A ciência de ficar rico autor Wallace D. Wattles.pdf
Comm law
1. Revenge Porn and Current Laws
to Protect Victims
An Analysis of the Criminalization of Revenge Porn
By: Erin Welsh
2. Introduction:
Revenge porn is defined by Merriam-Webster as ”sexually explicit images of person posted online
without that person’s consent especially as a form of revenge or harassment”
Growing trend in social media
The effects
Consent, harassment and privacy
3. Brief History
What is porn?
Privacy and changes in technology
Three prong Miller Test, Miller v. California 1973
Prurient Interest Test
Patently Offensive Test
Serious Value Test
4. Case Law
People v. Barber (2014), first revenge porn case in New York, found not guilty
State v. Johnson (2018), Minn. Stat. § 617.261 (2016)
Maurice Washington III is being charged under California revenge porn law
Bollea v. Gawker Media, LLC, civil remedy – not revenge
5. Standford Law Review
41 States and the District of Columbia has revenge porn laws
Penalties vary from fines and misdemeanor charges to felonies
Until 2014, California and New Jersey were the only states with any kind of revenge porn law
New Jersey was the first state to pass a law
In 2013 study, 47% of revenge porn victims considered suicide
6. University of Miami Law Review
Two federal bills under congressional review that in enacted will federally criminalize the
intentional disclosure of private information
IPPA (Intimate Privacy Protection Act) is the relevant on for this paper
Introduced as a way to combat the phenomenon of revenge porn
Focuses on the nonconsensual distribution of pornography
National study, 1 in 8 of social media users have been a victim
7. Conclusion
The First Amendment proposes issues with enacting a law to protect victims
It can restrict someone right to free speech
U. Miami L. Rev. argues that IPPA is attempting to place reasonable restrictions on the time, place
or manner of speech
Limitations
Future Research
Interpretation
