Netflix has released its latest true crime documentary “The Most Hated Man on the Internet”. The documentary follows the story of Hunter Moore, an individual who set up the revenge porn site IsAnyoneUp.com.
Hunter Moore encouraged users to upload explicit photographs of others to the website. He would then post the image and encourage his fans to post abusive comments on the photographs. One of the victims was the daughter of Charlotte Laws. Charlotte Laws discovered that Hunter Moore had obtained her daughter’s images by hacking into her email address.
The documentary makes it clear that there are currently no laws in the USA that prohibit revenge porn. The Police were therefore limited on what they could do to stop Hunter Moore. It was only when Charlotte Laws discovered that he may be involved in a hacking scheme that the FBI were able to get involved. In 2012, the FBI carried out an investigation and discovered that Hunter Moore, with the assistance of a hacker, had illegally obtained the images from the victims’ email addresses.
In 2015, Hunter Moore pleaded guilty to felony charges of aggravated identity theft and aiding and abetting in the unauthorised access of a computer. He was sentenced to two and a half years in prison in 2015 and fined $2,000. Hunter Moore was released from prison in May 2017.
How would Hunter Moore’s actions have been treated if he was based in the UK?
The Criminal Justice and Court Act 2015
Across the UK, revenge porn is a specific criminal offence. In accordance with Section 33(1) of the Criminal Justice and Court Act 2015:
“[i]t is an offence for a person to disclose a private sexual photograph or film if the disclosure is made (a) without the consent of an individual who appears in the photograph or film, and (b) with the intention of causing that individual distress”.
A person found guilty of an offence under Section 33(1) could be sentenced to a period of imprisonment of up to two years. In the UK, by obtaining and distributing the images Hunter Moore would have been committing an offence under Section 33(1) and could have been sentenced to up to two years in prison.
UK GDPR
Under UK law, there are also a number of civil remedies that would be available to Hunter Moore’s victim. The victims could have utilised the provisions of the UK GDPR. The images of the victims showed their faces and therefore this would be considered personal data under Article 4(1) of the UK GDPR which defines personal data as data that “relates to an identified or identifiable natural person”.
To be caught under the provisions of the UK GDPR victims would then need to demonstrate that their data was being processed. Article 4(2) of the UK GDPR defines processing as:
“any operation or set of operations which is performed on personal data… such as collection, recording, organisation, structuring, storage, adaption or alteration, retrieval, consultation, use, disclosure by transmission, dissemination or otherwise making available…”.
By obtaining the images and uploading them to his website, Hunter Moore would be collecting, storing, using and disclosing the data. This would therefore fall within the definition of processing.
Hunter Moore would therefore be bound by the UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA 2018) and the victims could enforce their rights under the UK GDPR and/or DPA 2018. Such rights may include the right to rectification, the right to erasure and the right to compensation.
Misuse of private information and breach of confidence
In addition, Hunter Moore’s victims may have also been able to pursue a claim in misuse of private information and/or breach of confidence. Breach of confidence is designed to protect the disclosure of information by one person (or organisation) to another by imposing an obligation of confidence. A claim for misuse of private information instead relates to the nature of the information shared. If successful in a claim in misuse of private information and/or breach of confidence the victims could have been awarded compensation and potentially an injunction preventing the further use of their explicit images.
Comment
As matters stand, the law in the USA does very little to protect victims of revenge porn. Victims are however well protected under UK law. Revenge porn is a criminal offence under UK law, victims can therefore report any concerns to the Police. In addition, there are a number of civil remedies available to a victim of revenge porn including the remedies set out within the UK GDPR, misuse of private information and breach of confidence. If you have been a victim of revenge porn it is important to seek legal advice urgently to discuss what options are available to you.
How Nelsons can help
Ruby Ashby is an Associate in our expert Dispute Resolution team.
If you need any advice concerning the subjects discussed in this article, please do not hesitate to contact Ruby or another member of the team in Derby, Leicester, or Nottingham on 0800 024 1976 or via our online enquiry form.
Contact us