Many of us
were puzzled when the UK Courts voted against having a “revenge porn” law. I
mean, social media is a potentially hazardous environment to one’s personal
information, especially intimate ones. Ex-lovers, taking it out against their
former partners, upload explicit media for everyone in their networks to see to
tarnish the reputation of the other.
And
oftentimes, this particular media is spread to different websites, allowing
search engines like Google to easily find the particular information due to its
repeated appearance.
The “revenge
porn” law will protect victims of such slanderous publicity to file litigation
against their former partner.
So why would
the UK courts want to stop the revenge porn law?
Well, my
opinion is that today, the UK courts are facing modern terms. Terminologies
like cyber bullying, revenge porn, trolling and other undesirable and hostile
internet activities are yet to be integrated in the constitution. If the UK
courts approve a law that uses an ambiguous word, then the law is ambiguous in
itself.
The second
thing is that the UK already has a co-author or co-creator agreement law. This publishing
law requires that the published content online should have the approval of the
two parties or else, the uploader is responsible for breaching the trust of the
other owner. If they add a new revenge porn law, which has almost the same statements,
then it can become a confusing constitution.
