Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Xithras

(16,191 posts)
89. There's no gurantee that would work.
Wed Dec 11, 2013, 03:18 PM
Dec 2013

In many cases a person in a photo has no direct legal recourse against the website operator at all.

Simply put, it's perfectly legal for me to profit off of your likeness, so long as I have authorization from the copyright holder to do so. You, as the subject of the photo, can sue the copyright holder for compensation because they authorized your image to be used in a for-profit manner. I, as the publisher, cannot be sued by you, because I have published perfectly legal material with the authorization of its owner (well, you can sue, but you'll almost certainly lose).

If you were the subject of the photo and wanted it pulled offline, I would propose a two-step process

1) Sue your ex for harassment, lost compensation (even if he gave it away, a jury might grant a cash award if the photos provided commercial value...and your EX would have to pay), and ownership of the images.

2) Once you have ownership of the images, you will have the legal authority to issue takedown notices to any sites that host them. Under the terms of the DMCA, if any sites fail to immediately remove your pictures, you can sue them for damages AND send notices to their service providers that will shut the sites down. I actually knew a photographer who had some of his work stolen (landscape shots, not nudes) and republished on a gallery site without his permission. After asking them to take the images down, and then sending a DMCA takedown notice, he was ignored repeatedly. So he identified the hosting provider that the site was using, sent the takedown notice to THEM, and the entire website was shut down less than 24 hours later. When they eventually brought it back online, his photos were no longer on the site. Even if the website operator doesn't want to remove the photos, the DMCA makes it an offense to knowingly provide services that facilitate copyright infringement. Somebody is providing hosting or internet connectivity to that website, and THEY will shut the site down if it is actively hosting infringing content (and if they don't, you can sue them for damages as well).

Of course, all of this goes out the window in the case of nude selfies. If that's the case, you don't have to sue anyone, because you already own the photo. The copyright belongs to the photographer, and if you take your own nude photo, you automatically own the copyright to that image. If someone posts one of your nude selfies to a "Revenge Porn" site, or if someone else uses it without your permission, you can not only order it taken down, but you can immediately sue them for using it without your permission.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Great! zappaman Dec 2013 #1
+1 SunSeeker Dec 2013 #85
Let's hope she can get it to stick. Warpy Dec 2013 #2
+1 nomorenomore08 Dec 2013 #23
And they should take pictures of his wee wee Bucky Dec 2013 #33
Now *that's* poetic justice! nomorenomore08 Dec 2013 #36
Shrinkage! Marie Marie Dec 2013 #56
Probably enough ... Blus4u Dec 2013 #79
Nice! Orrex Dec 2013 #3
Hope they were able to shut down the web site as well. Schema Thing Dec 2013 #4
What a piece of shit. Glassunion Dec 2013 #5
They have been doing the same thing with mugshots for years Lee-Lee Dec 2013 #9
Not even close dbackjon Dec 2013 #18
Same basic concept Lee-Lee Dec 2013 #22
Mugshots are... CSStrowbridge Dec 2013 #27
That they are- but that doesn't change that the sites run in the same fashion Lee-Lee Dec 2013 #29
I think the point being made Kelvin Mace Dec 2013 #35
Actually, the brilliance of this angle is that the legal status of the photos is irrelevant. Xithras Dec 2013 #50
California, home of Hollywood, Kelvin Mace Dec 2013 #81
No, your understanding of the law is incorrect. Xithras Dec 2013 #82
Thank you for the clarification Kelvin Mace Dec 2013 #88
There's no gurantee that would work. Xithras Dec 2013 #89
Except if the photos in question were taken with the consent of the parties involved cstanleytech Dec 2013 #67
Yes but you need signed consent forms to publish images for profit.... VanillaRhapsody Dec 2013 #76
Still a murky area Kelvin Mace Dec 2013 #80
I agree that people accused (not even convicted) of minor crimes shouldn't have their lives ruined. nomorenomore08 Dec 2013 #25
Salt Lake actually stopped publishing mugshots... Drunken Irishman Dec 2013 #74
'Stupid' works in a pinch! randome Dec 2013 #12
About time someone did something about this problem. Now, a national law too! Coyotl Dec 2013 #6
And you're the person who was suggesting xulamaude Dec 2013 #52
You mis-characterize. Coyotl Dec 2013 #64
Okay - my bad then. nt xulamaude Dec 2013 #66
But there is a way to get the phone to the owner - I took an iphone to an AT&T store and they Hestia Dec 2013 #69
wonderful. Whisp Dec 2013 #7
Hmm. I wonder if the websites that so the mugshots are next Lee-Lee Dec 2013 #8
The "mugshot" websites should have some degree of regulation, at the least. nomorenomore08 Dec 2013 #28
They work the same way RetroLounge Dec 2013 #40
++++++++ mopinko Dec 2013 #70
thats a lil different... iamthebandfanman Dec 2013 #72
Thank you! abelenkpe Dec 2013 #10
Good. Grief. nt Ninga Dec 2013 #11
That's my AG! Extortion is NOT free speech! robertpaulsen Dec 2013 #13
Good for her! And I hope with 31 felonies, he spends the rest of his life in prison.n/t freshwest Dec 2013 #20
Really, life in prison? Comrade Grumpy Dec 2013 #26
That is some great news! Matariki Dec 2013 #14
Good. I like the angle she used to pull this off too. Innovative use of the law. Xithras Dec 2013 #15
+1 kristopher Dec 2013 #45
Exactly. This is not speech. This is cyber rape; it is all about hurting people. nt SunSeeker Dec 2013 #86
can't say I have much sympathy for the guy.... mike_c Dec 2013 #16
+1 nomorenomore08 Dec 2013 #30
GOOD. liberalmuse Dec 2013 #17
This is good, put him in the cell with Bernie Madoff for just as long. My only hope is this didn't.. marble falls Dec 2013 #19
Awesome! Now please contact every victem and tell them to start filing lawsuit against him Drew Richards Dec 2013 #21
Context, context, context. Kamala Harris is the AG of California, not the USA. nt Bernardo de La Paz Dec 2013 #24
so far Bucky Dec 2013 #32
Of course, Bucky. nt Bernardo de La Paz Dec 2013 #63
Monty Python should be shakin' in their boots........... thelordofhell Dec 2013 #31
LOL, exactly what came to mind when I read the article mdbl Dec 2013 #42
Lol! Kaleva Dec 2013 #71
Another small business owner put out of business. THANKS OBAMA. Jester Messiah Dec 2013 #34
Arrest mstinamotorcity2 Dec 2013 #37
Is this the scumbag who created the site called Aldo Leopold Dec 2013 #38
I think it's a different asshole LTR Dec 2013 #39
I think this is the site I meant libodem Dec 2013 #55
Thank you, Kamala Harris. JDPriestly Dec 2013 #41
YAY, yay and yay …my State Attorney General rocks…. Tikki Dec 2013 #43
Brava!!! kristopher Dec 2013 #44
Excellent Hekate Dec 2013 #46
very cool dlwickham Dec 2013 #47
They arrested him on a ... CONSPIRACY THEORY ??1!!!1??1?//?/1/!!//??? Festivito Dec 2013 #48
Conspiracy is a separate crime. The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2013 #51
True. Nonetheless, they are citing a conspiracy theory -- those conspiracy theorists are. Festivito Dec 2013 #65
Good. Warren DeMontague Dec 2013 #49
Kamala Harris . . . Le Taz Hot Dec 2013 #53
She probably will. CA AG is the springboard to Governor. nt SunSeeker Dec 2013 #87
K&R libodem Dec 2013 #54
That may be Hunter Moore, another self-cycled gas huffer. Eleanors38 Dec 2013 #58
Yes libodem Dec 2013 #60
He should have lots of time to think about it. Eleanors38 Dec 2013 #62
There's actually a law to address this? Great. I was afraid there wasn't like a lot Cleita Dec 2013 #57
There is in California. Also, extortion is illegal everywhere. pnwmom Dec 2013 #59
Now, why can't I find a pic of this arrestee? Eleanors38 Dec 2013 #61
Good job by Harris. Kurovski Dec 2013 #68
unfortunately there are others.. iamthebandfanman Dec 2013 #73
Good Recursion Dec 2013 #75
"A big old hat tip to K. Harris!" KansDem Dec 2013 #77
I hear... nikto Dec 2013 #78
I am pleasantly surprised. redqueen Dec 2013 #83
Pic of POS: jsr Dec 2013 #84
Good. I hope he gets shanked in the chow line. Sheldon Cooper Dec 2013 #90
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Attorney General Kamala D...»Reply #89