”If a picture paints a thousand words…”

June 3, 2014 10 Comments
By

Fay Schopen on the perils of the Internet Age:

In a pre-digital age, what happened to your homemade erotica when you split was a pleasingly low-tech issue. If the break-up was fairly amicable and you were a man and a lady, the lady got to keep the sexy stuff. I don’t know why, it’s an unwritten heterosexual law – a throwback to the age of chivalry if you like. Sometimes you both had images of each other and that acted as a deterrent to the other party doing anything mean-spirited with the material – a bit like owning nuclear weapons. Burning was a popular choice, of course, although Polaroid pictures tend to be pretty robust, so I recommend a sharp pair of scissors.

Ah, those low-tech days! It’s not so simple now…

But what to do in a digital age when we’re drowning in risqué pictures and videos? Break up with a budding Robert Mapplethorpe at your peril. Unlike, say, a VHS video tape – I came across one of these from a previous relationship when I moved recently. I looked at it fondly, imagined what was on it and that was that. Oh, innocence – there’s a real possibility that naked pictures of yourself will live forever in your ex’s hard drive or on their phone – or on the internet itself if they are really mean.

I suppose you could just not create any such media..? Nah. Too simple. Besides, you know the courts will have your back, right?

This is demonstrated by the fact that a court in Germany has ruled that a woman has the right to ask her ex-boyfriend – a photographer – to delete erotic videos and intimate photographs of her taken, with her consent, in the course of their relationship. While there is no suggestion that he intended to distribute the material – such as with odious cases of “revenge porn” – the court agreed with her demand, saying her consent could be withdrawn on the grounds of her personal rights, on which it placed a higher value than her ex-boyfriend’s ownership rights.

As Ms Schopen ponders in this article, good luck with enforcing that!

… my first thought was that this was great news for embittered lovers everywhere, and for anyone who has ever had their photograph taken. Does our personal right not to have a picture of us with four chins appear on Instagram – even with a lovely filter – trump the rights of the photographer? Well, why not? Better yet, what about our personal right to have regrettable texts and emails deleted?

No doubt that’ll be next. These people never say ‘OK, enough’s enough’, do they?

I can’t help but think that a high-profile court case with an ex, whether the issue is sexy pictures or a text you shouldn’t have sent at 1am, will only draw attention to the fact that they “own” said pictures in the first place. It seems that the female partner in the German case did not suspect that her ex intended to distribute the images and videos; she simply didn’t like the thought of him owning and looking at them anymore. Well, tough luck. Close your eyes and imagine one of your past lovers naked. Yep. We can’t delete our thoughts.

I’m sure someone, somewhere in progressiveland, is working on it…

Tags: , ,

10 Responses to ”If a picture paints a thousand words…”

  1. June 4, 2014 at 3:28 am

    Upload ! Then it belongs to Google / yahoo / A.N.Other data manager.

    • June 7, 2014 at 7:35 am

      Who’ll yank it in a heartbeat if lawyers get involved!

  2. June 4, 2014 at 5:35 pm

    I am reminded of the innocence of that earlier age before digital photos, etc., of the story in which this aged Frenchman (it had to be a Frenchman) was ‘sniffing’ at the small collection of female pubic hairs provided by his chance travelling companion. (also French.)

    He remarked, “Quite delightful, but, in my own view, a little too near the *rse!”

    • June 7, 2014 at 7:38 am

      :o

  3. Furor Teutonicus
    June 5, 2014 at 7:25 am

    XX a woman has the right to ask her ex-boyfriend – a photographer – to delete erotic videos and intimate photographs of her taken, with her consent, in the course of their relationship. While there is no suggestion that he intended to distribute the material XX

    “While there is no suggestion that he intended to distribute the material XX

    She can claim damages in a civil process, and he has breached her private sphere,(A criminal court case) punishable by a fine, or imprisoment up to five years.

    There does not have to be an intent to distribute.

    This woman is MORE than in her rights.

    • June 7, 2014 at 7:39 am

      But presumably, he stars in these videos too. What aboit his rights?

      • Furor Teutonicus
        June 7, 2014 at 8:43 am

        He is the maker/producer. He can do what he wants, so long as the woman, or any one else, without their express permission, is made unidentifiable.

  4. June 5, 2014 at 7:39 am

    Imagine one of our past lovers naked? Oh dear, hope she doesn’t remember me that way.

  5. June 6, 2014 at 6:26 am

    She should follow the example set by celenonebrities like Paris Hilton, and copyright them, then she can earn royalties.

    • June 7, 2014 at 7:42 am

      Good point!

United Kingdom Time

Subscribe

Email us at contact orphans of liberty [all one word] at gmail dot com

Authors

For more about these renegades, click on the name to go to a short profile:

AK Haart
Churchmouse
James Higham
JuliaM
The Quiet Man

Orphans logo


Feel free to take this for your sidebar.