Archive for: January, 2014

Revenge porn ban introduced in Springfield

— Illinois soon may take on one of the more malicious uses of the Web: Revenge porn.

The idea is to curb the major embarrassment people suffer when their scorned ex-boyfriends or girlfriends post raunchy photos and videos of their former partners as a way to get back at them.

A new proposal filed at the Capitol would make it illegal for people to take to the Internet with such content without consent. Sponsoring Sen. Michael Hastings likened the posting of such pictures after bad breakups to “harassment and the worst type of cyberbullying.”

The legislation is needed because Illinois statutes fail to protect people who posed for racy pictures and videos while in a private relationship, only to have their “trust broken,” said Hastings, D-Orland Hills.

Under the measure, it would become a felony to post nude and sexually explicit pictures of another person without his or her permission. The bill also would make it a crime to require a fee to get pictures removed from a website. The maximum penalty would be up to three years in prison and a $25,000 fine, though judges would have discretion to impose lesser punishments.

New Jersey and California have enacted laws to make revenge porn a criminal offense. Bills are pending in 13 other states, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Elsewhere, opponents of such legislation have argued that it would infringe on the right of free speech. The American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois says the state’s civil laws should be considered for changes before such activities are made a crime, spokesman Ed Yohnka said.

Revenge porn ban introduced in Springfield – Chicago Tribune,0,7679005.story
revenge porn – Google News… Read the rest

Hunter Moore, once called the ‘Revenge Porn King’ out on bail – CNN

(CNN) — Hunter Moore, once dubbed the “most hated man on the Internet” and the “Revenge Porn King,” is free on bond after being indicted on felony charges including identity theft and conspiracy.

Moore, 27, the founder of a now-defunct “revenge porn” website is accused of hacking into people’s e-mail accounts to steal nude photos to post online, federal authorities said this week.

On Friday, a judge released him on bond set at $100,000 and took his passport as collateral, according to a court document. Moore is to appear in court again on February 7.

He was released into the custody of his parents, who signed the bond, CNN affiliate KCRA reported. His release came with some conditions.

Moore is not to use a computer or get anyone else to do it for him. He must take down his social media accounts and get tested for drug use, KCRA reported.

Moore, who the FBI says operated, was arrested in Woodland, California, Thursday. Also arrested was Charles Evens, a 25-year-old man in Southern California believed to be connected to the scheme.

‘You took the picture

In 2012, way before this arrest, Moore talked to HLN’s Dr. Drew about the website.

“The site was just born, actually,” Moore said. “It was just a couple of friends and, you know, we had our hearts broken by a couple of girls, and we thought we would make a site. And it became Is Anyone Up. That’s how it started. Of course. But when I did start the site, I was hurt, and so was my friends.”

But later in the show Moore was confronted by a woman who called in and said she regretted taking topless photos for a boyfriend and was devastated when the pictures appeared online.

“I don’t know how you can point your finger at me,” Moore responded.” You took the picture. I mean, I’ve been justifying this in my head for over a year and a half of the site. But at the end of the day, it started with you. You took these pictures.”

Site got out of hand

The FBI says Moore and Evens conspired to peddle “hundreds” of nude pictures, without getting permission in 2011 and 2012. But, according to an indictment Moore allegedly pushed Evens to hack into computers to get more sexually explicit photos.

Moore then would pay Evens for the photos and then post them on the site, according to the FBI.

Both suspects are named in a 15-count indictment with charges that include aggravated identity theft and conspiracy.
If convicted, they face up to five years in federal prison for each conspiracy and hacking-related charge.

Moore actually shutdown the website in 2012 and sold it to an anti-bullying group.

“Taking down the site has been something I`ve wanted to do for months,” Moore said. “It was just something I created that got out of hand. It was supposed to be for friends.”

CNN’s Mayra Cuevas contributed to this report.

Man once called the ‘Revenge Porn King’ out on bail – CNN
revenge porn – Google News… Read the rest

Notorious revenge porn site operator Hunter Moore charged with hacking

A notorious “revenge porn” website operator and another California man have been charged with stealing nude photos from hundreds of hacked email accounts and posting the images online.

Hunter Moore, 27, who has been dubbed by some media outlets as “the most hated man on the Internet,” was arrested Thursday at his home in Woodland. FBI agents also arrested Charles Evens, 25, of the Studio City area of Los Angeles.

Evens pleaded not guilty in a Los Angeles court while Moore appeared in court in Sacramento but didn’t enter a plea, U.S. attorney’s spokesman Thom Mrozek said.

Both remained jailed.

A 15-count federal indictment issued this week in Los Angeles charges the men with conspiracy, computer hacking, aggravated identity theft, and aiding and abetting. They could face up to five years in federal prison if convicted.

From 2010 to 2012, Moore ran a website called that posted nude and explicit photos, including some submitted to the site by former lovers and spouses without the permission of the people in them. Alongside the photos, Moore included the name and other details of the people depicted.

The photos included an “American Idol” finalist, the daughter of a major Republican donor, and a woman in a wheelchair, according to a 2012 article on Moore in Rolling Stone magazine.

According to the indictment, Evens was paid for providing Moore with nude photos that he obtained by hacking or using other means to accessing hundreds of email accounts.

In an email to Moore, Evens said what he was doing was illegal, and in other emails, Moore offered to pay Evens $200 a week and asked him to use an anonymous PayPal account to avoid detection of the scheme, according to the indictment. Evens was paid as much as $900 at one time, prosecutors contend.

Moore told BBC that he made as much as $20,000 a month in advertising revenue. He ignored cease-and-desist orders and scoffed at challenges to the ethics of his site, although in 2012 he finally sold the website to an anti-cyberbullying organization, saying his notoriety had resulted in people sending him a flood of child pornography and other images.

But he defended the site as well, even though he acknowledged in the 2012 BBC interview that posting the photos could “definitely affect someone’s livelihood.”

“I just monetize people’s mistakes that they made, and it’s kind of a shady business. But if it wasn’t me, somebody else was going to do it,” he said.

In a 2012 interview on CNN’s “Dr. Drew” show, a woman who called in to the show chastised Moore for refusing requests to remove naked selfies of her daughter and alleged they came from a hacked account.

“I’m sure she sent the pictures to a million different guys and just ended up on my site just like everybody else,” Moore said, although he added that he didn’t want to hurt her daughter.

“I`m sorry that your daughter was cyber-raped. But, I mean, now she’s educated on technology,” he added.

Notorious ‘revenge’ porn site operator charged with hacking – Fox News
revenge porn – Google News… Read the rest

Va. nursing student fights back after revenge porn video hits internet

RICHMOND, Va. (WTVR) – There is a sexually explicit video of Virginia nursing student Nicole Coon online and she is not ashamed to tell people about it.

Coon, 25, said the video she sent to an old boyfriend appeared online around Thanksgiving.

“It blows my mind,” she said about websites that post sexually explicit photos and videos of people against their will — revenge porn.

Revenge porn pictures and videos are usually submitted to websites by ex-boyfriends and girlfriends who obtained them over the course of their relationship.

“I was hysterical, I was upset. The first thing I was thinking is what about my reputation,”

she recalled after finding out about the video.

To add insult to injury, she said the Netherlands-based website demanded $500 to remove the video. When she went to police, she said they told her the website’s action was doing was legal — and out of their jurisdiction.

Nicole Coon and Del. Marcus Simon

Nicole Coon and Del. Marcus Simon

Nicole decided to come forward with her story in an effort to help change that.

She spoke Tuesday alongside newly elected Virginia Del. Marcus Simon (D – Fairfax County) about a bill aimed out outlawing revenge porn in Virginia.

House Bill 49 would make it against the law to disseminate sexually explicit pictures of someone without their permission and with the intent to cause them substantial emotional distress, Del. Simon explained.

The bill would go after the ex-boyfriend or girlfriend who shares the photo or video, not the website that publishes them.

“Hopefully [this bill] deters this behavior,” Del. Simon said. “I don’t know how angry you are with your ex, but is it worth risking up to a year in prison to post that picture.”

Opponents of the bill argue it could infringe on First Amendment free speech rights.

The photo would not necessarily have to be published online for the ex to get in trouble. Photos and videos shared via email or text apply too.

“Sometimes it is a lot of phone to phone to phone viral sharing that does on. That can have that same damage and  also be covered under my legislation,” Del. Simon said.

Coon said she regretted making the video once she found out it had been posted online for the world to see, but now she’s over that feeling of regret.

“I’m here and I’m helping get the word out. As of right now, there is no regret. I have none,” she said.

Watch Joe St. George’s report on the CBS 6 News at 6.

Va. nursing student fights back after ‘revenge porn’ video hits internet
revenge porn – Google News… Read the rest

California debates bill to punish “revenge porn” – San Francisco Chronicle (blog)

The California Legislature is debating a bill this week that would make it a misdemeanor to publish nude pictures online when the intent is to cause emotional distress.

The proposal covers images that were taken with consent but posted publicly without permission. It’s a complex distinction that is dividing proponents of free speech rights, on the one hand, and advocates of privacy rights and victims, on the other.

A variety of sites have emerged for the explicit purpose of featuring what’s sometimes called “revenge porn.” But the proposal targets the uploader not the host, in keeping with federal laws that inoculate sites from the actions of their users.

The bill would:

… provide that any person who photographs or records by any means the image of another, identifiable person without 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.

It could be punishable by up to a year in prison, if the victim is a minor or the individual commits more than one offense.

It’s unclear how one’s intent in uploading such material would be established.

The American Civil Liberties Union previously came out against the measure, which already passed in the California Senate. There are worries that the law could be used to squelch otherwise protected speech, including protest art.

“We opposed the bill as it was originally introduced on free speech grounds,” ACLU Legislative Director Francisco Lobaco said. “We are reviewing the amended bill and haven’t weighed in on it yet.”

Eric Goldman, law professor at Santa Clara University, expressed his concerns to the New York Times:

I’m unclear exactly how much ground the new law would cover that isn’t already covered by existing laws, such as anti-harassment/anti-stalking laws. As usual, one of the key questions is how existing law has failed and what behavior is being newly criminalized.

But Erica Johnstone of the organization Without My Consent noted in an interview: “The problem is those (existing laws) are not being enforced. More often than not, victims file reports and are told nothing can be done.”

Police often don’t realize existing statues could cover such acts or aren’t trained to apply those legal tools to digital crimes, she said.

Johnstone said the main flaw she sees with the California bill as written is that it doesn’t reflect the fact that the content used in revenge porn is often created by the victim him or herself.

“A lot of times the parties are in a long-distance relationship and this is the way of establishing intimacy over long distance,” she said.

Other proponents of victims point out that strongly discouraging the act in the first place is critical, because one such material is posted, it can quickly spread across the Internet, making its total removal near impossible. The threat of uploading intimate pictures and videos, or promise of removing them, is sometimes used to blackmail victims for sex or money.

It costs at least $10,000 in legal fees to issue a subpoena to an online company demanding the IP address that links a real person to an uploaded file, said Colette Vogele, co-founder of Without My Consent, in an earlier interview.

Depending on the facts of the case and the state involved, the victim might be able to sue the person for defamation, publication of private facts, breach of confidence and other claims. Some acts can rise to the level of criminal offenses, including stalking and extortion. But it costs thousands of additional dollars to file a lawsuit.

Revenge porn is just one form of online harassment. I explored the broader topic in an earlier story that noted how widespread it’s become:

University of Maryland law Professor Danielle Citron noted in a recent blog post that the Bureau of Justice Statistics estimated that “850,000 people in 2006 experienced stalking with a significant online component,” while other researchers predict that 30 percent of Internet users will “face some form of cyber harassment in their lives.”

It can take many forms, including hate speech, threats of rape and sexual violence, and posting of nude or doctored images. …

The results can be traumatic and tragic, as exemplified by the case of Tyler Clementi. In 2010, the 18-year-old Rutgers student killed himself after his roommate hid a webcam in their room and streamed video online of his sexual encounter with another man.












California debates bill to punish “revenge porn” – San Francisco Chronicle (blog)
revenge porn – Google News… Read the rest

Group Pushes For Ohio To Criminalize Revenge Porn

A growing number of women are pushing back and advocating new legislation to criminalize revenge porn. That’s when an ex-boyfriend or husband publishes explicit photos online without permission.A Cincinnati Christian school teacher resigned last month after photos of her appeared online.  The woman says her cell phone was stolen and the pictures uploaded.Another teacher’s aide, 32-year old Hollie Toups, also had to resign after semi-nude pictures of herself when up on a revenge porn website.”I think I stopped breathing for a while,” said Toups.  “I was at a store one day and somebody was like, ‘Hey, you’re the girl from that website.'”Relationships that end badly can result in the ex circulating private photos through email, social media and websites.

“You feel helpless,” said Jacobs.  “Hopeless.”

Jacobs took action and founded End Revenge Porn to bring awareness to the issue and allow victims to share their stories.

“It’s new but it’s old,” said Anita Rios, president of the Ohio National Organization for Women.  “It’s old because it’s systematic of how society views women.  When you have a culture that looks the other way with domestic violence, and this is a form of that, you see how many women are put in harms way at the end of a relationship.”

Only two states, New Jersey and California, have passed laws to criminalize it – although several others have started debate on the issue.

Currently, there is no pending legislation at the Ohio statehouse.

Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine has not taken a position on it.

Group Pushes For Ohio To Outlaw Posting Of ‘Revenge Porn’ Between Exes – 10TV
revenge porn – Google News… Read the rest

Victims Of Revenge Porn Open Up On Reddit About How It Impacted Their Lives – Huffington Post

A law passed in Israel on Jan. 6 states that uploading explicit pictures or videos without the subject’s consent is a form of sexual harassment, punishable by up to five years in prison. And given the horrifying stories of “revenge porn” victims , we hope to see similar legislation pass worldwide.

This week, Redditor TastyJams asked users: “Those who have naked pictures on the Internet; how did they get there and how has it affected your life?”

Several of the men and women who commented had willingly shared intimate photographs online and reported few or no repercussions or regrets. However, respondents whose images were posted by ex-partners — or so-called friends — were much more likely to report long-term effects like sexual shame, disruption to their education or employment, and trust issues.

One user created a “throwaway” Reddit account to share her story:

When I was married, my then husband and I made a homemade porn. I thought it was a good idea at the time and I was very wrong. Not too long after we made said porn, I found out he had been cheating and I left him. I had completely forgot that we had even a video until a co-worker came to me and said he got a very interesting email from my ex (they were friends) and showed me the link. That f**king asshole uploaded the video to porn site. He sent the link to everyone we know, including family. I was completely mortified to find out he had done this.

Needless to say, I had to quit my job and move back to my home province. I was being harassed at my job (I worked in a factory, it was mostly men that worked there). I couldn’t bear to see or hang out with any of my friends.

To the younger female redditors, no matter how much you trust and love him/her, do not make videos or let your [partner] take pics of you naked, that shit will come back to haunt you.

This user was just one of many to express such regrets. Here are five things victims of revenge porn reported feeling:

1. Humiliation. “My ex logged into my Facebook and took naked pictures that I had sent to my new [partner] over messenger and posted them for all to see,” one user posted. “My family saw, my friends saw, my Facebook got shut down for nudity and it took forever to get back. Now I’m extremely paranoid about my passwords and check my content religiously.”

2. Concern for their personal safety, especially when revenge porn postings are accompanied by personal information like email addresses, full names and phone numbers. One Redditor didn’t feel safe in her home after her naked pictures and contact information were shared online: “I got moved to accommodations that had on-duty personnel staffed 24 hours a day for my safety once I reported everything,” she wrote.

3. A need for hypervigilance. Years after her ex-boyfriend uploaded intimate images of her, professor Annmarie Chiarini shared her story in The Guardian:

I oscillated between panic and persistent anxiety. I would wake up at 3am and check my email, my Facebook page, eBay, then Google my name, a ritual I performed three times before I could settle back down. In September 2011, I was thrown into panic again after I read an anonymous email alerting me to an online profile that featured nude pictures of me.

4. Fear of being watched during sex. One Redditor commented that her worries of being exposed on the Internet have affected her sex life: “I confiscate all forms of technology and make sure the laptop is closed (fear of webcam) before I have sex.”

5. Body shame. A Redditor who was underage when a “friend” unknowingly took pictures of her changing into a bikini and posted them around their school wrote that the experience made her ashamed of her body: “The school got my parents in to look at/discuss it. My mother believed I’d taken them, and kids branded me a slut and a whore and made references to my body for the rest of my school life. I despised my body for many years after that.”

If your life has been impacted by “revenge porn” and you’d like to share your story, send your age, first name or initials, and geographic location to

Victims Of ‘Revenge Porn’ Open Up On Reddit About How It Impacted Their Lives – Huffington Post
revenge porn – Google News… Read the rest

What Israel’s New Revenge Porn Ban Means – Tablet Magazine

One of Israel’s first measures of the new year has been outlawing revenge porn, the practice of posting naked or otherwise incriminating photographs or videos of an ex-lover online to a public site. MK Yifat Kariv of Yesh Atid, currently serving her first term in office, led the amendment, calling the practice of uploading nude images of an ex “virtual rape.” According to the new law,

offenders who upload photos or videos without the consent of their partner can face up to five years in prison, and the victim will be eligible for up to 50,000 NIS without proof of damage, and higher compensation if damages are proven,

explains Elad Peled, a lecturer of defamation law and head of the research division at Lexidale International Policy Consulting. “The publisher may enjoy a defense where the publication was made with good faith, or for a legitimate cause, or where it raises public concern.”While the legislation is similar to bills proposed in New Jersey and New York—and already adopted in California—the measures are being approached differently in the two countries. The Israeli law amends Israel’s Bill for the Prevention of Sexual Harassment, whereas New Jersey’s law, for example, is being classified as an “invasion of privacy” law.  Jordan Kovnot, adjunct professor of Internet Law at Fordham Law School and attorney at OlenderFeldman LLP, explained that the reason victims of revenge porn had little recourse in the past is because of the “Communications Decency Act” from the 1990s, which enabled websites to make decisions about editing inappropriate content. “Unlike a print magazine which exercises editorial control, Congress wanted websites to freely edit out or delete comments that they found objectionable without fear that they could be sued.” So when it comes to revenge porn, which is typically posted to third-party sites, the website is legally protected from having to remove the content. “They can choose to, but they don’t have to. If you’re in the business of revenge porn, you’re not likely to be sympathetic to their concern.”Hence the new laws. None of the American legislation attempts to change the legal framework; all of them instead address instead the person posting the offensive material.

In California, as of October 1, 2013, a jilted ex might want to think twice before recording and posting a photo of the girl who left him—it could land him in jail for up to one year, plus a $1,000 fine.

“Many legislators have historically been hesitant to impose restrictions on the internet, which has thrived largely because it has been regulated by a light touch,” says Kovnot, “but you see A few instances where legislators are willing to buck that trend”—such as laws protecting children’s rights online, or legislation addressing pirated music and movies.“This is the next wave of laws that we’re going to start seeing around the country. The victims here are typically very sympathetic. They trusted someone, that trust was broken in a devastated way, and up until now they have had very few options for recourse,” says Kovnot. Legislation against revenge porn, even photos taken by the victim, protects those who make decisions in the blush of a relationship, not thinking of a time when that blush might wear off.

Read the original story

 … Read the rest

Houlton police chief Butch Asselin wants Maine to make revenge porn criminal

It’s a story that’s been told way too often in other parts of the world. Recently, it hit home in Houlton.

The story was given a face nationwide by Holly Jacobs, a doctoral student in Florida. She had sent nude pictures of herself to a boyfriend in a long-distance relationship that later went sour. Holly says her ex posted the photos on one of a growing number of websites featuring “revenge porn,” images posted by ex-lovers or friends seeking to hold the pictured person up to ridicule.

She had no idea those photos were online until an anonymous email arrived. It said, “Someone is trying to make life very difficult for you.” The email included a link, and when she clicked it, Holly was redirected to a site showing those pictures.

After contacting the website hosts and demanding that the photos be taken down, the pictures went viral. Holly says they appeared on numerous sites, often with her email and workplace addresses included. Someone posed as Holly and posted a fake profile on a porn site. The hate mail and stalking became intense.

Holly has sued her ex, who says he did not post the pictures. He says his computer was hacked, the hacker was responsible for the unauthorized posting, and therefore he’s also a victim.

You might wonder, can’t laws against harassment be used against those who post revenge porn? If it’s a single posting, rather than repeated acts, the laws in most states say no. If you send the photo willingly — even with the expectation that it won’t be shared — that can be an “out” for the one who posts it. The federal Communications Decency Act shields website operators from legal action based on what others post.

Some sleazy operators demand money to have photos removed. Such ransom schemes only add injury to insult, with no guarantee the photos won’t appear on other websites.

Only New Jersey and California have laws on the books making revenge porn a crime. Florida, Georgia and Wisconsin have also considered criminalizing revenge porn, although none of those states has yet passed such a law.

In Houlton, police chief Butch Asselin is hoping Maine makes such acts criminal.

“I think it’s a form of abuse,” Asselin told me last week. He thinks criminal rather than civil penalties will better deter revenge porn. “It’s a form of harassment. I think people are more likely to contact the police than contact an attorney to have this stopped.”

Even though his review of one offending site showed photos of women “from all over” Maine, Asselin says he has not yet found much support among legislators for changes during the upcoming session.

Professor Danielle Citron, who studies privacy and cyber hate crimes, has written extensively on revenge porn. She’s calling for laws in all states to crack down on the practice while protecting the right to free speech. Citron wrote recently in Slate, “Certain categories of speech can be regulated because they bring about serious harm and make only the slightest contribution to free speech. Revenge porn comes under that exact heading.”

The takeaway for consumers is not to put potentially embarrassing pictures on the Internet; even if removed from the original posting, there’s no guarantee they won’t reappear somewhere else.

Getting embarrassing photos taken down from websites can be challenging. Help can be found at two websites we’re aware of, and

Consumer Forum is a collaboration of the Bangor Daily News and Northeast CONTACT, Maine’s all-volunteer, nonprofit consumer organization. For assistance with consumer-related issues, including consumer fraud and identity theft, or for information, write Consumer Forum, P.O. Box 486, Brewer 04412, visit or email

Houlton police chief wants Maine to make revenge porn criminal – Bangor Daily News
revenge porn – Google News… Read the rest

Peter F. Kilmartin Filing ‘Revenge Porn’ Legislation

Citing the ever growing problem of posting photos and videos on the Internet with intent to embarrass or harm another individual, Representative Donald J. Lally Jr. (D-Dist. 33, Narragansett, South Kingstown), along with Attorney General Peter F. Kilmartin and Senator Erin Lynch (D – Dist. 31 Warwick, Cranston) recently announced the intention to file legislation that would prohibit the posting of “revenge porn” without consent of the individual depicted in the images.

According to a release from Attorney General Kilmartin’s office, “revenge porn” is defined as sexually explicit media that is publicly shared online without the consent of the pictured individual. It is uploaded by former lovers or hackers for the purpose of humiliation. The images or videos are often accompanied by personal information, including the pictured individual’s full name and links to social media profiles.

Although there have been reports of this disturbing conduct occurring across Rhode Island, the activity is not currently addressed by state law.

AG Kilmartin has filed similar legislation for the past three years as one part of his Internet Safety legislation package.

“We have all been taught that once an image is posted on the Internet, there is a good chance it will be in cyberspace forever,” he said. “But, the latest phenomenon of individuals posting intimate photos and videos on ‘revenge porn’ sites with the mission to embarrass exes takes the exploitation and degradation of people, especially women, to a new level of depravity.”

“These private images go viral to the world leaving the victim no recourse to have the images removed,” Kilmartin continued. “This legislation will give law enforcement and prosecutors the tools they need to hold these vengeful individuals accountable for this horrendous action.”

If passed, the legislation would prohibit a person from electronically distributing visual images of another engaged in sexually explicit conduct or the intimate parts of another, without that person’s consent and where the person had a reasonable expectation of privacy. Constitutionally protected activity is not subject to the provisions of this section.

Those in violation would be guilty of a felony with a maximum penalty of three years in prison or a fine of not more than $3,000 or both.

“I applaud Attorney General Kilmartin for this strong legislation and I will be proud to submit it when the new session begins,” said Rep. Lally. “Individuals posting explicit photos with the intent of embarrassing a former romantic partner must be punished, and this new law would give law enforcement and prosecutors the tools necessary to take decisive action. Once such a law is on the books, it will hopefully make those seeking revenge think twice before invading someone’s privacy in such a degrading manner.”


“Posting explicit photos of a former partner without their consent is extremely hurtful and embarrassing. Penalties need to be strong to ensure that people think twice before attempting to degrade an individual in this way,” said Sen. Lynch. “I am grateful to Attorney General Kilmartin for developing this legislation to address a new kind of virtual assault, which disproportionately targets women. I am proud to submit this legislation on his behalf.”

Narragansett, SK Rep. Lally Joins Officials in Filing ‘Revenge Porn’ Legislation –
Original story at
revenge porn – Google News… Read the rest