A recent CNN opinion by Professor Danielle Keats Citron, a law professor at the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School
of Law and an affiliate scholar at the Stanford Center on Internet and
Society and Yale Information Society Project, calls for the criminal law to take action in deterring and punishing “revenge porn.” Jeffery defined revenged porn in an earlier post as an individual posting “nude images of someone they know on the Internet - often doing so after the end of a relationship.” As Professor Citron details, the impact on a victim's future employment opportunities, mental and physical well-being, and the overall impact on his or her daily life is no doubt striking.
The criminalization of revenge porn has captured headlines recently due to the introduction of California’s SB 255, which is the latest attempt to criminalize the act. Under the current language of the Bill,
any person who photographs or records by any means the image of another, identifiable person with his or her consent who is in a state of full or partial undress in any area in which the person being photographed or recorded has a reasonable expectation of privacy, and subsequently distributes the image taken, with the intent to cause serious emotional distress, and the other person suffers serious emotional distress would constitute disorderly conduct subject to that same punishment.
Professor Citron has written extensively on the issue and has advocated for a “cyber civil rights” agenda highlighted in this 2009 Boston University Law Review article. This 2009 proposal spawned a 2010 symposium hosted by the Denver University Law Review (Part One, Part Two, and Part Three of this symposium are available at the Denver University Law Review Online).
Some of Professor Citron’s other publications on both “revenge porn” and “cyber civil rights” more generally can be found over at Concurring Opinions. Below are some of her more recent posts on the topic
Blaming the Victim: Been There Before, Concurring Opinions, Feb. 1, 2013 (a response to Professor Mary Anne Frank’s post on “revenge porn”)Professor Citron’s CNN opinion is a great read and I applaud her advocacy on the adoption of a cyber civil rights agenda. Some form of response is sorely needed to combat the more unsavory activities occurring online at the expense of others. I do, however, hope that those who are hesitant to react through regulatory measures in fear that such a response could chill free speech protections continue to take an active role in voicing their concerns. It is only through active and open discussion that the criminalization of discriminatory and abusive activities occurring online can properly conform to the protections of the First Amendment. As cyber civil rights issues continue to take shape throughout the country, such as those associated with the revenge porn debate, I would advise keeping a close eye on the insightful work of Professor Citron.
Revenge Porn Site Operators and Federal Criminal Liability, Concurring Opinions, Jan. 30 2013
The Importance of Section 230 Immunity for Most, Concurring Opinions, Jan. 25 2013
Revenge Porn and the Uphill Battle to Pierce Section 230 Immunity (Part II), Concurring Opinion, Jan. 25 2013
0 comments:
Post a Comment