Revenge Porn Victim?

Has someone posted explicit photos of you on the internet without your consent?   You may be the victim of revenge porn.

What is revenge porn?

Revenge porn is usually defined as revealing or sexually explicit images or videos of a person posted on the Internet, typically by a former sexual partner, without the consent of the subject and in order to cause them distress or embarrassment.   Simply put it is typically the non-consensual sharing of nude photos on the internet.

Revenge porn is a serious problem and there are an ever growing number of states that have adopted civil and/or criminal penalties for individuals who post revenge porn.  As of this writing there are 34 states that have revenge porn laws on the books that make revenge porn a criminal offense and 7 more states with bills pending.  There are 11 states that have revenge porn laws with civil remedies.  Revenge porn laws and their remedies vary widely from state to state so it is necessary to consult your own state laws concerning the available remedies you may have as a victim of revenge porn.  Remedies may include damages sustained against the poster and an order to remove the explicit photograph from the site where it appears.

There is also discussion afloat that a new federal revenge porn law and a bill was recently introduced in Congress and if adopted would have nationwide application and broaden remedies available for revenge porn victims.  The bill would carry civil penalties and up to five years in prison for a violation.  Sites such as Reddit, Facebook, Google and Twitter have all recently banned non-consensual nude photos as part of their policies and others are certain to follow.

As a victim of revenge porn a priority for you may be the removal of the explicit photos online.  If you can assert facts to establish the posting is as a result of revenge porn then the posting may violate the terms of service and a well-crafted letter from an attorney may result in the removal of the revenge porn from the site.   If you are the owner of the explicit photograph, which is often the case, and can establish the poster posted the explicit photograph without your consent you may be able to claim copyrights to the photograph and send a notice under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) demanding removal of the photograph from the website.

If you are the victim of revenge porn, you may have revenge porn or other remedies available to assist in the removal of your sexually explicit photos online.  Contacting an experienced attorney to assist you is often the best path to success in removal of online revenge porn photos.

PATENT EXHAUSTION AND SALE OF PATENTED ITEM

The U.S. Patent Act (35 U.S.C. § 271(a)) grants a patent owner the right to prevent others from making, using, selling, offering for sale or importing a patent invention within the U.S.  The doctrine of patent exhaustion limits the patent owner’s ability to control the use of patented items after those items have been sold.  In other words, the first authorized sale of a patented item terminates/exhausts all patents rights to that item.  As a result, the purchaser of the patented item has the right to use or resell the patented item without it being considered infringing of the patent owner’s rights.

In Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc., 816 F.3d 721 (Fed. Cir. 2016), cert. granted, 84 U.S.L.W. 3563 (U.S. Dec. 2, 2016) (No. 15-1189), the Supreme Court decided to review the Federal Circuit’s decision regarding patent exhaustion.  The main issue that the Supreme Court will examine is whether a patent owner can implement post-sale restrictions on the use or resale of a patented item to avoid the application of the patent exhaustion doctrine.  Thus, the Supreme Court’s decision could potentially expand the rights of the patent owner.

In this case, Impression Products, Inc. bought printer cartridges from a third party for resale in the U.S.  These cartridges were first sold by Lexmark and some of them were subject to the single-use/no-resale restriction.  Impression Products, Inc. acquired a modified version of the cartridges from a third party and sold these cartridges.  Lexmark sued Impression Products, Inc. for patent infringement and Impression Products, Inc. argued that the patent exhaustion doctrine applies.

Free Initial Consultation with a Utah Lawyer

When you need a lawyer for revenge pron, call Ascent Law for your free consultation (801) 676-5506. We want to help you.