Exploitive pictures of girlfriends / boyfriends - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Shadowman · 10-01-2003, 02:11 AM

Just watchinbg my local news on the tele, and there is a guy that took consensual pictures of his girlfriend whilst in a relationship (She's of legal age for nude photography, 18 here, and he's 19). He then broke up with her, and emailed the pictures to his mates, her family and friends, with the words 'Slut' and her mobile number attached. He's been charged with 2 counts of something....not exactly sure what it is, but get this...His maximum penalty is AUD$1000 or 1 month prison, now I dunno about the USA, but that seems very lenient, and wouldn't deter someone whos done this sort of thing, and wants to ger revenge. The guys definetely in the wrong, I'd never do something like that, but you gotta admit, would you be deterred by a $1000 fine? Whats the deal with laws in America?

Semi-Normal · 10-01-2003, 02:32 AM

I know something like that happened in America once, the dude got in trouble but I'm not sure what penalty he got. I agree the penalty the Aussie guy got does seem very lenient, though I think that if I was the sort of arsehole to do that, I'd still be deterred.

Vilkata · 10-01-2003, 03:21 AM

That is a very lenient penalty for the guy. I'm not sure exactly what the law is for things like that here, but I can tell you one thing. With how 'Sue happy' Americans are, that guy would probably be in debt for years because of claims of emotional trauma and what not. The victim and her family would sue the guy and his family for all it's worth. Not saying that is right, just saying that is how it sadly goes around here now a days.

Hanxter · 10-01-2003, 05:24 AM

I know a guy who caught his fiance giving his best man an oral knob job on camera.

At the wedding reception, when everyone was half in the bag, he told the guests to look under their seats where they found 8 x 10 photos of the deed.

She threatened to sue but the court threw it out and the marriage was anulled.

So, I don't really see the difference between "this" and "that" except for the fact that "that" was broadcast using e-mail.

Midnight_Son · 10-01-2003, 05:59 AM

it's pretty sad, I know there's alot of "pay-back" home videos on Kazaa

bender · 10-01-2003, 07:14 AM

There are so many sites out there that are made up of just that pissed off guys and girls who post naked picts of the ex. with a nasty version of what when on.

How would anyone get there kicks out of posting a pict. of someone they at one point cared about ?
Revenge is just anger without a thought to the long term.

ninety09 · 10-01-2003, 08:09 AM

Meh, if you're willing to let someone take naked pictures, then you shouldn't be surprised that something like that happens.

SecretMethod70 · 10-01-2003, 08:11 AM

I actually think there's more of a ground to sue the guy Hanxter mentioned than the guy in the thread starter's post I think.

The one Hanxter mentioned didn't have consent to take those pictures. The guy from the original post did.

Frankly, I think it's an incredibly sleazy thing to do, but he had consent to take those pictures and, legally, he owns them and can do whatever he wants with them. I think the girl's lucky is he gets ANYTHING. A civil suit, perhaps, but there's nothing actually legally wrong with what he did in my opinion.

tinfoil · 10-01-2003, 09:36 AM

Mm, she made a poor judgement mistake and he took advantage of it. He's a prick and should be boot-fucked but I wouldn't go so far as to say it should be illegal.

Again folks, before you date / see / fuck someone, be sure to have a lawyer aproved contract ready for them to sign.

onetime2 · 10-01-2003, 09:40 AM

I recall a court case where someone burned a flag in front of a group of veterans. One of the veterans punched him out and was arrested for assault. The Judge in his case fined him a dollar and put him on probation with his record being expunged if he kept out of trouble during probation. I think it would be suitable for a family member of the woman (or the woman herself) beat the crap out of him and received a similar punishment.

Not that this would necessarily solve the problem but I'll bet it would make the woman and her family feel better.

Lunchbox7 · 10-01-2003, 10:58 AM

Im the first to say that it is an imorral act but I dont see how you can be charged legally. She gave consent for him to take the photos. Therefor he owns them and can do whatever he wants with them. Maybe it could be slander but then he would need to either prove that she is a slut or that she isnt. Thats a pretty hard thing to do considering that the word 'slut' is very subjective. Could it be the divulging of personal information (Her mobile number)? If so then all the internet sites that make money selling your information should be charged. I made themistake once of enquiring about a correspondence course. For years afterwards I recieved shitloads of junkmail. Should I therfor sue that company for selling my personal details for all the mental anguish I had to edure through the constant harrassment of junkmail? It doesnt make sense. As I said I think he did the wrong thing but I dont see any legal way he should be charged.

filtherton · 10-01-2003, 01:03 PM

Why couldn't he be charged with harrasment? He was obviously harrassing her, sending shit to her family. Fukker deserves what he gets and more. People like this make it twice as hard to convince yer lady to let you take nudie pictures of her.

preluder · 10-01-2003, 01:05 PM

i think in the US the guy would be charged with defamation. there was a guy in florida last month who printed a naked picture of his ex-girlfriend on t-shirts and handed them out on the beach. He got fined and had to apologize.

Elegant Holmes · 10-01-2003, 01:27 PM

True he should be fined, but in Texas the maximum you can recieve from litigation in civil court is 5000 dollars, and defamation of character is hard to prove (especially if she was good looking). I like the idea of the bastard being boot-fucked, possibly in public.

BlueBongo · 10-01-2003, 01:56 PM

I have to agree with those that have said that the girl in the original post did consent to her pics being taken...so she shouldn't be suprised by what he did.

People should be responsible for the choices they make.

clavus · 10-01-2003, 04:28 PM

I would need to closely examine the pictures before I could properly reply.

Mael · 10-01-2003, 05:25 PM

i completely agree with lunchbox. she let him take it, so it's too bad for her. if they had been hidden cam pics, then that would be different. and hanxter, that's an old urban legend. check out snopes. it's on there.

striderkevin · 10-01-2003, 06:07 PM

If you're stupid enough to even take risque pics and then let someone else keep them, then that's one thing. But then if you're taking those pictures and putting phone numbers on them with 'slut,' then that's an entirely different matter. I think it is totally wrong of the guy for what he did, but I think the punishment should be the fine and jail.

numist_net · 10-01-2003, 11:19 PM

the pictures in themselves arent illegal, but the extra text that was added is slander and something else I cant remember because it's too late at night right now...

but either way, its just wrong, if not legally that absolutely morally wrong.

'revenge is a dish best served cold'

although, I dont condone it, generally.
but there was this one time... with this construction company that slighted us, so we filled a radiator of a bulldozer with popcorn... oh never mind, it was fun though...

K-Wise · 10-01-2003, 11:26 PM

Him putting the word "Slut" on them is indeed defamation of character and he can in fact be sued for that. It's one thing for her to be stupid enough to let him take the pictures it's another thing for him to be stupid enough to put the word "slut" on them and mail them around to everyone. Thats just as stupid as her taking the picture cause now she can take legal action and not a damn thing is gonna happen to her so she indeed gets the last laugh. He would deserve that for being stupid enough to do something so tasteless. It's one thing to show em to yer friends and keep it among them...but when she found out about it by him sending it to her fuckin family is when he fucked up. What a moron.

Asta!!

rogue49 · 10-02-2003, 05:26 AM

Can't they also get him for copyright laws?
Since she didn't give permission to release them publicly.

I think that's how they sometimes get through prositution laws with porn movies.
They get them to say they are making an private act, and allow them to release the film for profit.

Thraeryn · 10-02-2003, 05:38 AM

You know, I'm appalled by some of the sentiments in this thread. She let him take the pictures, so she "deserves what she gets"?!?!?! What in the fuck kind of misanthropic viewpoint is that?! This woman put her trust in a man that she was in a relationship with, and let him do something special, and you're saying that because of it, she deserves to be humiliated in front of her asshole (the original post does say that HE broke up with HER, for reasons that AREN'T mentioned) boyfriend's buddies, AND her family?

If that's a prevailing opinion, I'm not sure what the fuck I'm doing here.

floonine · 10-02-2003, 05:58 AM

I don't think that copyright laws could come into effect here, does anybody know for certain? My understanding is that it doesn't matter unless the person using your likeness is making money off of the media in question.
Now she could sue for slander, but she would have to pull a talent out of her ass and pretend she would've gotten famous for it if the pictures weren't released...

On a side note, IMO no one deserves that kind of abuse. Being a bigger person is still better than pitiful revenge, but again that is my opinion.

Semi-Normal · 10-02-2003, 08:06 AM

I fully agree Thraeryn.

If the photos had been taken on a one night stand or something, or if she'd cheated on him, then I'd say she was stupid, though I still wouldn't support the guy's actions.

Aren't relationships supposed to be about trust?

Hanxter · 10-02-2003, 08:32 AM

Quote:

[i]Originally posted by Mael
and hanxter, that's an old urban legend. check out snopes. it's on there.

sorry dude - it happened... maybe he got the idea from the one you mentioned... but it did happen

onetime2 · 10-02-2003, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by floonine
I don't think that copyright laws could come into effect here, does anybody know for certain? My understanding is that it doesn't matter unless the person using your likeness is making money off of the media in question.
Now she could sue for slander, but she would have to pull a talent out of her ass and pretend she would've gotten famous for it if the pictures weren't released...

On a side note, IMO no one deserves that kind of abuse. Being a bigger person is still better than pitiful revenge, but again that is my opinion.

Copyright is held by the photographer since he "created" the picture.

JStrider · 10-02-2003, 09:48 AM

well... i dont know the whole situation... but it sucks that this guy betrayed her trust...

ive got pics of ariekitten like that and id never put em on the net...oh wait... already have

(with her permission of course)

Thraeryn · 10-02-2003, 10:26 AM

Glad to see some folks still understand that people, not bitches or sluts or hos or skanks, but people, don't ever deserve to have something like that done to them.

ratbastid · 10-02-2003, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JStrider
ive got pics of ariekitten like that and id never put em on the net...oh wait... already have (with her permission of course)

Heh, JS-- I wondered if you were going to beat me to that....

Seriously, there are better ways to get over somebody than dragging their name (and phone number) all over the place. That's just not healthy. I'm not sure he needs a fine or jail time--sounds to me like he needs therapy.

majik_6 · 10-02-2003, 12:49 PM

Hmm, I know in a professional setting, especially with nudes, the photographer has to have a model release form signed by anyone in his pictures. It basically acknowledges that they understand what they're doing, it (sometimes) verifies their age, and (most importantly) releases any and all rights they may have once had to the picture and its usage.

Perhaps they could string him up on something like that...but if she knew the pictures were being taken, and all that jazz, then the added text is probably the only hope she's got.

Overall, I've got mixed feelings about this, without hearing the whole story, and whatnot.

Mael · 10-02-2003, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Thraeryn
You know, I'm appalled by some of the sentiments in this thread. She let him take the pictures, so she "deserves what she gets"?!?!?! What in the fuck kind of misanthropic viewpoint is that?! This woman put her trust in a man that she was in a relationship with, and let him do something special, and you're saying that because of it, she deserves to be humiliated in front of her asshole (the original post does say that HE broke up with HER, for reasons that AREN'T mentioned) boyfriend's buddies, AND her family?

If that's a prevailing opinion, I'm not sure what the fuck I'm doing here.

to clarify, i'm not saying what he did was right. i just don't think it was illegal. also, when i posted, i didn't notice that it said he put her number on there. guess i skipped over it. i definatly don't think that's right.

Quote:

Originally posted by Hanxter
sorry dude - it happened... maybe he got the idea from the one you mentioned... but it did happen

well, it's funny either way.

arcane · 10-04-2003, 02:06 AM

dont let someone take naked pictures of you unless you are sure that if they did get leaked you wouldnt mind

wry1 · 10-04-2003, 09:29 AM

As far as the original entry in this thread goes, the guy would have been prosecuted for pandering. Taking the pics wasn't illegal - she knew he had done so, and by posing for 'em had given her consent. Giving the pics to his buds also wasn't illegal - once she gave her consent for him to possess them, he can do whatever he wants with them.

However, when he put an advertisement on them with her phone number (in essence, using the photos as a tool to possibly drum up business for this girl), that was pandering (in other words, he was pimpin' her out).

That's why he would have been busted, and why the fine was so lenient.

etla · 10-04-2003, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rogue49
Can't they also get him for copyright laws?
Since she didn't give permission to release them publicly.

I think that's how they sometimes get through prositution laws with porn movies.
They get them to say they are making an private act, and allow them to release the film for profit.

It's kind of a fuzzy area. He's not making any profit off the distribution so he doesn't need a release anymore than you would need an architechural release for your slide show to paris. Unless your trip was so exciting you could charge admission to said show.

Shadowman · 10-04-2003, 11:03 PM

Just to clear something up, he hasn't been charged as of yet, the case adjourned, what I mentioned was the maximum pentalty. I agree with quite a few of your POV's, but I reckon he might get a $500 fine, and a good behaviour bond.

GakFace · 10-04-2003, 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SecretMethod70
I actually think there's more of a ground to sue the guy Hanxter mentioned than the guy in the thread starter's post I think.

The one Hanxter mentioned didn't have consent to take those pictures. The guy from the original post did.

Funny when you think about that one tho. Sure he didn't have consent, "Man his morals must be fucked up!".. oh wait a minute, it was his fiance sucking off another man.... And they want to PUNISH him for getting back? I personally applaud the man. Might sound a bit harsh, but in the grand scheme of things... they were already commited to eachother, and that sure beats just walking in on them.

Thats like Stealing an Item and having it be the cause of you getting a wound. Then having the people root for you when you sue the company for the bad item. That shit's not right. They deserved it.

As for the girl being called a slut? and sending all over the place? First I find that one a bit more extreme. Sure the wedding one went to a lot of people, but it was to the wedding people.. so it was still on context, this guy just started sending pictures all over the place. And yes, he also added the word "slut" on it, which only heightens the problem. Something sounds a little wrong with this guy, something psychological. Which is the difference between the two cases.

collide · 10-05-2003, 01:30 AM

Reminds me of the story of "Libby Hoeler". These links explain it better than I ever could:

http://www.monkeysugar.com/libby/libby.html
http://chickssuck.shutdown.com/content/19.html

rodgerd · 10-05-2003, 01:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ninety09
Meh, if you're willing to let someone take naked pictures, then you shouldn't be surprised that something like that happens.

Yes, and no. It's a sad comment on human nature that it's the case that all too often you can't trust people.

However, if you agree to make some porn for your own pleasure, it ought to remain private to the parties as agreed, even if you do break up.

rodgerd · 10-05-2003, 01:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Thraeryn
You know, I'm appalled by some of the sentiments in this thread.

Ayuh.

Ethics and morals, people. I've never had anyone who agreed to pose nude for me who didn't have boundaries around who got to see the pictures. I've had less than pleasant breakups with two of the people who have posed for me, and the pictures in question have and will remain private per our original agreements (at least in as much as I can control such).

Anything else makes you a shitbag.

rodgerd · 10-05-2003, 01:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by onetime2
Copyright is held by the photographer since he "created" the picture.

Yes, but there's also the idea of model releases. In the States, for example, you'd need a contract with the model for pretty much anything other than private use or news publication.

The same is generally true in most locales.

10-01-2003, 02:11 AM	#1 (permalink)
Shadowman Crazy Location: Perth	Exploitive pictures of girlfriends / boyfriends Just watchinbg my local news on the tele, and there is a guy that took consensual pictures of his girlfriend whilst in a relationship (She's of legal age for nude photography, 18 here, and he's 19). He then broke up with her, and emailed the pictures to his mates, her family and friends, with the words 'Slut' and her mobile number attached. He's been charged with 2 counts of something....not exactly sure what it is, but get this...His maximum penalty is AUD$1000 or 1 month prison, now I dunno about the USA, but that seems very lenient, and wouldn't deter someone whos done this sort of thing, and wants to ger revenge. The guys definetely in the wrong, I'd never do something like that, but you gotta admit, would you be deterred by a $1000 fine? Whats the deal with laws in America? __________________ Shadowman

10-01-2003, 02:32 AM	#2 (permalink)
Semi-Normal Insane Location: Christchurch, New Zealand	I know something like that happened in America once, the dude got in trouble but I'm not sure what penalty he got. I agree the penalty the Aussie guy got does seem very lenient, though I think that if I was the sort of arsehole to do that, I'd still be deterred. __________________ I'm not lazy, I'm "motivationally challenged." Last edited by Semi-Normal; 10-01-2003 at 04:39 AM..

10-01-2003, 03:21 AM	#3 (permalink)
Vilkata Crazy	That is a very lenient penalty for the guy. I'm not sure exactly what the law is for things like that here, but I can tell you one thing. With how 'Sue happy' Americans are, that guy would probably be in debt for years because of claims of emotional trauma and what not. The victim and her family would sue the guy and his family for all it's worth. Not saying that is right, just saying that is how it sadly goes around here now a days. __________________ LOL KEEKLES

10-01-2003, 05:59 AM	#5 (permalink)
Midnight_Son The Cover Doesn't Match The Book Location: in a van down by the river	it's pretty sad, I know there's alot of "pay-back" home videos on Kazaa __________________ SWM, tattooed, seeks meaningful tits and beer. Enjoys biker mags, pornography, and Sunday morning walks to the liquor store. Winners of erotic hot dog eating contests given priority.

10-01-2003, 08:11 AM	#8 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	I actually think there's more of a ground to sue the guy Hanxter mentioned than the guy in the thread starter's post I think. The one Hanxter mentioned didn't have consent to take those pictures. The guy from the original post did. Frankly, I think it's an incredibly sleazy thing to do, but he had consent to take those pictures and, legally, he owns them and can do whatever he wants with them. I think the girl's lucky is he gets ANYTHING. A civil suit, perhaps, but there's nothing actually legally wrong with what he did in my opinion. __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

10-01-2003, 05:24 AM	#4 (permalink)
Hanxter The Griffin	I know a guy who caught his fiance giving his best man an oral knob job on camera. At the wedding reception, when everyone was half in the bag, he told the guests to look under their seats where they found 8 x 10 photos of the deed. She threatened to sue but the court threw it out and the marriage was anulled. So, I don't really see the difference between "this" and "that" except for the fact that "that" was broadcast using e-mail.

10-01-2003, 07:14 AM	#6 (permalink)
bender Addict Location: around the corner	There are so many sites out there that are made up of just that pissed off guys and girls who post naked picts of the ex. with a nasty version of what when on. How would anyone get there kicks out of posting a pict. of someone they at one point cared about ? Revenge is just anger without a thought to the long term.

10-01-2003, 08:09 AM	#7 (permalink)
ninety09 Flavour of the Weak Location: Canada	Meh, if you're willing to let someone take naked pictures, then you shouldn't be surprised that something like that happens.

10-01-2003, 09:36 AM	#9 (permalink)
tinfoil Fucking Hostile Location: Springford, ON, Canada	Mm, she made a poor judgement mistake and he took advantage of it. He's a prick and should be boot-fucked but I wouldn't go so far as to say it should be illegal. Again folks, before you date / see / fuck someone, be sure to have a lawyer aproved contract ready for them to sign. __________________ Get off your fuckin cross. We need the fuckin space to nail the next fool martyr.

10-01-2003, 09:40 AM	#10 (permalink)
onetime2 Junkie Location: NJ	I recall a court case where someone burned a flag in front of a group of veterans. One of the veterans punched him out and was arrested for assault. The Judge in his case fined him a dollar and put him on probation with his record being expunged if he kept out of trouble during probation. I think it would be suitable for a family member of the woman (or the woman herself) beat the crap out of him and received a similar punishment. Not that this would necessarily solve the problem but I'll bet it would make the woman and her family feel better. __________________ Strive to be more curious than ignorant.

10-01-2003, 10:58 AM	#11 (permalink)
Lunchbox7 Addict	Im the first to say that it is an imorral act but I dont see how you can be charged legally. She gave consent for him to take the photos. Therefor he owns them and can do whatever he wants with them. Maybe it could be slander but then he would need to either prove that she is a slut or that she isnt. Thats a pretty hard thing to do considering that the word 'slut' is very subjective. Could it be the divulging of personal information (Her mobile number)? If so then all the internet sites that make money selling your information should be charged. I made themistake once of enquiring about a correspondence course. For years afterwards I recieved shitloads of junkmail. Should I therfor sue that company for selling my personal details for all the mental anguish I had to edure through the constant harrassment of junkmail? It doesnt make sense. As I said I think he did the wrong thing but I dont see any legal way he should be charged.

10-01-2003, 01:03 PM	#12 (permalink)
filtherton Junkie Location: In the land of ice and snow.	Why couldn't he be charged with harrasment? He was obviously harrassing her, sending shit to her family. Fukker deserves what he gets and more. People like this make it twice as hard to convince yer lady to let you take nudie pictures of her. Last edited by filtherton; 10-01-2003 at 01:27 PM..

10-01-2003, 01:05 PM	#13 (permalink)
preluder Tilted Location: Houston, TX	i think in the US the guy would be charged with defamation. there was a guy in florida last month who printed a naked picture of his ex-girlfriend on t-shirts and handed them out on the beach. He got fined and had to apologize.

10-01-2003, 01:27 PM	#14 (permalink)
Elegant Holmes Crazy Location: "TX"	True he should be fined, but in Texas the maximum you can recieve from litigation in civil court is 5000 dollars, and defamation of character is hard to prove (especially if she was good looking). I like the idea of the bastard being boot-fucked, possibly in public. Last edited by Elegant Holmes; 10-01-2003 at 01:30 PM..

10-01-2003, 04:28 PM	#16 (permalink)
clavus pow! Location: NorCal	I would need to closely examine the pictures before I could properly reply. __________________ Ass, gas or grass. Nobody rides for free.

10-01-2003, 05:25 PM	#17 (permalink)
Mael Banned Location: The Hell I Created.	i completely agree with lunchbox. she let him take it, so it's too bad for her. if they had been hidden cam pics, then that would be different. and hanxter, that's an old urban legend. check out snopes. it's on there.

10-01-2003, 06:07 PM	#18 (permalink)
striderkevin Crazy Location: Can't tell you, then I'd have to kill you.	If you're stupid enough to even take risque pics and then let someone else keep them, then that's one thing. But then if you're taking those pictures and putting phone numbers on them with 'slut,' then that's an entirely different matter. I think it is totally wrong of the guy for what he did, but I think the punishment should be the fine and jail. __________________ "A false life is equal to death. Be your true self" -Strider Hiryu

10-01-2003, 11:19 PM	#19 (permalink)
numist_net Banned Location: UCSD	the pictures in themselves arent illegal, but the extra text that was added is slander and something else I cant remember because it's too late at night right now... but either way, its just wrong, if not legally that absolutely morally wrong. 'revenge is a dish best served cold' although, I dont condone it, generally. but there was this one time... with this construction company that slighted us, so we filled a radiator of a bulldozer with popcorn... oh never mind, it was fun though...

10-01-2003, 11:26 PM	#20 (permalink)
K-Wise It's All About The Ass!! Location: In a pool of mayonnaise!!	Him putting the word "Slut" on them is indeed defamation of character and he can in fact be sued for that. It's one thing for her to be stupid enough to let him take the pictures it's another thing for him to be stupid enough to put the word "slut" on them and mail them around to everyone. Thats just as stupid as her taking the picture cause now she can take legal action and not a damn thing is gonna happen to her so she indeed gets the last laugh. He would deserve that for being stupid enough to do something so tasteless. It's one thing to show em to yer friends and keep it among them...but when she found out about it by him sending it to her fuckin family is when he fucked up. What a moron. Asta!! __________________ "I love music and it's my parents fault (closing statement)." - Me..quoting myself...from when I said that...On TFP..thats here...Tilted Forum Project *It ain't goodbye, it's see ya later! I'll miss you guys!* - Asta!!

10-02-2003, 05:26 AM	#21 (permalink)
rogue49 Loser	Can't they also get him for copyright laws? Since she didn't give permission to release them publicly. I think that's how they sometimes get through prositution laws with porn movies. They get them to say they are making an private act, and allow them to release the film for profit.

10-02-2003, 05:38 AM	#22 (permalink)
Thraeryn Loser	You know, I'm appalled by some of the sentiments in this thread. She let him take the pictures, so she "deserves what she gets"?!?!?! What in the fuck kind of misanthropic viewpoint is that?! This woman put her trust in a man that she was in a relationship with, and let him do something special, and you're saying that because of it, she deserves to be humiliated in front of her asshole (the original post does say that HE broke up with HER, for reasons that AREN'T mentioned) boyfriend's buddies, AND her family? If that's a prevailing opinion, I'm not sure what the fuck I'm doing here.

10-02-2003, 05:58 AM	#23 (permalink)
floonine Insane Location: Silicon Valley, Utah	I don't think that copyright laws could come into effect here, does anybody know for certain? My understanding is that it doesn't matter unless the person using your likeness is making money off of the media in question. Now she could sue for slander, but she would have to pull a talent out of her ass and pretend she would've gotten famous for it if the pictures weren't released... On a side note, IMO no one deserves that kind of abuse. Being a bigger person is still better than pitiful revenge, but again that is my opinion. __________________ Political arguments do not exist, after all, for people to believe in them, rather they serve as a common, agreed-upon excuse. Foolish people who take them in earnest sooner or later discover inconsistencies in them, begin to protest and finish finally and infamously as heretics.

10-02-2003, 08:06 AM	#24 (permalink)
Semi-Normal Insane Location: Christchurch, New Zealand	I fully agree Thraeryn. If the photos had been taken on a one night stand or something, or if she'd cheated on him, then I'd say she was stupid, though I still wouldn't support the guy's actions. Aren't relationships supposed to be about trust? __________________ I'm not lazy, I'm "motivationally challenged."

10-02-2003, 09:48 AM	#27 (permalink)
JStrider Poo-tee-weet? Location: The Woodlands, TX	well... i dont know the whole situation... but it sucks that this guy betrayed her trust... ive got pics of ariekitten like that and id never put em on the net...oh wait... already have (with her permission of course) __________________ -=JStrider=- ~Clatto Verata Nicto

10-02-2003, 10:26 AM	#28 (permalink)
Thraeryn Loser	Glad to see some folks still understand that people, not bitches or sluts or hos or skanks, but people, don't ever deserve to have something like that done to them.

10-02-2003, 12:49 PM	#30 (permalink)
majik_6 narcissist Location: looking in a mirror	Hmm, I know in a professional setting, especially with nudes, the photographer has to have a model release form signed by anyone in his pictures. It basically acknowledges that they understand what they're doing, it (sometimes) verifies their age, and (most importantly) releases any and all rights they may have once had to the picture and its usage. Perhaps they could string him up on something like that...but if she knew the pictures were being taken, and all that jazz, then the added text is probably the only hope she's got. Overall, I've got mixed feelings about this, without hearing the whole story, and whatnot. __________________ it's all about self-indulgence

10-04-2003, 02:06 AM	#32 (permalink)
arcane Insane Location: SLC, UT	dont let someone take naked pictures of you unless you are sure that if they did get leaked you wouldnt mind __________________ <Arcane> so if you banged 2000 chicks then at least one had a pen0r?

10-04-2003, 09:29 AM	#33 (permalink)
wry1 Loser Location: Far too far from my Angel....	As far as the original entry in this thread goes, the guy would have been prosecuted for pandering. Taking the pics wasn't illegal - she knew he had done so, and by posing for 'em had given her consent. Giving the pics to his buds also wasn't illegal - once she gave her consent for him to possess them, he can do whatever he wants with them. However, when he put an advertisement on them with her phone number (in essence, using the photos as a tool to possibly drum up business for this girl), that was pandering (in other words, he was pimpin' her out). That's why he would have been busted, and why the fine was so lenient.

10-04-2003, 11:03 PM	#35 (permalink)
Shadowman Crazy Location: Perth	Just to clear something up, he hasn't been charged as of yet, the case adjourned, what I mentioned was the maximum pentalty. I agree with quite a few of your POV's, but I reckon he might get a $500 fine, and a good behaviour bond. __________________ Shadowman

10-05-2003, 01:30 AM	#37 (permalink)
collide Turn off your TV. Location: ... .- -. ..-. .-. .- -. -.-. .. ... -.-. --- --..-- -.-. .-	Reminds me of the story of "Libby Hoeler". These links explain it better than I ever could: http://www.monkeysugar.com/libby/libby.html http://chickssuck.shutdown.com/content/19.html __________________ "inhuman fiery goat worship" is an anagram for "information superhighway" -kingvolc