Cyberbullying and sharing intimate images without consent

[speedog]

New legislation for cyberbullying and sharing intimate images without consent - link (http://www.canada.ca/en/campaign/cyberbullying/cyberbullying.html).

One would like to think it could be as simple as one just doesn't allow pictures to be taken of one's self nude but with the proliferation of digital cameras/recording media, I guess this is just a bit too much to ask for. Years ago if one took any sort of intimate photo, you took your chances in getting it developed somewhere or you developed it yourself - these days it's all at your fingertips in your cellphone. Add to that how communication has changed in relationships with social media/texting/cell phones and it is not unimaginable how someone might post a picture out of revenge or to be a braggart.

It will be interesting to see if this new legislation changes any behaviours - it is a tool for the legal system but like with speeding or distracted driving laws, there are still many that break those laws regardless of the possible known consequences.

[Feruk]

Seriously? What a retarded waste of time. Laws already exist and they certainly don't need more. Our government must be having a really slow year.

[Thales of Miletus]

I think it is a great idea.

People don't seem to think they have to act maturely when there is a piece of glass between them and the real world.

Be it a wind shield or a computer monitor, people can be sociopaths when they are not held to account.

[firebane]

Yay more laws to govern a persons idiocy. :banghead:

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by firebane
Yay more laws to govern a persons idiocy. :banghead:

There are lots of idiots that need to be restrained.

This law may have prevented that little girl in Vancouver from committing suicide. Wasn't it a creepy pedophile that put her picture on the net?

[DeleriousZ]

If you don't want naked pictures of yourself on the internet, don't take naked pictures of yourself.

[blairtruck]

i thought the person who takes the picture owns the rights to the picture

[Modelexis]

Originally posted by Thales of Miletus
Be it a wind shield or a computer monitor,

What about a badge, or a judges bench, or a parliament building or in a Humvee?

Do you see the contradiction here? What is worse, posting nudies of an ex gf or sending troops into iraq to fight, die and terrorize foreign populations.

[firebane]

Originally posted by Thales of Miletus


There are lots of idiots that need to be restrained.

This law may have prevented that little girl in Vancouver from committing suicide. Wasn't it a creepy pedophile that put her picture on the net?

And whose idiot idea was it to send it to that person.. OH right..

[Feruk]

Originally posted by blairtruck
i thought the person who takes the picture owns the rights to the picture
They do... until they post it somewhere. Then no. For example, your pics that you add to Facebook are no longer owned by you.

[codetrap]

Originally posted by Modelexis


What about a badge, or a judges bench, or a parliament building or in a Humvee?

Do you see the contradiction here? What is worse, posting nudies of an ex gf or sending troops into iraq to fight, die and terrorize foreign populations. What about a cow, or an duck, or a chicken or on a horse? Do you see the contradiction here? What's worse, posting nudies of an ex gf or the enslavement and rampant consumption of our animal brethren.

[16hypen3sp]

I saw many people in high school learn the hard way. Too many young women trying to win the affection of a crush or something of the sort.


There was the odd male that would fall for it too.

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by firebane


And whose idiot idea was it to send it to that person.. OH right..

I look at women a little differently than some men. I appreciate them and care for them.

It takes a lot for a woman to trust, and when she does, she gives herself to you. And when you part ways, a woman is usually sad but ready to move on.

Some men however are built differently. They sleep with a woman and call her whore, and if she dares break up with a man, she gets threatened or has the symbol of her trust pasted all over the internet.

The way some men treat women disgusts me. I think the men that don't want womens nude pics restricted, just don't get any of the real thing and have to pull it to a picture.

[cancer man]

Originally posted by Thales of Miletus


I look at women a little differently than some men. I appreciate them and care for them.

It takes a lot for a woman to trust, and when she does, she gives herself to you. And when you part ways, a woman is usually sad but ready to move on.

Some men however are built differently. They sleep with a woman and call her whore, and if she dares break up with a man, she gets threatened or has the symbol of her trust pasted all over the internet.

The way some men treat women disgusts me. I think the men that don't want womens nude pics restricted, just don't get any of the real thing and have to pull it to a picture. to each haters of "milk" your eating like a b!tch so ur gonna stay a b!tch. eat some cow eat some pizza eat cow in pasta cow in bread cow with cheese drink cow. look at cows there big eat them and ull be to. u are what u eat u wanna eat chicked ull stay being a chicken. u wanna eat string cheese ur gonna be a string cheese. u wanna eat fruit ur ganna be a fruit. Enjoy life.

What about milk...

[JRSC00LUDE]

Ladies, I bet he's single! Go bask in the glow of respect!

[jwslam]

Originally posted by Thales of Miletus
I think it is a great idea.

People don't seem to think they have to act maturely when there is a piece of glass between them and the real world.

Be it a wind shield or a computer monitor, people can be sociopaths when they are not held to account.
You seem to be in favor only because you get cyberbullied by killramos :rofl: :rofl:

for the record, I'm a bubble-popper in real life too. try playing Anomia with me just once.

[killramos]

Originally posted by jwslam

You seem to be in favor only because you get cyberbullied by killramos :rofl: :rofl:

Oh he wishes that any of my posts could be construed as illegal cyberbullying in any way :rofl:

The cyberbullying legislation is a joke anyways, it just gives judges more direct tools to deal with situations that were already criminal code offences ( like forcing kids off FB etc in the event of a judgment).

Criminal Harassment has already been illegal for decades, and the definitions of what classifies as criminal harassment have not changed.

The intimate images section is the only part that is new or has any teeth. Basically stating that if anyone wants images removed they can have the courts force people and have whoever distributed them pay for the costs associated with removal.

Beyonce tried that once, didn't work :rofl:

[syb65]

Beyond.ca - Car Forums > Lounge > Society / Law / Current Events / Politics > Cyberbullying and sharing intimate images without consent<Ask Leo

[zipdoa]

Originally posted by DeleriousZ
If you don't want naked pictures of yourself on the internet, don't take naked pictures of yourself.

Yeah, also, if you don't want to get raped, don't dress provocatively.

/You drank too much and passed out, so you deserve to be raped.
/Don't piss off your boyfriend if you don't want to get hit
/Don't become a victim of anything because it's the victims fault that it happened to them

In relationships, people like to have fun. That might include sharing pictures. Most people have the moral capacity to realize it's a shitty thing to share these pictures after the relationship ends, as some pathetic method of revenge. This law is probably a result of shitty human beings being shitty.

Do we tell people who are involved in serious not-at-fault collisions that they should not have been driving because "if you don't want to get into a crash, don't drive a car". That's fucking stupid - We educate drivers on safety, and we promote better habits. We need to change the culture of using sex as an excuse to discriminate just because we think we own our partners.

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by jwslam

You seem to be in favor only because you get cyberbullied by killramos :rofl: :rofl:

for the record, I'm a bubble-popper in real life too. try playing Anomia with me just once.

What is wrong with some of you?

You have a little community, of what seems to be very immature people. You get together and flame anyone that doesn't agree with your groups consensus.

I am against cyberbullying because I think some people don't feel the need to be moral if no one is watching them.

[FraserB]

Originally posted by zipdoa
Do we tell people who are involved in serious not-at-fault collisions that they should not have been driving because &quot;if you don't want to get into a crash, don't drive a car&quot;. That's fucking stupid - We educate drivers on safety, and we promote better habits. We need to change the culture of using sex as an excuse to discriminate just because we think we own our partners.

It's more of a case of "if you don't want those compromising pictures of yourself potentially leaked, don't take them in the first place". Instead, people want a free pass to put themselves into bad situations or make poor decisions and then complain to the cops when it bites them in the ass or they regret those drunken pics they took.

It's a knee jerk reaction to cases that were already covered by existing legislation, the only difference is that police will now have an easier time getting access to your electronic communications, seizing whatever the deem "associated" with the act and lets them into more than just electronics if they can find some tenuous link.

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by FraserB


Instead, people want a free pass to put themselves into bad situations or make poor decisions and then complain to the cops when it bites them in the ass or they regret those drunken pics they took.



You are asking women not to trust men. Something that would make life harder for the majority of us.

The law would protect children also. I don't know why anyone would want child porn to continue to be posted on the net.

[EM2FTL]

Originally posted by FraserB


It's more of a case of &quot;if you don't want those compromising pictures of yourself potentially leaked, don't take them in the first place&quot;. Instead, people want a free pass to put themselves into bad situations or make poor decisions and then complain to the cops when it bites them in the ass or they regret those drunken pics they took.

It's a knee jerk reaction to cases that were already covered by existing legislation, the only difference is that police will now have an easier time getting access to your electronic communications, seizing whatever the deem &quot;associated&quot; with the act and lets them into more than just electronics if they can find some tenuous link.

What happens when an individual is passed out or just asleep, and their 'partner' at the time takes pictures of them then distributes said pictures? Should they simply have chosen a more trustworthy partner? It is a free pass to blame the person who took the picture?

When we talk about applicable legislation, are we referring to leg that was drafted prior to the introduction of the internet, and a complete paradigm shift in photography/distribution etc?

Can I write anything today without turning it into a question?

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by EM2FTL

It is a free pass to blame the person who took the picture?

Can I write anything today without turning it into a question?

This thread is interesting. It reveals the people who think this law restricts them, versus the people who are worried about the protection of others.

[DeleriousZ]

Originally posted by Thales of Miletus


This thread is interesting. It reveals the people who think this law restricts them, versus the people who are worried about the protection of others.

Yes. Shit. You got me. I hate it when someone tries to jail me for sharing noodz. :rolleyes:

[Mista Bob]

When it comes to certain pictures, as long as the individuals are over 18 this is something that should just never involve the law.

I mean FFS, is no one growing up beyond the kindergarten school yard now?
Tax dollars/resources should never be wasted just to have the hands held of all these people who are too stupid to go through their own lives without constant supervision.

I can just picture it now, crying to 911 when their ex releases pictures that they took themselves and gave out to them. Totally a great use of resources.

Don't want them put out, don't take them. People need to grow the fuck up and accept responsibility for their own actions.

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by Mista Bob
People need to grow the fuck up and accept responsibility for their own actions.

Isn't morality part of personal responsibility?

[A790]

Originally posted by Mista Bob
When it comes to certain pictures, as long as the individuals are over 18 this is something that should just never involve the law.

I mean FFS, is no one growing up beyond the kindergarten school yard now?
Tax dollars/resources should never be wasted just to have the hands held of all these people who are too stupid to go through their own lives without constant supervision.

I can just picture it now, crying to 911 when their ex releases pictures that they took themselves and gave out to them. Totally a great use of resources.

Don't want them put out, don't take them. People need to grow the fuck up and accept responsibility for their own actions.
That's an incredibly short-sighted way of looking at it.

This law would make enforcing and prosecuting those types of cases much easier. It establishes clear legal language regarding how offenses of this nature would be handled. What's the issue here?

It's not as if the police are going to get inundated with calls from people over it. If anything, it will serve to streamline the burden placed on the court system with cases of this nature.

And you know what? If my ex decides to release my nudes, fuck yes I'm going after her legally. Your sentiments regarding the issue are flat-out irrelevant.

Sending nudes doesn't mean that someone needs to "grow the fuck up", especially if they were sent to a spouse/partner. Releasing someone else's nudes without consent does mean that, though. Your anger is hilariously misplaced.

[codetrap]

Originally posted by zipdoa
Yeah, also, if you don't want to get raped, don't dress don't dress provocatively <and walk into a men's prison and say I want to get fucked hard>

/You drank too much and passed out <in a men's prison after saying you wanted to get fucked hard>, so you deserve to be raped.
/Don't piss off your boyfriend <and punch him in the face> if you don't want to get hit
/Don't become a victim of anything because it's the victims fault that it happened to them <when they did stupid things and put themselves into stupid situations where they become the victims>

In relationships, people like to have fun. That might include sharing pictures. Most people have the moral capacity to realize it's a shitty thing to share these pictures after the relationship ends, as some pathetic method of revenge. This law is probably a result of shitty human beings being shitty.

Do we tell people who are involved in serious not-at-fault collisions that they should not have been driving because &quot;if you don't want to get into a crash, don't drive a car&quot;. That's fucking stupid - We educate drivers on safety, and we promote better habits. We need to change the culture of using sex as an excuse to discriminate just because we think we own our partners.

There's some pretty false analogies here.... corrected them for you. There's also a difference between initiating a situation where you're essentially inviting abuse to something like the risk assessment like driving where you always maintain some kind of control. I think in your car example, it would be your example, except she was driving with her eyes closed.

[sexualbanana]

I can't say that I've read the language in the law, but just from reactions and my very superficial knowledge of the legislation, I think this is simply a reaction to the speed with which information spreads now.

Intimate photos/subject matter has been around for a long time. Only now, it spreads like fucking wildfire.

20 years ago, if my girlfriend/wife/husband/boyfriend/booty call wanted to send me a photos of themselves, it would take 5-10 business days. Now it takes 5 seconds. The biggest change is the speed with which that photo multiplies.

20 years ago, if I wanted to show that photo to my friends, I'd show it to them in person. More than likely because there's only one copy, and unless people felt inclined to, they'd have to pay me to make copies or photocopies. Which just takes too much time and effort. Now, I simply hit re-send. And not only do I have a copy of that photo, but so do my friends! Instead of 1 copy, now there's 4 out there!

That's where my impression of the intent of the legislation is heading. From the sounds of it, it may not be perfect, but I think the intent is to catch up to technology.

Having said that, if you are sent an intimate photo by a partner and you in turn send it out to your friends, that just makes you a shitty person.

[Thales of Miletus]

Laws keep the immoral from doing their thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQUr2RkjykU

[Mista Bob]

Originally posted by A790

That's an incredibly short-sighted way of looking at it.

This law would make enforcing and prosecuting those types of cases much easier. It establishes clear legal language regarding how offenses of this nature would be handled. What's the issue here?

It's not as if the police are going to get inundated with calls from people over it. If anything, it will serve to streamline the burden placed on the court system with cases of this nature.

And you know what? If my ex decides to release my nudes, fuck yes I'm going after her legally. Your sentiments regarding the issue are flat-out irrelevant.

Sending nudes doesn't mean that someone needs to &quot;grow the fuck up&quot;, especially if they were sent to a spouse/partner. Releasing someone else's nudes without consent does mean that, though. Your anger is hilariously misplaced.

What is incredibly short sighted is taking these types of photos and sending them to anyone, doesn't matter who or how many people, with the expectation that nothing can possibly go wrong.

Shit happens and there is an incredibly easy way to avoid this, don't take them.
There are risks with everything you do in your life, you either accept those risks or avoid it. Pretty simple.

So why should resources that cost tax dollars be wasted processing cases over something as pathetic as this.
I'm annoyed not because of this specific thing but rather how everything in society now is all about refusing to take any responsibility over ones owns actions. Like I said, people need to grow up.

[Xtrema]

Post a chopped picture of Harper without consent, go to jail.

At least that's how this law will be used in my mind.

[sputnik]

Originally posted by zipdoa
Yeah, also, if you don't want to get raped, don't dress provocatively.

/You drank too much and passed out, so you deserve to be raped.
/Don't piss off your boyfriend if you don't want to get hit
/Don't become a victim of anything because it's the victims fault that it happened to them

So if I leave $100,000 cash on the seat of an unlocked car in Forest Lawn, are people going to feel sorry for me when it gets stolen or are they going to tell me I was stupid?

Rape (and likewise theft) is a terrible thing and inexcusable. However if you put yourself in a vulnerable position it isn't that you _deserved_ it, but you certainly weren't protecting your assets.

So if you don't want naked pictures of you on the internet. Don't take naked pictures of yourself.

[A790]

Originally posted by Mista Bob
So why should resources that cost tax dollars be wasted processing cases over something as pathetic as this.
I'm annoyed not because of this specific thing but rather how everything in society now is all about refusing to take any responsibility over ones owns actions. Like I said, people need to grow up.
This is already happening. So you feel that building legislation that streamlines the process and clearly defines culpability and sentencing is going to wind up costing more than prosecuting on the existing vague legislation?

Can you please explain how?

[Thales of Miletus]

I think the ugliness of the internet speaks to the value of laws.

Some people will be moral, because they are moral.

Some people will be immature, because there is nothing stopping them from being immature.

[codetrap]

Originally posted by A790

That's an incredibly short-sighted way of looking at it.

This law would make enforcing and prosecuting those types of cases much easier. It establishes clear legal language regarding how offenses of this nature would be handled. What's the issue here?

It's not as if the police are going to get inundated with calls from people over it. If anything, it will serve to streamline the burden placed on the court system with cases of this nature.

And you know what? If my ex decides to release my nudes, fuck yes I'm going after her legally. Your sentiments regarding the issue are flat-out irrelevant.

Sending nudes doesn't mean that someone needs to &quot;grow the fuck up&quot;, especially if they were sent to a spouse/partner. Releasing someone else's nudes without consent does mean that, though. Your anger is hilariously misplaced. I'm personally on the fence about this. On one hand, I think having legal culpability for the person releasing the pictures is a good thing, especially if it's done maliciously. However, that being said, the reality of the situation is that you're completely giving up control by sending them. This is really a complex issue with many variations. If I print the picture and accidentally leave it on the bus, and someone takes it and emails out, are they liable? I think the hardest big is going to be proving intent.

In your example, if she releases your nudes, do you really have a leg to stand on? You gave them to her, they're now hers. What she does with them is her business... as it would be if you gave her your old phone, and forgot to remove those images off it. It's the mixing of a moral and ethical argument where the strict legalities can have some pretty far reaching implications on the responsibility of ownership, and where property lines could potentially be redrawn to.

*shrug*.. Just my thoughts running on too little sleep..

[A790]

Originally posted by codetrap
I'm personally on the fence about this. On one hand, I think having legal culpability for the person releasing the pictures is a good thing, especially if it's done maliciously. However, that being said, the reality of the situation is that you're completely giving up control by sending them. This is really a complex issue with many variations. If I print the picture and accidentally leave it on the bus, and someone takes it and emails out, are they liable? I think the hardest big is going to be proving intent.

In your example, if she releases your nudes, do you really have a leg to stand on? You gave them to her, they're now hers. What she does with them is her business... as it would be if you gave her your old phone, and forgot to remove those images off it. It's the mixing of a moral and ethical argument where the strict legalities can have some pretty far reaching implications on the responsibility of ownership, and where property lines could potentially be redrawn to.

*shrug*.. Just my thoughts running on too little sleep..
You make valid points. I think, given the ease of creating and sending this type of content, that laws should be put in place that clearly define the legalities associated.

Leaving a photo on a bus is one thing (negligence), releasing an explicit photo of someone else without consent is something else entirely (obvious intent to cause harm).

[Thales of Miletus]

Perhaps things would quickly change on the internet, if every person had to put their name to their actions.

[EM2FTL]

Originally posted by Thales of Miletus
Perhaps things would quickly change on the internet, if every person had to put their name to their actions.

Yes, because Facebook is just great :rolleyes:

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by EM2FTL


Yes, because Facebook is just great :rolleyes:

I have never had anyone insult me on facebook.

However I do understand that the internet has created a new freedom and source of expression for the true blue dicks of the world.

[Mista Bob]

Originally posted by A790

This is already happening. So you feel that building legislation that streamlines the process and clearly defines culpability and sentencing is going to wind up costing more than prosecuting on the existing vague legislation?

Can you please explain how?

It shouldn't be there in the first place.
Things are getting out of hand, don't you think?

What's next, people suing because they feel slightly offended over something? Oh wait... that already happens.

[A790]

Originally posted by Mista Bob


It shouldn't be there in the first place.
Things are getting out of hand, don't you think?

What's next, people suing because they feel slightly offended over something? Oh wait... that already happens.
You haven't answered my question. Before I address yours I'd like you to address mine.

[FraserB]

Originally posted by Thales of Miletus


You are asking women not to trust men. Something that would make life harder for the majority of us.

The law would protect children also. I don't know why anyone would want child porn to continue to be posted on the net.

I might be wrong here, but I thought distributing and possessing child pron was already illegal. Maybe I'm wrong on this though.

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by FraserB


I might be wrong here, but I thought distributing and possessing child pron was already illegal. Maybe I'm wrong on this though.

It doesn't seem to be illegal enough.

Pedophiles should be shot in the head. No jail time, no probation, just shot in the head.

[JRSC00LUDE]

Originally posted by Thales of Miletus

It doesn't seem to be illegal enough.

Pedophiles should be shot in the head. No jail time, no probation, just shot in the head.

What an incredibly American Conservative stance on capital punishment.

[baygirl]

I am of the mindset that if I send spikerS nudes, it is out of my control what happens to them afterwards, and there is a chance they could end up being seen by others, that's a chance you take when you hit send. However that doesn't make it okay for him to post them online to seek revenge or harass me.

[killramos]

Originally posted by JRSC00LUDE


What an incredibly American Conservative stance on capital punishment.

I was thinking exactly the same thing when I saw his post! Between this and using Ned Flanders as an avatar...

Good thing conservatives are generally less intelligent right?

:rofl:

[Mista Bob]

Originally posted by A790

You haven't answered my question. Before I address yours I'd like you to address mine.

If they are going to do it then they may as well do so as efficiently as possible. Can't argue with that, nor is it what I'm trying to do.
What I have a problem with is the multitude of things going to court that IMO should never make it past the front door in the first place, this included.

[A790]

Originally posted by Mista Bob
What I have a problem with is the multitude of things going to court that IMO should never make it past the front door in the first place, this included.
I think we need to accept that the social environment is changing. I agree with your sentiments on the subject, by the way. It's pretty sad that common sense has to be replaced by litigious oversight... but sadly, that's the world that we've created.

The focus on moving to a more PC environment has also created this mentality of whom should accept fault. In some situations, like the one we're discussing now, many would argue where the fault/blame lies.

We can make this trend better by putting in effective legislation that solves problem areas, but I also think we need to move to make people less dependent on legal mechanisms to solve problems. The court is not a mediator, it's a last resort.

But here's an example:

A good friend of mine sold her cell phone. Before she sold it she did a factory wipe/reset so that it was a blank slate when she handed it off to the new owner.

The new owner recovered the old phone data, including nude photos that were on the device. He then demanded a "finders fee" in exchange for the deletion of the photos.

She is having a hard time prosecuting because existing laws don't really cover that well. Because he didn't threaten to release the photos, it's not technically extortion. As a result, he got a slap on the wrist.

We're talking about someone that knowingly restored old phone data after it was deleted. Someone that not only viewed these photos, but then turned around a "finders fee" in exchange for the deletion of the photos.

This is why I believe that legislation of this nature is important. This case should be open and shut, but because existing laws don't do an adequate job defining the crime and establishing precedence, this guy is going to get off with little more than a warning.

You can argue that it's a risk that was taken, but there is no arguing that this type of behaviour is becoming more common and should have clear "rules" that impact people that would seek to abuse or extort others. The simple fact of the matter is that laws are needed to remain relevant with technology as technology continues to develop and change the way we communicate and behave. It is naive to think otherwise.

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by JRSC00LUDE


What an incredibly American Conservative stance on capital punishment.

Why do you, or why would anyone else, defend a pedophile?

[JRSC00LUDE]

You realize, when you reach THAT far for a pitch, you will always strike out. Right?

Best of luck to you though as you attempt to twist that around too!


:dunno:

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by JRSC00LUDE
You realize, when you reach THAT far for a pitch, you will always strike out. Right?

Best of luck to you though as you attempt to twist that around too!




So you are saying, "that you enjoy watching little boys play baseball"?

You are a sicko.

[codetrap]

Originally posted by Thales of Miletus
So you are saying, &quot;that you enjoy watching little boys play baseball&quot;?

You are a sicko. Watching children play games makes me a sicko? Then I guess every parent with children in sports is really a pedodphile according to you?

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by codetrap
Watching children play games makes me a sicko? Then I guess every parent with children in sports is really a pedodphile according to you?

Relax, I was simply giving him the same sort of hyperbole he dispenses daily.

[codetrap]

Don't forget the emoticons then.😋

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by codetrap
Don't forget the emoticons then.&amp;#128523;

What does the satire emoticon look like?

(\_(\
(^.^)
O(")(")

[JRSC00LUDE]

How cute, the trash talking imbecile is mistaking sheer stupidity for satire again. :dunno:

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by JRSC00LUDE
How cute, the trash talking imbecile is mistaking sheer stupidity for satire again. :dunno:

^^^Butthurt Irony.^^^