seems obvious, but make revenge porn a crime http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/09/24/revenge_porn_is_domestic_abuse_it_should_be_a_crime.html … dont punish those taking, but those improperly spreading the photos
And the intent bit doesn't actually solve those problems. "Intent to harm" is going to depend on how harm is defined. @nathanjurgenson
-
-
Harm is likely going to HAVE to be defined in terms of publicity-- e.g., intent to share publicly.
@nathanjurgenson -
One of Perfect 10's arguments against Google was that Google was harming the women whose photos were taken.
@nathanjurgenson -
@sarahjeong v important details, but ones that exist outside digital images that the law has dealt w/. welcome that same debate here -
My point in bringing up Perfect 10 is that "harm to women" is coopted to pursue frivolous litigation for personal gain
@nathanjurgenson -
@sarahjeong i see, though doesn't seem to preclude creating a framework that punishes people who spread images non-consensually -
It's *exactly* what copyright law does (tho base motivation is diff.) and there's a reason why services have safe harbor.
@nathanjurgenson -
@sarahjeong is this argument against non-consensual image-sharing w/ intent to harm anywhere longform? having a hard time following in 140 -
.
@nathanjurgenson Probably somewhere, tho I'm not sure off the top of my head. Planning on writing something this week on it. - 1 réponse de plus
Nouvelle conversation -
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.