website=cybercivilrights.org|publisher=[[Cyber Civil Rights Initiative]]}}</ref><ref>{{harvardnb|Citron|2009}}</ref> [[Mary Anne Franks]], CCRI's Vice-President and Legislative & Tech Policy Director, has been heavily involved with legislative and policy efforts to combat revenge porn.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dailydot.com/politics/mary-anne-franks-revenge-porn/|title=Meet the Krav Maga-fighting law professor behind U.S. revenge porn laws|work=The Daily Dot}}</ref> Dr. Laura Hilly and Kira Allmann of the [[Oxford Human Rights Hub]] have characterized revenge porn as a kind of gendered hate speech designed to silence women. An article of theirs argues that this stifling of free expression is often ignored in debates over revenge porn.<ref name=OxHRH>{{cite news|last1=Hilly|first1=Laura|last2=Allman|first2=Kira|title=Revenge porn does not only try to shame women – it tries to silence them too|url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jun/22/revenge-porn-women-free-speech-abuse?CMP=ema_565|accessdate=24 June 2015|work=The Guardian}}</ref> While not solely focused on revenge porn, the older non-profit organization ''Without My Consent'' provides legal resources related to it and lobbies to protect the privacy and free speech rights of online harassment victims.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/24/magazine/mag-24lede-t.html|title=How to unmask the Internet's vilest characters|first=Emily|last=Bazelon|publisher=New York Times Magazine|date=2011-04-22|accessdate=2016-01-28}}</ref> Since 2012, there has also been a website ''Women Against Revenge Porn'', calling itself "not an organization or a business", which has been cited as an advocacy group for people exposed in revenge porn.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.smh.com.au/national/revenge-porn-the-ugly-side-of-sexting-20131122-2y1ns.html|title=Revenge porn the ugly side of sexting|first=Miles|last=Godfrey|publisher=Sydney Morning Herald|date=2013-11-23|accessdate=2016-01-28}}</ref> In late 2014, Elisa D'Amico and David Bateman, partners at the law firm [[K&L Gates]], launched the Cyber Civil Rights Legal Project (CCRLP), a project offering free legal help to victims of revenge porn.<ref>{{Cite web|title = Law Firm Founds Project to Fight 'Revenge Porn'|url = https://dealbook.nytimes.com/2015/01/29/law-firm-founds-project-to-fight-revenge-porn/?_r=0|website = DealBook|access-date = 2016-01-28|first = Matthew|last = Goldstein}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title = BigLaw firm fights 'revenge porn' with pro bono advocacy; suit alleges copyright infringement|url = http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/biglaw_firm_fights_revenge_porn_with_pro_bono_advocacy_suit_alleges_copyrig|website = ABA Journal|access-date = 2016-01-28|first = Debra|last = Cassens Weiss}}</ref> To better facilitate the introduction of relevant legislation, some anti-revenge porn activists have called upon others in their community to use gender-neutral language more often when discussing the issue.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://socialchangenyu.com/revenge-porn-legislation-activists-and-the-lessons-from-sexual-harassment-jurisprudence-gender-neutrality-public-perceptions-and-implications/#_ftn1|title=Revenge Porn Legislation Activists and the Lessons from Sexual Harassment Jurisprudence: Gender Neutrality, Public Perceptions and Implications|first=Amy|last=Lai|publisher=NYU|year=2015|accessdate=2016-01-23}}</ref> The term "revenge porn" itself has also come under fire. The CCRI for instance prefers the term "nonconsensual pornography".<ref name=CCRImission>{{cite web|last=Staff|title=About|url=http://www.endrevengeporn.org/welcome/|publisher=CCRI|accessdate=27 March 2014}}</ref> In analogy with "child sexual abuse images" being the preferred term for child pornography, McGlynn and Rackley proposed "image-based sexual abuse".<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = McGlynn | first1 = Clare | last2 = Rackley | first2 = Erika | title = Not ‘revenge porn', but abuse: let's call it image-based sexual abuse (blog) | journal = Inherently Brief | volume = 41 | publisher = Postgraduate Students, [[Durham University|Gender & Law at Durham (GLAD)]] via [[WordPress]]| date = 15 February 2016 | url = https://inherentlyhuman.wordpress.com/2016/02/15/not-revenge-porn-but-abuse-lets-call-it-image-based-sexual-abuse/ | ref = none | postscript = .}}</ref> Along with journalist [[Sarah Jeong]], they have argued that it is harmful to associate revenge porn with pornography which revolves around consent. Jeong also considers it a mistake for activists to focus on revenge porn itself as the main problem, rather than the underlying culture which leads to its subjects being socially ostracized.<ref>{{Cite web|title = Snap Judgment {{!}} Bitch Media|url = https://bitchmedia.org/article/snap-judgment-revenge-porn|website = Bitch Media|accessdate = 2016-01-03}}</ref> In the [[Australian Capital Territory]], an electronic petition was started in March 2017 that calls upon the A.C.T. Legislative Assembly to consider criminalizing the non-consensual disclosure of sexual images and videos.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/petition-calls-on-act-government-to-introduce-revenge-porn-laws-20170322-gv4gaj.html|title=Calls for ACT government to introduce 'revenge porn' laws|first=Michael|last=Gorey|date=23 March 2017|work=canberratimes.com.au|accessdate=27 March 2017}}</ref> The A.C.T Legislative Assembly consequently passed a Bill that criminalised the distribution, or threatened distribution, of intimate photos and videos on 16 August 2017.<ref name="auto"/> ==Legislation== Laws banning revenge pornography have been slow to emerge.<ref name= W347>{{harvnb|Citron & Franks|2014|p=347}}</ref> Contributing factors include a lack of understanding about the gravity of the problem, free speech concerns,<ref name=greenfield>{{cite news|last1=Greenfield|first1=Rebecca|title=Why Isn't Revenge Porn Illegal Everywhere?|url=http://www.thewire.com/technology/2013/08/why-isnt-revenge-porn-illegal-everywhere/68758/|accessdate=27 June 2015|work=The Wire (The Atlantic)|date=27 Aug 2013}}</ref> belief that existing law provides adequate protection,<ref name=greenfield/> a lack of care, historically, for women's issues, and "misunderstandings of [[First Amendment]] doctrine" (Citron & Franks).<ref name=W347/><ref>{{cite news|last1=Citron|first1=Danielle|title=Debunking the First Amendment Myths Surrounding Revenge Porn Laws|url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/daniellecitron/2014/04/18/debunking-the-first-amendment-myths-surrounding-revenge-porn-laws/|website=forbes.com|publisher=[[Forbes]]}}</ref> The [[American Civil Liberties Union]] and the [[Electronic Frontier Foundation]] have drawn attention to the implications for free speech if legislation is too broad.<ref>{{cite web|title=‘Revenge Porn' Bill Needs Changes|url=http://www.acluct.org/updates/revenge-porn-bill-needs-changes/|website=acluct.org|publisher=[[American Civil Liberties Union]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last1=Franks|first1=Mary Anne|title=The ACLU's Frat House Take on 'Revenge Porn'|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mary-anne-franks/the-aclus-frat-house-take_b_6980146.html|website=huffingtonpost.com|publisher=[[Huffington Post]]|date=1 April 2015}}</ref><ref name="Arizona">{{cite web|last1=Mullin|first1=Joe|title=Arizona makes deal with ACLU, won't enforce bad law on "revenge porn"|url=https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/07/arizona-makes-deal-with-aclu-wont-enforce-bad-law-on-revenge-porn/|website=arstechnica.com|publisher=[[Ars Technica]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/victims_are_taking_on_revenge_porn_websites_for_posting_photos_they_didnt_c|title=Victims are taking on 'revenge porn' websites for posting photos they didn't consent to|first=Lorelei|last=Laird|publisher=ABA Journal|date=2013-11-01|accessdate=2016-01-28}}</ref> ===Asia=== Since 2009, the Philippines has criminalized copying, reproducing, sharing or exhibiting sexually explicit images or videos over the Internet without written consent of the individual depicted.<ref>{{cite web | title = Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009 (Republic Act No. 9995) | date = 15 February 2010 | accessdate = 25 June 2015 | work = The LawPhil Project | url = http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2010/ra_9995_2010.html}}</ref> [[Israel]] responded quickly to public pressure in January 2014 and passed a law making sharing sexually explicit videos without the consent of the pictured individual punishable by up to five years in prison.<ref name="timesofisrael.com">{{cite news | author = Yaakov, Yifa | url = http://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-law-labels-revenge-porn-a-sex-crime|title= Israeli Law Makes Revenge Porn a Sex Crime | work = The Times of Israel | date = 6 January 2014}}</ref> After Israel's bill was passed, it was widely predicted that nearby countries such as Egypt, Lebanon and Saudi Arabia would not introduce similar bills as they have been slow to adopt legislation against sexual harassment in general.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/06/sexual-harassment-made-crime-egypt-201465172339220160.html|title=Sexual harassment made a crime in Egypt|publisher=Al Jazeera|date=2014-06-06|accessdate=2016-01-23}}</ref> However, some commentators have suggested that victims could find recourse in existing laws against pornography, indecency, defamation and invasion of privacy.<ref>{{cite journal | author = Ajbaili, Mustapha | date = 10 January 2014 | title = Banning ‘Revenge Porn:' Will Arabs follow Israel's lead? | work = Al Arabiya News | accessdate = 25 June 2015 | url = http://english.alarabiya.net/en/perspective/features/2014/01/10/Banning-Revenge-Porn-Will-Arabs-follow-Israel-s-lead-.html}}</ref> Japan passed a bill in November 2014 which made it a crime to communicate "a private sexual image of another person" without consent.<ref>{{harvnb|Matsui|2015|loc= [https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/pacrimlp24&id=305 pp. 289-319]}}{{Subscription needed|via=[[HeinOnline]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.loc.gov/law/foreign-news/article/japan-new-revenge-porn-prevention-act/|title=Japan: New Revenge Porn Prevention Act|first=Sayuri|last=Umeda|publisher=Library of Congress|date=2014-11-26|accessdate=2016-01-23}}</ref> ===Australia === In November 2014, the Australian state of [[Victoria (Australia)|Victoria]] modified its existing [[sexting]] laws. In addition to prohibiting the sending of nude pictures without consent, the amendment also added safeguards to prevent minors from receiving child pornography charges for self-made content.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.vic.gov.au/news/sexting.html|title=Sexting|first=|last=|date=3 November 2014|publisher=Department of Justice and Regulation, Government of Victoria|accessdate=27 March 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/Domino/Web_Notes/LDMS/PubStatbook.nsf/f932b66241ecf1b7ca256e92000e23be/73A4F3B93BAA3547CA257D780015AC59/$FILE/14-074aa%20authorised.pdf|title=Crimes Amendment (Sexual Offences and Other Matters) Act 2014|publisher=Government of Victoria|accessdate=26 February 2017}}</ref> The legislation followed an upsurge in the practice and the case ''Giller v Procopets'', which had to be argued on the equity of [[breach of confidence]] and [[tort]] grounds.<ref>The Age, 4 October 2015: [http://www.theage.com.au/national/government-urged-to-outlaw-revenge-porn-20150926-gjvod5 Revenge porn: government urged to make it illegal]</ref><ref>Supreme Court of Victoria – Court of Appeal, [http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/vic/VSCA/2008/236.html ''Giller v Procopets'' &#91;2008&#93; VSCA 236 (10 December 2008)]</ref><ref>[https://www.ag.gov.au/Consultations/Documents/Righttosueforseriousinvasionofpersonalprivacy-issuespaper/69%20Peter%20A%20P%20Clarke.PDF A STATUTORY RIGHT OF PRIVACY] by Peter A P Clark</ref> [[South Australia]] followed in 2016, with a bill making it illegal to distribute or threaten to distribute invasive nude photographs.<ref name="abc.net.au"/><ref>{{cite web|title=Summary Offences (Filming and Sexting Offences) Amendment Bill 2016|url=https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/B/CURRENT/SUMMARY%20OFFENCES%20(FILMING%20AND%20SEXTING%20OFFENCES)%20AMENDMENT%20BILL%202016.aspx|publisher=Government of South Australia|author=Office of Parliamentary Counsel|accessdate=19 January 2017}}</ref> [[New South Wales]] passed a Bill that criminalised the distribution, or threatened distribution, of intimate photos or videos<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/bills/Pages/bill-details.aspx?pk=3396|title=Crimes Amendment (Intimate Images) Bill 2017|publisher=Parliament of New South Wales|accessdate=28 June 2017}}</ref>, which commenced on 25 August 2017<ref>{{cite newspaper|url=http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/revenge-porn-now-a-crime-in-nsw-20170825-gy4c9d.html|title=Revenge porn now a crime in NSW|author=|date=25 August 2017|publisher=|agency=Australian Associated Press|newspaper=The Sydney Morning Herald}}</ref>. On 16 August 2017 the [[Australian Capital Territory]] passed a Bill that criminalised the distribution, or threatened distribution, of intimate photos and videos.<ref name="auto"/> From 2015 onward, there have been increasing calls across Australia to pass laws designed to combat revenge porn.<ref>The Age, 15 September 2015: [http://www.theage.com.au/comment/revenge-porn-laws-need-to-be-more-robust-and-comprehensive-20150914-gjm0t6 'Revenge porn' needs more than a slap on the wrists]</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/pressure-builds-for-revenge-porn-laws-in-queensland-20150915-gjnhey.html|title=Pressure builds for revenge porn laws|first=Amy|last=Remeikis|date=15 September 2015|website=Brisbane Times|accessdate=7 September 2016}}</ref> As of 2017, the Attorney General of [[Western Australia]] has confirmed that relevant legislation is being drafted.<ref name="abc.net.au"/><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/western-australia/push-for-new-revenge-porn-laws-in-wa/news-story/ec310500d3fd582390f2c6289ea0f385|title=Push for new ‘revenge porn' laws in WA|author=Claire Bickers|date=5 March 2016|website=Perth Now|accessdate=7 September 2016}}</ref> ===North America=== ====Canada==== In 2014, with the passage of the Protecting Canadians from Online Crime Act, Canada criminalized the "non-consensual distribution of intimate images" that were made under a "reasonable [[expectation of privacy]]".<ref>{{cite web | title = Protecting Canadians from Online Crime Act (S.C. 2014, c. 31) | work = Justice Laws Website | date = 9 December 2014 | accessdate = 25 June 2015 | url = http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/annualstatutes/2014_31/page-1.html}}</ref> ====United States ==== [[Tort]], [[Privacy law|privacy]], [[copyright]], and criminal laws offer remedies against people who submit revenge porn.<ref>Woodrow Hartzog, [http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2013/05/how-fight-revenge-porn "How to Fight Revenge Porn"], Stanford Law Center for Internet and Society (May 10, 2013).</ref><ref>Doug Barry, [http://jezebel.com/5993942/a-new-bill-in-florida-would-make-non+consensual-revenge-porn-a-felony "A New Bill in Florida Would Make Non-Consensual ‘Revenge Porn’ a Felony"], ''[[Jezebel]]'', 7 April 2013.</ref> Slightly more than half of all [[U.S. state]]s have laws expressly applicable to revenge porn: [[Alabama]],<ref>{{cite news|title=New Alabama law covers 'revenge porn,' other sex crimes|url=http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2017/05/new_alabama_law_covers_revenge.html|website=al.com|date=31 May 2017|author=Mike Cason}}</ref> [[Alaska]], [[Arizona]], [[Arkansas]], [[California]],<ref name=twsEconomist/> [[Colorado]], [[Connecticut]],<ref>{{cite act|url=https://www.cga.ct.gov/2015/ACT/PA/2015PA-00213-R00HB-06921-PA.htm|title=An Act Concerning Invasions of Privacy|date=7 July 2015|number=15-213|accessdate=29 August 2017}}</ref> [[Delaware]], [[Florida]], [[Georgia (U.S. state)|Georgia]], [[Hawaii]], [[Idaho]], [[Illinois]],<ref>{{cite journal |last=Garcia |first=Monique |date=December 30, 2014 |title=Quinn signs 'revenge porn' ban into law |url=http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-quinn-signs-illinois-revenge-porn-law-met-1230-20141229-story.html |journal=Chicago Tribune |accessdate=December 31, 2014}}</ref> [[Louisiana]], [[Maine]], [[Maryland]], [[Michigan]],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2015-2016/billenrolled/Senate/pdf/2015-SNB-0508.pdf|title=Enrolled Senate Bill No. 508|publisher=Michigan Legislature|year=2016|accessdate=2017-02-26}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2015-2016/billenrolled/Senate/pdf/2015-SNB-0509.pdf|title=Enrolled Senate Bill No. 509|publisher=Michigan Legislature|year=2016|accessdate=2017-02-26}}</ref> [[Minnesota]],<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bills/text.php?number=SF2713&version=2&session=ls89&session_year=2016&session_number=0&format=pdf|title=SF No. 2713|publisher=Minnesota Legislature|date=2016-08-01|accessdate=2017-02-26}}</ref> [[Nevada]], [[New Hampshire]],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_status/billText.aspx?id=962&txtFormat=html|title=Senate Bill 465-FN: An Act Relative to the nonconsensual dissemination of private sexual images|date=10 March 2016|website=The New Hampshire General Court|access-date=7 December 2016}}</ref> [[New Jersey]],<ref name=twsEconomist/> [[New Mexico]], [[North Carolina]], [[North Dakota]], [[Oklahoma]],<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://legiscan.com/OK/text/SB1257/2016|title=Oklahoma SB1257 {{!}} 2016 {{!}} Regular Session|website=LegiScan|access-date=2016-06-06}}</ref> [[Oregon]], [[Pennsylvania]], [[Texas]], [[Utah]], [[Vermont]], [[West Virginia]],<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.thenewscenter.tv/content/news/WV-Governor-signs-dozens-of-new-bills-including-revenge-porn-law-420517703.html|title=WV Governor signs "revenge porn" bill into law|date=26 April 2017|work=TheNewsCenter}}</ref> [[Virginia]], [[Washington (state)|Washington]] and [[Wisconsin]].<ref name="ncsl.org">{{cite web | url = http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/telecom/cyberstalking-and-cyberharassment-laws.aspx | title = State Cyberstalking and Cyberharassment Laws | work = National Conference of State Legislatures | date = 16 November 2012}}</ref> For example, New Jersey law prohibits both the capture and the distribution of sexually explicit photographs and films by any person, "knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so" and without the subjects' consent.<ref>New Jersey Invasion of Privacy, [ftp://www.njleg.state.nj.us/20022003/AL03/206_.PDF "N.J.S.A. 2C:14-9"].</ref> The law was used to prosecute [[Dharun Ravi]], the [[Rutgers University|Rutgers]] student who distributed webcam footage of his roommate Tyler Clementi engaging in sexual activity, after which [[Suicide of Tyler Clementi|Clementi killed himself]].<ref>Megan DiMarco and Alexi Friedman, [http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/05/dharun_ravi_sentenced_for_bias.html "Live Blog: Dharun Ravi Sentenced to 30 Days in Jail"], ''The Star-Ledger'' (May 12, 2012).</ref> The law has also been used to prosecute several men who allegedly distributed revenge porn of their ex-girlfriends.<ref>Marueen O'Connor, [http://nymag.com/thecut/2013/08/crusading-sisterhood-of-revenge-porn-victims.html "The Crusading Sisterhood of Revenge-Porn Victims"], ''[[New York Magazine]]'' (Aug. 29, 2013).</ref> [[Mary Anne Franks]], a law professor and constitutional scholar who drafted the model legislation and advised legislators in the majority of the above states, emphasizes that many of these laws are still deeply flawed.<ref name= Huff4>{{cite web|last1=Franks|first1=Mary Anne|title=How to Defeat 'Revenge Porn': First, Recognize It's About Privacy, Not Revenge|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mary-anne-franks/how-to-defeat-revenge-porn_b_7624900.html|website=huffingtonpost.com|publisher=[[Huffington Post]]}}</ref> Representatives from the Department of Justice, California's Office of the Attorney General, 50 major technology companies, victim advocates, and legislative and law enforcement leaders joined together in 2015 to form a Cyber Exploitation Working Group, and have announced the creation of a working hub "to combat so-called cyber exploitation – the practice of anonymously posting explicit photographs of others online, often to extort money from the victims."<ref>{{Cite web|title = California teams with tech firms to fight cyber exploitation|url = http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-1015-cyber-exploitation-20151015-story.html|website = [[Los Angeles Times]]|accessdate = 2015-10-20|date = 2015-10-15|last = [[Associated Press]]}}</ref> ===== Criminal prosecutions ===== Several well-known revenge porn websites, including ''IsAnyoneUp'' and the ''Texxxan'', have been taken down in response to actual or threatened legal action.<ref>Erica Goode, [https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/24/us/victims-push-laws-to-end-online-revenge-posts.html?pagewanted=all "Victims Push Laws to End Online Revenge Posts"], ''New York Times'' 23 September 2013.</ref> The former was investigated by the FBI after anti-revenge porn activist [[Charlotte Laws]] uncovered a hacking scheme associated with the website. Indictments for fifteen felonies were handed down under the [[Computer Fraud and Abuse Act]] in January 2014 for the site owner and his accomplices, and the trial was initially set to begin in November 2014 in Los Angeles.<ref>Indictment, [http://cbsla.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/revenge-porn-moore-evens-indictment.pdf ''United States v. Hunter Moore''].</ref><ref name=2014FBITime>{{cite news|last=Roy|first=Jessica|title=Revenge-Porn King Hunter Moore Indicted on Federal Charges|url=http://time.com/1703/revenge-porn-king-hunter-moore-indicted-by-fbi/|publisher=Time|accessdate=19 April 2014}}</ref> [[Hunter Moore]], the owner of ''IsAnyoneUp'' pleaded guilty to hacking and identity theft in early 2015.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-courts/revenge-porn-kingpin-hunter-moore-pleads-guilty-faces-jail-n313061|title=Revenge Porn Kingpin Hunter Moore Pleads Guilty, Faces Jail|work=NBC News}}</ref> Moore was sentenced to two and a half years in prison on December 2, 2015.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/02/27/is-this-the-end-of-revenge-porn.html|title=Is This the End of Revenge Porn?|work=The Daily Beast}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/12/03/revenge-porn-purveyor-hunter-moore-is-sentenced-to-prison/|title=Revenge porn purveyor Hunter Moore is sentenced to prison|first=Abby|last=Ohlheiser|publisher=The Washington Post|date=2015-12-03|accessdate=2016-01-23}}</ref> In December 2013, California Attorney General [[Kamala Harris]] charged Kevin Bollaert, who ran the revenge porn website ''UGotPosted'', with 31 felony counts, including [[extortion]] and [[identity theft]].<ref>[https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-kamala-d-harris-announces-arrest-revenge-porn-website-operator "Press Release: Attorney General Kamala D. Harris Announces Arrest of Revenge Porn Website Operator"], California Office of the Attorney General.</ref> In March 2014, because the victim was under eighteen years old in the photos, a court in Ohio awarded damages of $385,000 against Bollaert. In April 2015 Bollaert was sentenced to 18 years in prison.<ref name="LAtimes_ 2015-04-03">{{Cite news | title = 'Revenge porn' website operator sentenced to 18 years | last = Perry | first = Tony | work = [[Los Angeles Times]] | date = 3 April 2015 | accessdate = 2015-04-04 | url = http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-revenge-porn-sentenced-20150403-story.html }}</ref> "Sitting behind a computer, committing what is essentially a cowardly and criminal act, will not shield predators from the law or jail", said Attorney General Harris following the verdict.<ref name="LAtimes_ 2015-04-03"/> Also in California, a man named Noe Iniguez was given jail time for posting a naked photo of his ex-girlfriend on her employer's [[Facebook]] page.<ref name="BBC_30307657">{{Cite news | title = 'Revenge porn' Facebook post leads to jail sentence | work = [[BBC News]] | date = 3 December 2014 | accessdate = 2015-04-04 | url = http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-30307657 }}</ref> Casey Meyering, the operator of revenge porn website ''WinByState'', was arrested<ref>{{cite web|url=http://napavalleyregister.com/news/local/revenge-porn-website-operator-sentenced-to-years/article_fd4ea4fe-16c7-517c-a763-115e92f66cdf.html|title='Revenge porn' website operator sentenced to 3 years|author=Sean Scully|work=Napa Valley Register}}</ref> in Oklahoma in 2014 and extradited to Napa County. Meyering's website invited users to submit nude photos of ex-girlfriends and other women, with the photos categorized by state. He would then make the women featured on his website pay $250 to have their photos taken down. There were about 400 images of California women on the website, including at least one in Napa Valley, where California Attorney General [[Kamala Harris]] had filed the case. After originally pleading not guilty, on May 8, 2015, the 28-year-old man pleaded no contest to one count of [[extortion]], three counts of attempted extortion, and one count of [[conspiracy (criminal)|conspiracy]]. He was sentenced to three years imprisonment as of early June 2015. =====Tort and privacy law===== States without specific laws about revenge porn have seen lawsuits alleging [[invasion of privacy]], [[privacy laws|public disclosure of private fact]] and [[intentional infliction of emotional distress]] against the individuals who uploaded the images.<ref>[https://www.scribd.com/doc/138909420/Revenge-Porn-Complaint-Holly-Jacobs-vs-Ryan-Seay Complaint in ''Jacobs v. Seay''], 13-1362 6CA0 (Fl. Apr. 18, 2013)</ref> Forty states, including California and New York, have [[computer crime|anti-cyberharassment]] laws that may be applicable to cases of revenge porn.<ref name="ncsl.org"/> In February 2014, a US$500,000 settlement was awarded to a Texas woman who brought suit against her ex-boyfriend for posting video and photos of her on the Internet. The state did not have a specific "revenge porn" law at the time of the lawsuit.<ref name=ABCNewsTX>{{cite web|last=Staff|title=Houston woman wins $500,000 in 'revenge porn' lawsuit|url=http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/national_world&id=9447698|publisher=abclocal.go.com|accessdate=3 March 2014}}</ref><ref name=AVNTexas>{{cite web|last=Staff|title=Texas Jury Awards Revenge-Porned Woman Half a Mil|url=http://business.avn.com/articles/legal/Texas-Jury-Awards-Revenge-Porned-Woman-Half-a-Mil-550467.html|publisher=Adult Video News|accessdate=3 March 2014}}</ref><ref>Adi Robertson, [https://www.theverge.com/2014/3/1/5459904/texas-woman-wins-half-million-dollar-revenge-porn-lawsuit "Texas Woman Wins Half a Million Dollars in Revenge Porn Lawsuit"], ''[[The Verge]]'' (Mar. 1, 2014)</ref> =====Communications Decency Act §230===== Some revenge porn lawsuits have named service providers and websites as defendants alongside individuals who uploaded the images.<ref>[https://www.scribd.com/doc/121463764/Class-Action-Suit-Against-GoDaddy-com-Texxxan-com ''Toups v. Godaddy.com''], No. D130018-C (Tex. June 18, 2013).</ref> The [[Communications Decency Act]], also known as §230, shields websites and service providers from liability for content posted by users providing they are not themselves co-creators of the content.<ref>[https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230 47 U.S.C. §230] Protection for Private Blocking and Screening of Offensive Material.</ref><ref name=lichter>{{cite news|last1=Lichter|first1=Susanna|title=Unwanted exposure: Civil and criminal liability for revenge porn hosts and posters|url=http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/privacy/unwanted-exposure-civil-and-criminal-liability-for-revenge-porn-hosts-and-posters|work=Harvard Journal of Law and Technology|date=28 May 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last1=Franks|first1=Mary Anne|title=The Lawless Internet? Myths and Misconceptions About CDA Section 230|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mary-anne-franks/section-230-the-lawless-internet_b_4455090.html|website=huffingtonpost.com|publisher=[[Huffington Post]]|date=18 December 2013}}</ref> If user-generated content posted to a website does not violate copyright or federal criminal laws, sites have no obligation to remove the content under §230.<ref>Jerry Brito, [http://reason.com/archives/2013/10/21/are-laws-against-revenge-porn-a-good-ide "Are Laws Against Revenge Porn A Good Idea?"] (Oct. 21, 2013).</ref><ref>{{harvnb|Wolf|2014|loc= [https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/tulicl23&id=259 pp. 255-264]}}{{Subscription needed|via=[[HeinOnline]]}}</ref> =====Copyright===== An estimated 80% of revenge porn pictures and videos are taken by the subjects themselves.<ref name="kelly">Heather Kelly, [http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/03/tech/web/revenge-porn-law-california/ "New California 'Revenge Porn' Law May Miss Some Victims"], ''CNN'' (Oct. 3, 2013).</ref> Those individuals can bring actions for [[copyright infringement]] against the person who uploaded their nude or semi-nude "[[selfie]]s". American victims may file [[Digital Millennium Copyright Act]] takedown notices with service providers.<ref>[https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/102 17 U.S.C. §102-Subject Matter of Copyright: In General].</ref> Revenge porn site [[MyEx.com]] has been a defendant in a copyright infringement case.<ref name=usdc>{{Cite web |url= http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1658&context=historical |title= Hollie Toups vs Google, Inc., Yahoo!, Inc. and www.myex.com|date= March 6, 2014 |work=United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas, Beaumont Division |accessdate=July 19, 2014}}</ref> =====First Amendment and anti-SLAPP===== Some [[free speech]] advocates object to revenge porn laws on [[First Amendment]] grounds, citing the fact that US laws restricting expression have a history of being overturned.<ref>''See'' [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2853347803518998660&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr ''United States v. Alvarez''], 132 S.Ct. 2537, 2544 (US 2012) ("[A]s a general matter, the First Amendment means that government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content").</ref><ref>Erin Fuchs, [http://www.businessinsider.com/is-revenge-porn-protected-by-the-first-amendment-2013-9 "Here's What the Constitution Says About Posting Naked Pictures Of Your Ex To The Internet"], ''[[Business Insider]]'' (Oct. 1, 2013).</ref> Journalist Sarah Jeong argues that new criminal laws meant to combat revenge porn are likely to be [[Overbreadth doctrine|overbroad]], resulting in unintended consequences.<ref>{{cite news | author = Jeong, Sarah | date = 28 October 2013 | title = Revenge Porn Is Bad. Criminalizing It Is Worse | work = Wired | accessdate = 25 June 2015 | url = https://www.wired.com/2013/10/why-criminalizing-revenge-porn-is-a-bad-idea/}}</ref> Revenge porn uploaders and websites may also challenge lawsuits using state protections against [[strategic lawsuit against public participation]]s (anti-SLAPP laws),<ref>{{cite news | author = Mullin, Joe | url = http://staging.arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/01/new-lawsuit-against-revenge-porn-site-also-targets-godaddy | title = New lawsuit against 'revenge porn' site also targets GoDaddy | work = Ars Technica | date = 22 January 2013}}</ref> which allow defendants to counter lawsuits aimed at stifling free speech.<ref>Twenty-five states currently have anti-SLAPP legislation. [http://www.chillingeffects.org/question.cgi?QuestionID=475 "What is a SLAPP suit?"], Chilling Effects Clearinghouse (2013).</ref> ===Europe=== Many European countries have broad privacy statutes that may be applicable to revenge porn.<ref>{{harvnb|Rotenberg & Jacobs|2013}}</ref> France also criminalizes the willful violation of the intimate private life of another by "transmitting the picture of a person who is within a private place, without the consent of the person concerned".<ref>{{cite web | url = http://archive.equal-jus.eu/181/1/French_penal_code.pdf | title = French Penal Code Article 226-1 | date = 19 November 2013}}</ref> A German [[High Court]] made a May 2014 ruling that intimate photographs of partners should be deleted if the partner so requests.<ref name=2014IndependentGrayling/> ====United Kingdom==== =====England and Wales===== In 2012, the English singer-songwriter [[Tulisa (singer)|Tulisa Contostavlos]] obtained an injunction preventing the distribution of a sex-tape of her and a former lover that had been published on the internet.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2012/850.html|title=Tulisa Contostavlos v Michael Mendahun and others|author=|date=29 March 2012|work=bailii.org|accessdate=5 October 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite news| url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/9155127/Tulisa-sex-tape-removed-after-lawyers-obtain-injunction.html | location=London | work=The Daily Telegraph | title=Tulisa 'sex tape' removed after lawyers obtain injunction | date=20 March 2012}}</ref> The case was set to include considerable damages, but was settled out of court before it could be considered.<ref name = "House of Lords report"/><ref>{{cite news|title=Triumphant Tulisa settles legal action against ex over sex tape publication|url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2172471/Tulisa-Contostavlos-settles-legal-action-ex-Justin-Edwards-sex-tape.html|accessdate=12 July 2012|newspaper=The Daily Mail|date=12 July 2012|location=London|first1=Sarah|last1=Bull|first2=Donna|last2=McConnell}}</ref> In April 2014, UK charities including [[The National Stalking Helpline]], [[Women's Aid]], and the [[UK Safer Internet Centre]] reported increased use of revenge porn websites.<ref name=2014IndependentGrayling/> Women's Aid Charity Chief Executive Polly Neate stated, "To be meaningful, any attempt to tackle revenge porn must also take account of all other kinds of psychological abuse and [[controlling behaviour]], and revenge porn is just another form of [[coercive control]]. That control is central to domestic violence, which is why we're campaigning for all psychological abuse and coercive control to be criminalised". In July [[Chris Grayling]], the [[Secretary of State for Justice]], announced plans to "take appropriate action" to address revenge porn in Britain.<ref name=2014IndependentGrayling>{{cite news|last1=Simpson|first1=Jack|title=Revenge porn: What is it and how widespread is the problem?|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/what-is-revenge-porn-9580251.html|website=www.independent.co.uk|publisher=Independent UK|accessdate=7 July 2014|location=London|date=2 July 2014}}</ref> A House of Lords Committee, in a report on social media and the law, subsequently called for clarification from the [[Director of Public Prosecutions (England and Wales)|DPP]] as to when revenge porn becomes a crime.<ref name = "House of Lords report">{{cite web|title=Social media and criminal offences – Communications Committee Contents|url=https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201415/ldselect/ldcomuni/37/3704.htm|publisher=[[House of Lords]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title='Revenge porn' laws must be clearer, say Lords|url=https://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/jul/29/revenge-porn-laws-must-be-clearer-say-lords|work=[[The Guardian]]|agency=Press Association|archiveurl=https://www.webcitation.org/6T1o04Z9x|archivedate=2 October 2014|deadurl=no}}</ref> In February 2015 the [[Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015]], which has a specific amendment dealing with such actions, received [[Royal Assent]]. Section 33 of the Act makes it an offence in England and Wales to disclose private sexual photographs and films without the consent of the individual depicted and with the intent to cause distress. There is a maximum sentence of two years imprisonment.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31429026|title='Revenge porn' illegal under new law in England and Wales|work=BBC News | date=12 February 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015|url=http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/2/section/33/enacted#section-33-1-a|website=legislation.gov.uk|publisher=[[Her Majesty's Stationery Office]]}}</ref> On April 23, 2015, a seminar was held in [[Westminster]] on the new legislation. The seminar was organised by the [[Oxford Human Rights Hub]] and co-hosted with the law firm [[McAllister Olivarius]], the [[End Violence Against Women Coalition]], [[The University of Durham]], and [[The University of Birmingham]].<ref>{{cite news|title=Call to extend revenge porn laws|url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-3052592/Call-extend-revenge-porn-laws.html|website=dailymail.co.uk|publisher=[[Daily Mail]]|location=London|date=23 April 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Event: Revenge Porn: The New Law|url=http://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/revenge-porn-the-new-law/|website=ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk|publisher=[[Oxford Human Rights Hub]]}}</ref> The seminar called for the law to be extended to cover activities such as [[upskirting]]. In June 2015 it was reported that [[BriaAndChrissy|Chrissy Chambers]], a [[YouTube]] star from the United States, was pursuing a civil suit against her British ex-boyfriend who posted sexually-explicit videos taken without her knowledge or consent to [[Facebook]] where they were [[viral video|repeatedly shared]]. Chambers chose to pursue a civil case as the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 does not apply retroactively to content posted prior to its passage.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Kleeman|first1=Jenny|title=US woman pursues ex-boyfriend in landmark UK revenge-porn action|url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/03/us-woman-pursues-ex-boyfriend-in-landmark-uk-revenge-porn-action|website=theguardian.com|publisher=[[The Guardian]]|date=3 June 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last1=Luckhurst|first1=Phoebe|title=YouTube star Chrissy Chambers: 'Discovering revenge porn video devastated me|url=http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/youtube-star-chrissy-chambers-discovering-revenge-porn-video-devastated-me-10307182.html|website=standard.co.uk|publisher=[[London Evening Standard]]|date=9 June 2015}}</ref> Between April 2015 (the date that section 33 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 came into force) and December 2015 the number of reported incidents of revenge pornography in England and Wales was 1,160. However, 61% of them resulted in no action being taken and the number of people prosecuted for disclosing private sexual images during the legislation's first year was 206. =====Scotland===== In Scotland, revenge porn became a specific offence in April 2016 when the Abusive Behaviour and Sexual Harm Act came into effect. =====Northern Ireland===== In Northern Ireland, revenge porn was made a crime in February 2016 through the amendment of an existing law.<ref>{{cite news|title=Revenge porn: More than 200 prosecuted under new law|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37278264|date=6 September 2016|publisher=BBC News|accessdate=7 September 2016}}</ref> =====Malta===== A law criminalising revenge porn in Malta entered into force in November 2016. Article 208E of the Maltese Criminal Code punishes whoever, with an intent to cause distress, emotional harm or harm of any nature, discloses a private sexual photograph or film without the consent of the person or persons displayed or depicted in such photograph or film. Such person would, on conviction be liable to imprisonment for a term of up to two years or to a fine of not less than €,3000 and not more than €5,000, or to both such imprisonment and fine.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2017-04-17/local-news/Government-does-not-exclude-updating-current-laws-on-suits-for-pain-and-suffering-6736173075|title=Government does not exclude updating current laws on suits for pain and suffering|last=Grech|first=Helena|date=17 April 2017|website=|publisher=The Malta Independent|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=|access-date=2017-04-17}}</ref>{{Better source|date=April 2017}} ==Minors== If the video or images in question are of individuals who are minors, this can lead to legal action for [[child pornography]]<ref>{{cite news|url=http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=news/technology&id=6555650 |title=Sexting teens can go too far |work=Philadelphia News |date=2008-12-14 |accessdate=2014-03-27}}</ref> as has happened in non-revenge porn related cases involving [[sexting]].<ref name=2013CaNPSelfiePorn>{{cite web|last=Seidman|first=Karen|title=Child pornography laws ‘too harsh' to deal with minors sexting photos without consent, experts say|url=http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/11/16/child-pornography-laws-too-harsh-to-deal-with-minors-sexting-photos-without-consent-experts-say/|publisher=National Post News – Canada|accessdate=27 March 2014}}</ref><ref name=CnetSelfiePorn>{{cite web|last=Matyszczyk|first=Chris|title=Teen charged with child porn for allegedly tweeting nude selfies|url=http://www.cnet.com/news/teen-charged-with-child-porn-for-allegedly-tweeting-nude-selfies/|publisher=Cnet.com|accessdate=27 March 2014}}</ref> ==Prenuptial agreements== Increasingly, couples are drafting "social media" [[prenuptial agreement]]s,<ref name=2014ABCSocialMedia>{{cite web|last1=Effron|first1=Lauren|title= I Love You, You're Perfect, but Watch What You Facebook: Social Media Prenups|url=http://abcnews.go.com/Lifestyle/love-perfect-watch-facebook-social-media-prenups/story?id=23977608&singlePage=true|website=abcnews.go.com|publisher=ABC News, Good Morning America|accessdate=9 June 2014}}</ref> some of which include provisions relating to revenge porn.<ref name=2014AVNPrenup>{{cite web|last1=Staff|title='Revenge Porn' Increasingly Added to Marriage Prenups|url=http://business.avn.com/articles/legal/Revenge-Porn-Increasingly-Added-to-Marriage-Prenups-563939.html|website=AVN.com|publisher=Adult Video News|accessdate=9 June 2014}}</ref> Clauses may state that couples agree not to share photos or posts that are likely to harm a spouse's professional reputation.<ref name=2014ABCSocialMedia/> ==In other media== The 2017 independent film ''[[From Jennifer (2017 film)|#FromJennifer]]'' tackles the subject of revenge porn. In the film, the main character's acting career is derailed by an ex-boyfriend who posts a video of them online without her consent. When the video goes viral, her manager drops her as a client, and the ensuing humiliation she suffers leads her toward a path of destruction and counter-revenge. ==See also== * [[Online shaming]] == References == {{reflist|30em}} == Further reading == {{refbegin}} * {{cite journal|last1=Citron|first1=Danielle|title=Cyber Civil Rights|journal=[[Boston University School of Law#Law Journals|Boston University Law Review]]|date=February 2009|volume=89|issue=1|pages=61–126|url=http://www.bu.edu/law/central/jd/organizations/journals/bulr/volume89n1/documents/CITRON.pdf|ref=harv}} * {{cite journal|last1=Citron|first1=Danielle Keats|last2=Franks|first2=Mary Anne|journal=[[Wake Forest Law Review]]|date=2014|volume=49|issue=2|pp=345–392|url=http://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/fac_pubs/1420/|title=Criminalizing Revenge Porn|ref={{harvid|Citron & Franks|2014}}}} * {{cite journal | last1 = Hayward | first1 = Philip | last2 = Rahn | first2 = Alison | title = Opening Pandora's Box: pleasure, consent and consequence in the production and circulation of celebrity sex videos | journal = [[Porn Studies]] | volume = 2 | issue = 1 | pages = 49–61 | publisher = [[Taylor and Francis]] | doi = 10.1080/23268743.2014.984951 | date = January 2015 | url = https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23268743.2014.984951 | ref = {{harvid|Hayward & Rahn|2015}} | postscript = .}} * {{cite journal |last = Matsui|first= Shigenori | title = The Criminalization of Revenge Porn in Japan | journal = [[Washington International Law Journal]]|issue = 2|date= April 2015| volume = 24 | pages = 289–318|url=https://www.law.washington.edu/WINLJ/|ref=harv}} * {{cite journal | last1=Rotenberg | first1=Marc | last2=Jacobs | first2=David | url = http://www.harvard-jlpp.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/36_2_605_Rotenberg_Jacobs.pdf | title = Updating the Law of Information Privacy: The New Framework of the European Union | journal = [[Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy]] | volume = 36 | issue = 2 | year = 2013|ref= {{harvid|Rotenberg & Jacobs|2013}}}} * {{cite journal|last1=Wolf|first1=Brittany|title=Free Speech versus Human Dignity: Comparative Perspectives on Internet Privacy|journal=[[Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law]]|date=Winter 2014|volume=23|issue=1|pages=251–282|url=http://www.law.tulane.edu/uploadedFiles/Tulane_Journal_Sites/Tulane_Journal_of_International_and_Comparative_Law/Table_of_Contents/05%20i231covtoc.pdf|ref={{harvid|Wolf|2014}}}} {{refend}} {{wiktionary}} {{Sexual abuse|collapsed}} {{Pornography}} {{DEFAULTSORT:Revenge porn}} [[Category:Pornography]] [[Category:Internet culture]] [[Category:Sex and the law]] [[Category:Human rights abuses]] [[Category:Privacy controversies and disputes]] [[Category:Revenge]] [[Category:Cybercrime]]'