The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Are REVENGE PORN laws constitutional?
Poast new message in this thread
Date: December 2nd, 2014 12:27 PM Author: fluffy odious skinny woman That it's a photograph in question, legally obtained and owned, should be no different than the legality of relaying a true story that happened ("my GF is a slut") or other material. In a free society, it is our right to distribute this kind of information at will, should it not cross the line to harassment or fraudulence. Ethically it sucks, but shouldn't be criminalized.
Criminalizing photography or sharing of photography is absolutely fucked. People need to know that if you let someone photograph you that those photo belong to that person. This applies in every other case so distorting the law to reflect people's dislike of revenge porn is nothing more than stupid legislation. |
 |
Date: December 2nd, 2014 12:30 PM Author: cyan bisexual nibblets right of publicity muddies the waters, but yeah, generally when a person takes a picture without invading someone's privacy (as in a locker room), it's theirs to do with what they want. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2744877&forum_id=2#26842036) |
|
Date: December 2nd, 2014 12:31 PM Author: Primrose cerebral ratface What about my boys locker room photos? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2744877&forum_id=2#26842041) |
|
Date: December 2nd, 2014 12:33 PM Author: fluffy odious skinny woman so this should PWN upskirt laws too, right? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2744877&forum_id=2#26842051) |
|
Date: December 2nd, 2014 12:44 PM Author: Sickened Nursing Home See that recent Texas ruling. You can take upskirt photos like NBD (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2744877&forum_id=2#26842103) |
|
Date: December 2nd, 2014 12:51 PM Author: cyan bisexual nibblets tricky spot (tee hee). a good rule of thumb is that if you can see it from a place/vantage point you're allowed to be in, then you've got a good argument. the guys that basically stick cameras up under dresses/skirts are going to have more trouble with the new laws that are being written. I think people have a reasonable expectation of privacy under their clothes.
but dudes that just chill on benches or stairs and watch the show, can't say there's anything wrong there. paparazzi are the same with girls getting in and out of cars. |
Date: December 2nd, 2014 12:41 PM Author: Aromatic peach legend Learned Pimp, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Today we overrule all prior precedents pertaining to the right of privacy, in light of the compelling prurient interests of amoral porn addicts everywhere. |
|
Date: December 2nd, 2014 1:21 PM Author: fluffy odious skinny woman (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2744877&forum_id=2#26842291) |
|
Date: December 2nd, 2014 2:02 PM Author: adventurous rambunctious telephone (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2744877&forum_id=2#26842491) |
|
Date: December 2nd, 2014 1:58 PM Author: Heady canary sex offender I'm against revenge porn laws because sluts don't deserve protection. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2744877&forum_id=2#26842475) |
|
Date: December 2nd, 2014 2:03 PM Author: fluffy odious skinny woman cr (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2744877&forum_id=2#26842492) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2015 8:14 PM Author: citrine kitchen NFL player hit with revenge porn charges http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/01/nfl-player-hit-with-revenge-porn-charges/
I fail to see how these laws are constitutional and not just feminist garbage
Keep your fucking clothes on, women |
|
Date: January 6th, 2015 8:15 PM Author: fluffy odious skinny woman cr (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2744877&forum_id=2#27068387) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2015 8:16 PM Author: hairraiser brass black woman Explain invasion of privacy laws or whatever though... By that reasoning those would be unconstitutional too, right? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2744877&forum_id=2#27068398) |
|
Date: January 6th, 2015 8:20 PM Author: histrionic party of the first part dopamine Could go either way. Revenge porn is clearly not "core speech", so I can see it being criminalized with a narrow statute. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2744877&forum_id=2#27068419) |
|
Date: April 6th, 2015 10:35 PM Author: Disrespectful spruce yarmulke theater oh, it's not 'core speech', I see. lol @ THE MAJESTY OF THE LAW. it's just a great big morass of ad hoc bullshitting. |
|
Date: November 23rd, 2017 2:25 PM Author: Cheese-eating piazza (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2744877&forum_id=2#34756756) |
|
Date: November 23rd, 2017 2:35 PM Author: orchid electric furnace trailer park (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2744877&forum_id=2#34756794) |
|
Date: April 6th, 2015 10:02 PM Author: burgundy high-end bbw preventive strike (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2744877&forum_id=2#27636021) |
|
Date: April 6th, 2015 10:37 PM Author: misunderstood theatre newt some dood got 18 yrs in prison for that. He's a white male though, so nobody defends him. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2744877&forum_id=2#27636336) |
|
Date: November 23rd, 2017 2:26 PM Author: stimulating ruby national My god law school was awful. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2744877&forum_id=2#34756757) |
|
Date: November 23rd, 2017 2:27 PM Author: stimulating ruby national Does this box fit into this box? And they're not boxes, their concept networks with no foundations. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2744877&forum_id=2#34756763) |
|
Date: November 23rd, 2017 2:35 PM Author: orchid electric furnace trailer park (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2744877&forum_id=2#34756795) |