this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2024
99 points (93.8% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54716 readers
216 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Vendetta9076@sh.itjust.works 18 points 2 months ago (2 children)

This isn't like its revenge porn or anything though. Everything about the filming of the scene was consentual and released to the public consentually. Whats the issue with a dude wanting to organixe and jerk off to the scenes?

Involuntary porno sounds like something was leaked or filmed at gunpoint.

[–] Kissaki@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Whats the issue with a dude wanting to organixe and jerk off to the scenes?

There's a fundamental difference between doing that and publicizing something though.

[–] Ohmmy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 months ago

But would it not be just as weird, creepy, and taboo for one to do it with non-nude and therefore non-pornographic material? Would pictures of feet being passed around not be just as weird but also not covered under this law?

[–] Vendetta9076@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago

Is there? According the the law the issue is that he took the scenes as pornographic when they weren't. Not that he organized and posted the scenes in the first place.

[–] datavoid@lemmy.ml -2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Maybe the scenes being filmed weren't intended to be viewed sexually? There are lots of ways you can make nudity non-sexual.

I think the whole point is that the actresses didn't agree to be jerked off to going in.

[–] Facebones@reddthat.com 8 points 2 months ago

Its like how in general (in the US) you dont have an expectation of privacy in public - You went to the mall, if someone is filming at the mall you might get caught in that.

You performed nude in this movie that was released to the public, you can't then get mad that people are looking at you nude. Are we going to start monitoring streaming services for people who start a movie then click immediately to 00:49:32 a few times a week then go arrest them too?

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I think the whole point is that the actresses didn’t agree to be jerked off to going in.

I don't think anybody agrees to being jerked off to or not. There's no contract between actors and audience.

[–] datavoid@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 months ago

Not in America, at least