/https%3A%2F%2Fblueprint-api-production.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Fcard%2Fimage%2F752112%2Fe9b662d0-3fc4-477c-9e14-e9dcecb60a20.jpg)
Image: Getty Images/Cultura RF
$6.4 million. That's the latest bill for sharing revenge porn.
In a landmark case in California, one of the largest ever judgements in a revenge porn case has seen the United States District Court awarding $6.4 million to a Los Angeles County woman.
Reported by The New York Times, the plaintiff, listed anonymously as Jane Doe, sued her former partner, David K. Elam II, in December 2014 for sharing explicit photographs — private images she had sent while they were dating — on porn sites, including identified revenge porn site MyEx, after their break-up in 2013. Eight images were allegedly shared straight to Tumblr.
The images were also allegedly sent to personal and professional acquaintances. According to court documents detailing the complaint, this was "part of a revenge porn campaign explicitly designed to destroy Jane."
Elam was also accused of impersonating Jane Doe in online dating sites including OKCupid and Adultspace. According to court documents, "The profile used a variation of Jane’s first name that was identical to the Twitter username she was using at that time, and included suggestive photographs of Jane." Elam was accused of distributing the plaintiff's home address on these sites and "encouraging men to send her sexual images of themselves and to visit her at her home for sex."
Elam denied or declined to respond to the allegations in court.
It took four years for the case to come to a head, with the ruling landing in favour of the plaintiff on April 4. According to the NYT, it was one of the first lawsuits picked up by anti-online harassment initiative, the Cyber Civil Rights Legal Project. Copyright, not necessarily human decency, won out in the end, with the plaintiff basing the case around the violation of copyright regarding the distributed images.
By now, most U.S. states have some form of legal protection against the sharing of explicit images online without consent. California certainly does — Civil Code Section 1708.85 gives individuals the right to bring a private cause of action against any person who, without consent, intentionally distributes nude or sexual imagery of that individual.
Of course, $6.4 million is an incredible amount of money, and a surefire victory for setting revenge porn case precedent. And while it's not the largest settlement — NYT noted an $8.9 million case against an Arizona man sharing sexual images given to him privately by a woman from a couple — it's significant.
Importantly, victims of revenge porn are caused somewhat irreparable injury, which cannot be compensated for, even with millions.
At least it's a start.
In a landmark case in California, one of the largest ever judgements in a revenge porn case has seen the United States District Court awarding $6.4 million to a Los Angeles County woman.
Reported by The New York Times, the plaintiff, listed anonymously as Jane Doe, sued her former partner, David K. Elam II, in December 2014 for sharing explicit photographs — private images she had sent while they were dating — on porn sites, including identified revenge porn site MyEx, after their break-up in 2013. Eight images were allegedly shared straight to Tumblr.
The images were also allegedly sent to personal and professional acquaintances. According to court documents detailing the complaint, this was "part of a revenge porn campaign explicitly designed to destroy Jane."
Elam was also accused of impersonating Jane Doe in online dating sites including OKCupid and Adultspace. According to court documents, "The profile used a variation of Jane’s first name that was identical to the Twitter username she was using at that time, and included suggestive photographs of Jane." Elam was accused of distributing the plaintiff's home address on these sites and "encouraging men to send her sexual images of themselves and to visit her at her home for sex."
Elam denied or declined to respond to the allegations in court.
It took four years for the case to come to a head, with the ruling landing in favour of the plaintiff on April 4. According to the NYT, it was one of the first lawsuits picked up by anti-online harassment initiative, the Cyber Civil Rights Legal Project. Copyright, not necessarily human decency, won out in the end, with the plaintiff basing the case around the violation of copyright regarding the distributed images.
By now, most U.S. states have some form of legal protection against the sharing of explicit images online without consent. California certainly does — Civil Code Section 1708.85 gives individuals the right to bring a private cause of action against any person who, without consent, intentionally distributes nude or sexual imagery of that individual.
Of course, $6.4 million is an incredible amount of money, and a surefire victory for setting revenge porn case precedent. And while it's not the largest settlement — NYT noted an $8.9 million case against an Arizona man sharing sexual images given to him privately by a woman from a couple — it's significant.
Importantly, victims of revenge porn are caused somewhat irreparable injury, which cannot be compensated for, even with millions.
At least it's a start.
0 komentar:
Post a Comment