Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday March 16 2015, @05:16AM   Printer-friendly
from the nudge-nudge-wink-wink dept.

Phys.Org is reporting that Twitter has announced that it is banning the posting of sexually explicit images without the consent of the subject of those images.

From the article:

Twitter has become the latest online platform to ban "revenge porn," or the posting of sexually explicit images of a person without consent. In updated terms of service released Wednesday, Twitter explicitly banned "intimate photos or videos that were taken or distributed without the subject's consent."

The update comes following Reddit's announcement last month of a similar ban, which came after the online bulletin board was criticized for allowing the distribution of hacked nude pictures of Hollywood stars.

Have you been a victim of "revenge porn"? Have you posted explicit photos of others without their permission?

Would any lawyers care to jump in and discuss what copyright infringement issues, if any, might be raised?

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 18 2015, @04:54AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 18 2015, @04:54AM (#159207)

    As such, please make an argument for the moral rightness of posting "revenge porn."

    Also, what qualifies as a good (convincing) argument is also subjective. Someone could just respond with, "I like it." That would probably matter only to them, but their feelings would not be objectively wrong.

  • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Wednesday March 18 2015, @05:15AM

    by NotSanguine (285) <NotSanguineNO@SPAMSoylentNews.Org> on Wednesday March 18 2015, @05:15AM (#159208) Homepage Journal

    Also, what qualifies as a good (convincing) argument is also subjective. Someone could just respond with, "I like it." That would probably matter only to them, but their feelings would not be objectively wrong.

    If the aim is persuasion, "I like it" isn't really a convincing argument. That's not really subjective, given the definition of the word "argument."

    Funny that. Words actually have meanings. How very bizarre.

    From https://www.google.com/search?q=define+argument&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 [google.com]
    ar·gu·ment
    ˈärɡyəmənt/
    noun

    2. a reason or set of reasons given with the aim of persuading others that an action or idea is right or wrong.

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr