Twitter Will Ban Revenge Porn and Non-consensual Nudes 114
AmiMoJo writes: Twitter has changed its rules to state it will forbid users from posting revenge porn and non-consensual nudes on its service. In the private information section of the site's policy list, the company added that users "may not post intimate photos or videos that were taken or distributed without the subject's consent." Twitter seemed to indicate that it would use some combination of automated and manual checks to decide whether a reported post is revenge porn or not before removing the post. "We will ask a reporting user to verify that he or she is the individual in question in content alleged to be violating our policy and to confirm that the photo or video in question was posted without consent." There will be an appeal process too.
In February, reddit made a similar rules change after the site was embroiled in controversy for allowing the posting of stolen nude celebrity photos in 2014. Banning "involuntary pornography," reddit urged victims to e-mail the site with details so administrators could remove the offending posts.
In February, reddit made a similar rules change after the site was embroiled in controversy for allowing the posting of stolen nude celebrity photos in 2014. Banning "involuntary pornography," reddit urged victims to e-mail the site with details so administrators could remove the offending posts.
Re:Cue MRAs/GamerGators/Redpillers in 3...2...1... (Score:5, Insightful)
This has nothing to do with ethics in games journalism. You need to get your echochamer re-aligned.
It Remains a Journalism Scandal. Deal With It. (Score:5, Insightful)
The week-long gaming press news blackout and ongoing user comment/forum censorship (in former free-speech strongholds such as 4chan and Reddit, no less) didn't work.
The coordinated, ongoing smear campaign that began with the "Gamers are Over" articles hasn't worked.
The doxxing and harassment of pro-GG folks hasn't worked.
The endless train of embarrassingly desperate counter-hashtags [minus.com] hasn't worked.
The Wikipedia and Nightline hit pieces only damage those outlets' credibility for short-term effect.
The SVU episode . . . hahaahhahaha WOW, where do I even begin . . . it is progapanda that couldn't be more precisely crafted to the corrupt press's specifications (i.e. "narrative"), and broadcast to a national non-gamer audience, much of which likely accepted it as reality. It was a wake-up call to quite a few previously unaware or neutral parties, especially game devs*.
Eurogamer is the latest games journalism site to update its ethics policy in the wake of Gamergate [blogjob.com], joining PC Gamer [techraptor.net], IGN [blogjob.com], the Escapist [escapistmagazine.com], and of course Kotaku/Gawker [blogjob.com] (though in Gawker's case, they put up more of a fight and the Gamergate pressure to be ethical had to be routed through the FTC [reddit.com]). And there are probably more I'm forgetting.
Gamergate also got Brad Wardell (CEO of Stardock) some long-overdue apologies for hit pieces run against him:
https://twitter.com/iamDavidWi... [twitter.com]
http://www.gamepolitics.com/20... [gamepolitics.com]
http://www.zenofdesign.com/in-... [zenofdesign.com]
Ask yourself how much of this you've seen reported in the corrupt media (which at this point, sadly, clearly includes Slashdot). Of course none of it ever had a chance of appearing in the Wikipedia article. Nothing enrages anti-Gamergaters more than someone covering both sides of the story [youtube.com], and that should tell you something.
Their side thrives only in an environment of propaganda and censorship, and evaporates when faced with integrity and transparency. They prove the need for Gamergate every time they write an article based on the assumption that terrorism and child porn^W^W^W^W misogyny and harassment have become the root passwords to the Constitution^W^W journalistic ethics.
* like Mark Kern and Ken Levine, who had nothing to do with Gamergate, but were so disgusted by the SVU episode that they publically called on the gaming press to stop slandering gamers. Both were instantly swarmed by anti-GG on twitter, and VG24/7 ran a hit piece on Kern without even getting his side of the story, and refused even after he specifically asked them. I think Eurogamer saw exactly what happened to Kern, and it's no accident that that their policy explicitly includes a "right of reply" (perhaps a subtle message that they won't similarly treat game devs like shit).
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Cue MRAs/GamerGators/Redpillers in 3...2...1... (Score:5, Informative)
Just a heads up, that reddit's policy change only refers to non-consensual nudes of females.
http://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/2ythke/i_wish_i_was_a_female_celeb_in_gaming/
Re: (Score:2)
Yep I saw that. I use as a gauge how well those in authority apply their own rules to themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Cue MRAs/GamerGators/Redpillers in 3...2...1.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Sugartits?
Re:Cue MRAs/GamerGators/Redpillers in 3...2...1... (Score:4, Informative)
If you cannot see that only applying it to female pictures is unfair, then there is no hope for you at all.
In the case of the nudes (Score:1)
How do they prove it if the face is censored or missing?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
They should send an uncensored nude picture of themselves to twitter admins to prove that the body matches their face, and a scan of a photo-id to prove their identity.
Re: (Score:1)
Timestamped, of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Geolocated of course...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
There is no defense. Accusation is guilt.
This could be interesting. (Score:4, Funny)
Will they start by taking down all of those naked pictures of that poor blue bird?
Re: (Score:1)
The blue bird consented.
Re: (Score:2)
Animals don't count. Take note, naturalists (both meanings).
You are an animal, I am an animal... It's just that non-human animals don't have any rights in our society...
Reddit (Score:5, Interesting)
Not quite. They only banned the practice for females(in practice). Males who petition to have their pictures to be removed have been ignored. SC2 streamer Destiny posted earlier this week about how reddit refuses to take down his leaked revenge nudes(which are still stored on reddit's servers as someone with a particular beef with Destiny has added the images to a custom CSS for a subreddit) and refuses to discipline those that continually post it.
This is similar to Gawker's avid posting of Hulk Hogan's stolen sextape versus their denouncement and refusal to host images of the leaked female celebrity nudes, known as the Fappening.
Re: (Score:2)
More and more, I am beginning to believe that we either make ourselves comfortable with the fact that all information of any kind WILL flow through these digital lines, or we oppress ourselves with biased rules and unfair restrictions on freedom of speech.
I think we can adapt our expectations to the new paradigm. But it will take a lot of time and testing of our pre-set inhibitions and impulse to hide to adapt our culture to the information age in such a way that
Re:Reddit (Score:5, Insightful)
"In practice", they haven't done anything, for two simple reasons:
1) The victim needs to complain, and most will never even notice, and
2) It takes 15 seconds to make a throwaway account, and hours or even days for someone to notice, complain, and get a response; then, 15 seconds later...
I fully expect Twitter to have the same level of success.
Re:Reddit (Score:5, Informative)
perhaps because of risk getting sued? (Score:1)
Could it be that in one case, it was celebrity photos, and quite high risk getting hit by a horde of lawyers?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Why not just create a rule of no unauthorized celebrity content? If the idea is to avoid litigation, then that's the most obvious choice...
Could be bad for business. You get too restrictive, and some competition might pop up.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like a pretty good case for a damages lawsuit, he should contact a lawyer and sue them into oblivion. There is also the harassment, and you could maybe get one of those new cyberbully laws used against the person.
Re: (Score:2)
1) The victim needs to complain, and most will never even notice, and 2) It takes 15 seconds to make a throwaway account, and hours or even days for someone to notice, complain, and get a response; then, 15 seconds later...
Not only that, if Twitter enforces its rules the way they are stated, i.e.:
may not post intimate photos or videos that were taken or distributed without the subject's consent [emphasis added]
That "or" is crucial. Amost always, commercial nude photography pays the model (and of course it's consensual), but in exchange for pay, the photographer or company paying for the pictures retains all copy and distribution rights.
What that means, is that the photographer or company -- i.e. the copyright holder -- can distribute those photos without consent of the model, yet perfectly legally. Not only is it legal, it's the way it'
Re: (Score:2)
What experience do you have with commercial nude photography? Were you working for Playgirl, or just taking pictures of topless women posing with a CGI hobbit?
It isn't just nude photography, it's ANY photography involving live models. Those are industry-standard contractual terms. I did do commercial photography for a time.
Re: (Score:2)
It looks like you're seriously stalking somebody. I'm not sure why you think it's me.
Re: (Score:2)
No, Jane's not a lesbian. Jane fantasizes about fucking hot guys, so Jane wouldn't have an ex-girlfriend.
Easy to say anonymously via the internet. If we were face-to-face, I very much doubt you would have the guts to say these things. At least after you said them the first time.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not saying the rule will work but having this rule at least may help in court if they get sued. At worst, it may only get them out of negligence even if they get stuck with some guilt in a court case. That's where the big money starts rolling in so it does help.
That's not the point. If they enforce the rules as written, it is as likely to GET them sued, as it is to save them from suits.
It is literally, and legally, not about "consent". It's about who has the rights to the pictures. If I owned the rights to the pictures, the model has no legal say in what I do with them. If he or she tried to interfere with my legal right to distribute, that would be grounds for a suit. Breach of contract, among other things.
Re: (Score:2)
1) The victim needs to complain, and most will never even notice, and
2) It takes 15 seconds to make a throwaway account, and hours or even days for someone to notice, complain, and get a response; then, 15 seconds later...
Not only that, if Twitter enforces its rules the way they are stated, i.e.:
may not post intimate photos or videos that were taken or distributed without the subject's consent [emphasis added]
That "or" is crucial. Amost always, commercial nude photography pays the model (and of course it's consensual), but in exchange for pay, the photographer or company paying for the pictures retains all copy and distribution rights.
What that means, is that the photographer or company -- i.e. the copyright holder -- can distribute those photos without consent of the model, yet perfectly legally. Not only is it legal, it's the way it's usually done.
I warned when Reddit tried to do this that they were going to get themselves in hot water if they tried to enforce their rules as written. I now have to say the same about Twitter.
Probably all of these sites retain the ability to limit what you may post, regardless of your ownership of the content. If Reddit wants to ban images of left handed Antarticans, they are prefectly able to do so, even if I own all rights to the images. They are not required to permit anything they do not want to.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Because feminists don't care about men. It stopped being about equality 20+ years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
I googled this Destiny guy and the first thing that came up was a story about him posting revenge nudes of his girlfriend. Do you have a link to his complaint?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
Don't you know? Feminism is about equality, you horrible misogynist pissbaby neckbeard dudebro fuckboy shitlord. Women are just more equal than men.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Find another hobby other than revenge porn. A hike perhaps? Camping?
Re: (Score:3)
Non-consensual, underage pictures... Legal? (Score:1)
I recently posted a non-consensual photo of my newborn daughter, taken as she was brought out of the womb. Everybody congratulated us (for the baby, and for the photo, which was a great shot ;-) ).
I somehow doubt Twitter would have an issue with her image.
Re: (Score:2)
When she complains, I am sure twitter would be willing to remove the picture.
And congrats, being a parent is a very rewarding "job".
Re: (Score:1)
Watch out [googleusercontent.com]! A bunch of sickos are writing the law..
They will also provide a free service to ... (Score:2)
Revenge porn (Score:1)
Hmm... Revenge porn you said? Do you have sample links?
come for the banality (Score:3)
Twitter - come for the banality, stay for the censorship!
Okay. (Score:1)
So, subjects in photographs other than the rightsholder now have veto power over when those works are displayed? We're just a couple court cases for anyone tagged in an unflattering Facebook photo to demand it be deleted from the Internet entirely, not just untagged.
Disable pic tweets (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> basically the law says you don't need peoples consent to take their photos. you can take their photos on the streets and in public areas.
I am not sure if that's true.
Years ago, I took some undergraduate law classes. According to what I was taught at the time: "if it's public, you can't call it private." Anything out the public was fair game.
Today, I think there are laws about photographing police, even laws about photographing national monuments.
Interesting to see it being done in near-lockstep. (Score:1)
While it could be a coincidence, but it seems that these policies seem to share too many similarities in timing and direction.
Re: (Score:2)
You seriously need to learn what "liberals" means. It is not a generic curse, like "asshole" or "fuckwad". It has actual meaning. Your constant misuse of it makes you look ignorant.