What exactly is revenge porn and how does "defamation" apply in this case (I am aware that the suit does not involve defamation in a way related to revenge porn)? If it involves posting pornographic pictures involving others that approved of the pictures in the first place, how could that activity constitute defamation?
"Revenge porn" is posting pornographic pictures of your exes (or other people of whom you have such pictures, and don't have permission to post it publicly). The idea being that you shame your exes by posting your dirty photos of them from when you were dating. Apparently the sites also include real names and hometowns of the people posted, or in some cases even addresses and phone numbers, to increase the chances of them being embarrassed by people who know them finding the pictures.
This particular defamation suit has nothing to do with revenge porn per se. It just happens that the founder of a revenge porn website is a huge asshole, and started making (presumably) baseless accusations of pedophilia against someone who campaigns against cyber bullying and who helped shut down his first revenge porn site. The details are a bit more complicated, but that's the gist.
So the defamation lawsuit is about his pedophilia accusation, not anything directly to do with the revenge porn sites, though I think there are some other pending privacy lawsuits about them too.
>"Revenge porn" is posting pornographic pictures of your exes
>Apparently the sites also include real names and hometowns of the people posted, or in some cases even addresses and phone numbers, to increase the chances of them being embarrassed by people who know them finding the pictures.
>It just happens that the founder of a revenge porn website is a huge asshole
Didn't see that one comming! Did M. Night Shyamalan write this post? :)
Hunter Moore at one point operated a website dedicated to posting pornographic images, ostensibly without the permission of the participants. (I say ostensibly because as far as I know it hasn't gone to court. The media coverage certainly implied that permission was lacking.) He used the presence of other, more legitimate pornography to defend the site but in my opinion legitimacy wasn't really his goal. (His new website's selling point is identifying information.)
As a free-speech advocate I'm leery of defamation lawsuits in general, but (again, in my opinion) Moore has gone well past the point of being merely 'offensive' and moved on to actively endangering other people for no reason. Accusing someone of possessing child pornography because you don't like them is getting pretty close to the line as well. So I don't have much sympathy.
