Latest Breaking News

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)

41. as I said, I wouldn't want to defend that particular statute

Reply to jberryhill (Reply #39)

Wed Jun 1, 2016, 05:16 PM

Jun 2016

They should have just copied and pasted the California statute, which requires specific intent and actual harm

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

42 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Bill to outlaw 'revenge porn' sent to R.I. House floor [View all] inanna Jun 2016 OP

Gotta agree if they arent careful any law they pass could get thrown out as being to broad. nt cstanleytech Jun 2016 #1

The bill may not be perfect, but something needs to be done. inanna Jun 2016 #2

constitutional rights should not be discarded because "victims". Warren Stupidity Jun 2016 #4

Agreed Sherman A1 Jun 2016 #5

Agreed something does need to be done but what exactly can be done in this situation cstanleytech Jun 2016 #6

Please point me to anything about victims in the Constitution jberryhill Jun 2016 #36

Seems like a violation of first amendment rights. Warren Stupidity Jun 2016 #3

there's no first amendment right to violate someone else's right of privacy nt geek tragedy Jun 2016 #7

Except the complication is this isnt about films and or videos being taken or given without consent cstanleytech Jun 2016 #8

is there a link to a specific statute? geek tragedy Jun 2016 #11

People react without reading the actual statutory language all of the time here at DU jberryhill Jun 2016 #30

If I give you a picture of me, it is yours. Warren Stupidity Jun 2016 #9

1) the picture can be taken without consent; 2) sharing a picture geek tragedy Jun 2016 #10

1) no it can't. NT. Warren Stupidity Jun 2016 #12

So no photo has ever been taken of someone without their knowledge or consent? nt geek tragedy Jun 2016 #13

Your not making any sense, this law is about stopping people from sharing private photos and cstanleytech Jun 2016 #14

when you buy a Blu-Ray, under US law do you have a right to put its contents geek tragedy Jun 2016 #15

There are limits to copyrighting private photos and videos. cstanleytech Jun 2016 #16

That's current copyright law. The state is more than able to pass additional laws geek tragedy Jun 2016 #17

+1 inanna Jun 2016 #19

Not if it violates the Constitution they cannot which is the problem here if cstanleytech Jun 2016 #20

every law is suspectible to challenge if it's overbroad. geek tragedy Jun 2016 #21

I think scotus is going to have to decide this one. nt cstanleytech Jun 2016 #23

other states have successfully passed them and used them to convict geek tragedy Jun 2016 #24

Did that case go all the way to SCOTUS? cstanleytech Jun 2016 #25

defendants didn't bother to appeal, but it was a very narrowly tailored statute nt geek tragedy Jun 2016 #26

Ah, still would be interesting to see if it would survive a SCOTUS challenge because if it cstanleytech Jun 2016 #27

34 states have such laws. Some did overstep, like Arizona nt geek tragedy Jun 2016 #28

Also, laws have been passed in Canada and the UK. inanna Jun 2016 #29

Okay, so, some pervert flashes himself at a woman on the train... jberryhill Jun 2016 #31

no expectation of privacy, he would waive any such claims by committing that crime, and also geek tragedy Jun 2016 #34

lol - How do you know his hands were unclean? jberryhill Jun 2016 #35

here's the bill, looks like the big problem would be vagueness-- geek tragedy Jun 2016 #37

It crimininalizes a Pulitzer Prize winning news photograph jberryhill Jun 2016 #39

as I said, I wouldn't want to defend that particular statute geek tragedy Jun 2016 #41

+1000 smirkymonkey Jun 2016 #42

Definition of "revenge porn" inanna Jun 2016 #18

The first one with images and or video obtained without consent are areas were cstanleytech Jun 2016 #22

In fact, you could make each successive purchaser pay you jberryhill Jun 2016 #32

Can you please post the statutory definition in question here? jberryhill Jun 2016 #38

The whole problem is solved by mandating written consent. JonathanRackham Jun 2016 #33

"The ACLU is not helping those that need it the most." jberryhill Jun 2016 #40