So just how gross do festival wristbands get?The moment a woman parked a Mercedes on top of a FerrariBride asks man with father’s heart to walk her down the aisleDownload our app
Most Read in Sport
Dutch cyclist Annemiek van Vleuten posts image of facial injuries following Rio horror crashShe says it was hard to deal with the disappointment but added she was proud about her team’s performance.
Some people get quite offended by this Canadian swimmer’s pre race ritualSanto Condorelli has a unique way to bring himself luck before he swims.
Whoops! This Chinese swimmer celebrates his gold medal but doesn’t nail itSun Yang tries to throw his cap into the crowd, but things don’t exactly go to plan.
WATCH: Everyone loves the O’Donovan brothers after this brilliant interviewUp Skibb!
American swimmer Lilly King wasn’t afraid to share her views on Olympic drug cheatsKing had already “stirred it up”, in her own words, in the build up to the race by wagging her finger at the “cheating” Russian.
Irish swimmer blasts ‘cheaters’ after losing out on semi final place”Who are you supposed to trust now? They have signs all over the village saying we are a clean sport, and it’s not. wholesale jerseys from china http://www.cheapnfljerseysfreeshipping.top/ And I just don’t think that’s fair.”
Irish boxer Michael O’Reilly out of Olympics after he admits taking supplementIrish middleweight boxer Michael O’Reilly has this evening admitted taking a supplement that may have contained a banned substance, writes Daniel McConnell, Political Editor.
Joy and despair for Ireland at Rio Olympics; Appeal means Ireland’s equestrians drop a placeIt was an action packed day for Team Ireland in Rio today, with two winners, four qualifiers in total but one devastating disappointment, writes Daragh Conchir.
10 states now outlaw such postings
Arizona, which on Wednesday became the 10thstate to outlaw so called “revenge porn,” has one of the strongest such laws in the US, making it a felony to post online images of people who are nude or that are sexually explicit, without getting their consent.
The momentum has gathered quickly, with 27 state legislatures considering and, in some cases, approving bills this year to crack down on a phenomenon that often involves photographs or videos taken with consent but then misused after the relationship turns sour.
Recommended:How much do you know about the US Constitution? A quiz.
At the same time, enough victims must be willing to share their stories as bills are being considered to maintain momentum.
“They’re terrified of having more eyes on their material [posted online without their consent], but unless they show there’s a need for these laws, these bills are going to be dying left and right,” says Holly Jacobs, founder of the End Revenge Porn campaign and the nonprofit Cyber Civil Rights Initiative (CCRI), based in Miami.
Most of the laws are so new that it’s too soon to tell how effectively they will deter revenge porn or enable successful prosecutions. But at least three nonconsensual pornography convictions have resulted from a 2004 New Jersey privacy law, says Mary Anne Franks, a law professor at the University of Miami who has helped draft some of the state statutes in conjunction with CCRI.
Alaska and Texas, along with New Jersey, have laws that can be applied in such cases but haven’t received much publicity, because they weren’t promoted as revenge porn laws. With such anti harassment, anti stalking, and privacy laws, specific revenge porn laws aren’t necessary, say some commentators.
In addition, California, Idaho, Utah, Virginia, Georgia, and Wisconsin have passed revenge porn laws since the start of 2013, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Another law is awaiting the governor’s signature in Maryland. And one moving forward in Illinois would make the offense a felony, as do Arizona and Idaho (the other laws typically make the offense a misdemeanor or allow only for civil claims, not criminal charges).
Felony charges are important, Ms.
To keep them narrowly tailored, such laws should have some exceptions, Franks says. For instance, the penalty shouldn’t apply to images that are posted out of concern for the public interest (remember the Anthony Weiner texting scandal?), for law enforcement reasons, or sent via e mail to seek help for an individual who may be a victim, she says.
“All of these laws are going to be challenged under the First Amendment,” says Neil Richards, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis. “The great problem legislatures are facing is that they really want to do good here and are under pressure to act sweepingly and broadly, but the best thing to do is to act carefully, because you can regulate revenge porn in a way that respects the ability of major [news outlets] to report the news.”
Arizona’s law does not include a public interest exception, but does include exceptions for law enforcement, medical treatment, or “images involving voluntary exposure in a public or commercial setting.”
One feature that makes Arizona’s law “conceptually different” and important, Professor Franks says, is that it classifies nonconsensual pornography as a sex offense, while many of the states classify it as disorderly conduct, privacy invasion, or harassment.
Unlike some of the other laws, Arizona’s also does not require proof that the defendant intended to cause emotional distress. That’s good, Franks says, because some people post nonconsensual pornography not out of revenge, but out of a desire to make money or to seek popularity. The fact that the images are out there, “that’s the harm. There shouldn’t have to be an additional motive,” Franks says.
On the federal level, Franks is helping Rep. Jackie Speier (D) of California to draft a bill. They are still getting feedback from major social media websites about the best way to write rules for the removal of nonconsensual sexual content.
Currently, websites that host revenge porn content can try to defend themselves under Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act, which gives immunity to sites for content created by third parties, as long as it doesn’t infringe intellectual property law or federal criminal law.