Revenge porn site operator sentenced to 25 months jail
Last edited Fri Dec 4, 2015, 05:59 PM - Edit history (1)
Source: The Washington Post
Published on Fri Dec 04 2015
Hunter Moore, the man who created an infamous revenge porn site, was sentenced to more than two years in prison on Wednesday, according to the City News Service.
Moore was known as “the most hated man on the Internet” for creating IsAnyoneUp.com, where he publicly posted nude or compromising photos, uploaded by angry exes seeking revenge. His victims — the subjects of the photographs, who did not consent to having the photos posted online — were often identified by name, alongside their social media and contact information.
U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee sentenced Moore to 2-and-a-half years in federal prison, followed by three years of supervised release. While in jail, Moore must undergo a mental health evaluation. He also owes a $2,000 fine.
<snip>
An October 2013 California law made revenge porn illegal in the state. In December of last year, Noe Iniguez became the first person to be convicted under that law after posting a nude photograph of his ex to the Facebook page of her employer. He was sentenced to a year in jail, according to the Los Angeles Times. At least 26 states now have revenge porn laws on the books, according to the Cyber Civil Rights initiative.
Read more: http://www.thestar.com/business/tech_news/2015/12/04/revenge-porn-site-operator-sentenced-to-25-months-jail.html
Fucking asswipe.
More from The Verge:
Why the revenge porn king got away with a wrist slap
...
"That's a bullshit sentence," said Chiarini, who in 2010 saw an ex-lover post intimate photos of her on eBay. "That's just a ridiculously low number of years in jail. It is some satisfaction that he's serving time but really his sentence is nothing. He's not really paying for his crimes."
The truth is Moore, 29, is paying for his crimes, only those crimes have little to do with revenge porn. Moore, who could not be reached for comment, admitted in February to paying a hacker to steal intimate photos from the email accounts of young women so he could post them to his site. He pleaded guilty to a single count each of computer hacking and identity theft. The law designed to outlaw revenge porn adopted in California, where Moore resided, was passed after he shuttered his site. Had it been around at the time, Moore might have received additional jail time. Last December, Noe Iniquez became the first person convicted under the law and was sent to prison for a year.
<snip>
In a 2012 interview with The Village Voice, Moore said: "I'm gonna sound like the most evil motherf*er — let's be real for a second: If somebody killed themselves over that? Do you know how much money I'd make? At the end of the day, I do not want anybody to hurt themselves. But if they do? Thank you for the money."
Moore was prophetic. People have indeed killed themselves, maybe not as a result from photos being posted to his site, but from revenge porn — the practice he helped popularize. In September, a girl in Kenya killed herself after a man she knew threatened to post pictures of her online. The same year, a Brazilian teenage girl hanged herself after a sex tape she participated in was posted online.
Link: http://www.theverge.com/2015/12/4/9849490/hunter-moore-sentence-revenge-porn-law-enforcement-failure
= new reply since forum marked as read
He held her in captivity and threatened to kill her family if she left. He beat her regularly. He had her raped and filmed it and sold it and made millions and she had no legal standing (as a civil action) to stop it.
I find it ironic that revenge porn laws are basically a rewrite of overturned The Minneapolis Ordinance (that provided civil remedies to porn victims, not criminal), except that the laws now make the producers/distributers criminal. I'm good with that, but that's asking for more than what we did in the 80s and were told we were anti-free-speech puritanical zealots.
Unless people know their porn comes from a highly regulated source with obviously consenting participants ("fair trade pornography), they may be unwittingly using somebody's revenge porn.
Thirty years after SCOTUS overturned the anti-pornography ordinances I'll take what we can get. 
