People looking for the nudes here.

On google it comes up before piratebay torrent, dailymail and reddit.

 

Good publicity for Obsidian, I guess.

 

Í knew people would  object to what I was saying, but as I mentioned this is exactly what the women journalists were saying. Maybe we should at least try to consider it because they are women after all and they would see this differently to how men see it ?

 

I think there is a case for this type of perspective? A case for virtual sexual abuse ?

By consider, you really mean "just agree with them", don't you ? While hacking is wrong, it somewhat trivializes people who are the victims of sexual abuse to compare this to it.

 

Ya think ?

Well, Bruce seemed to be of a different mind, so.

I'm not even sure the invasion of privacy claim is that strong.  This is clearly theft, but most of these pictures were taken by the victims with full knowledge.  The Erin Andrews story was a lot more invasive and creepy than this one.

Stealing digital things ? Nah. Definitely is an invasion of their privacy, people went nosing about where they shouldn't

Stealing digital things ? Nah. Definitely is an invasion of their privacy, people went nosing about where they shouldn't

 

I've never understood how people get hung up on the idea of digital theft.  Do you argue over identity theft as well?  

Well it doesn't make much sense to call it theft to me, the items are still in the people's possession (well, assuming the cloud service didn't retain it against their wishes). Identity theft might make sense, at a point your identity no longer belongs to you as the criminal's messing around with things

Purely for research purposes of course I have viewed the whatsherface from Hunger Games pics. They are just slightly risque' selfies and pretty flattering. They are private of course and it is in principle all kinds of wrong. Lesson, don't put anything in the cloud you don't want in the public. Especially if you are famous, it makes you a target. 

Well, Bruce seemed to be of a different mind, so.

 

A different mind indeed.... a special mind...

I was watching a discussion now on Sky News about this debacle. The debate was between two ladies and two men. Anyway the ladies were saying the leaking of the photos and videos is tantamount to sexual abuse. One of men was disagreeing as he said "we must be careful to not throw around words that are an embellishment of a situation". The ladies said there is " no doubt there is a sexual element to this"

 

 

Anyway I tend to agree with the ladies, it may not be the accepted definition of sexual abuse but its a grotesque violation of the targeted women's privacy and there is no doubt it is very hurtful and embarrassing. So for me its a type of  virtual abuse and ridicule, its not far off from real abuse because the only thing  missing is the physical act of abuse

So... does this mean the very act of me simply seeing a naked woman without her explicit consent (say her top pops off at a pool) I am immediately a sex offender who molested her?

 

 

I was watching a discussion now on Sky News about this debacle. The debate was between two ladies and two men. Anyway the ladies were saying the leaking of the photos and videos is tantamount to sexual abuse. One of men was disagreeing as he said "we must be careful to not throw around words that are an embellishment of a situation". The ladies said there is " no doubt there is a sexual element to this"

 

 

Anyway I tend to agree with the ladies, it may not be the accepted definition of sexual abuse but its a grotesque violation of the targeted women's privacy and there is no doubt it is very hurtful and embarrassing. So for me its a type of virtual abuse and ridicule, its not far off from real abuse because the only thing missing is the physical act of abuse

So... does this mean the very act of me simply seeing a naked woman without her explicit consent (say her top pops off at a pool) I am immediately a sex offender who molested her?

Yes, you filthy Sub-Human. Repent for the sin of being male.

 

 

I was watching a discussion now on Sky News about this debacle. The debate was between two ladies and two men. Anyway the ladies were saying the leaking of the photos and videos is tantamount to sexual abuse. One of men was disagreeing as he said "we must be careful to not throw around words that are an embellishment of a situation". The ladies said there is " no doubt there is a sexual element to this"

 

 

Anyway I tend to agree with the ladies, it may not be the accepted definition of sexual abuse but its a grotesque violation of the targeted women's privacy and there is no doubt it is very hurtful and embarrassing. So for me its a type of virtual abuse and ridicule, its not far off from real abuse because the only thing missing is the physical act of abuse

So... does this mean the very act of me simply seeing a naked woman without her explicit consent (say her top pops off at a pool) I am immediately a sex offender who molested her?

Yes, you filthy Sub-Human. Repent for the sin of being male.

 

 

In the minds of folks such as Bruce, other modern feminists, and the manginas who apologize for them, yes.

 

Really, equating the theft and proliferation of nude photos to sexual abuse or rape is abhorrently despicable. and either a warped mind incapable of true differentiation is required or a sinister mind with an evil agenda. Saying that doing so belittles those who actually have suffered abuse or rape is a polite understatement.

 

One of the major problems in western society is that as a culture we've come to tolerate this destructive nonsense, even though in many places the majority still fortunately does not (so there's hope of a return to sanity).

Edited September 4, 201411 yr by Valsuelm

Well it doesn't make much sense to call it theft to me, the items are still in the people's possession (well, assuming the cloud service didn't retain it against their wishes). Identity theft might make sense, at a point your identity no longer belongs to you as the criminal's messing around with things

 

That's why we call it digital theft, which is a real thing.  What would you rather call it?  Piracy sounds silly.  Invasion of privacy doesn't really cover it, because that would just be the act of hacking in and seeing the pictures.  Taking the pictures and posting them up is closer to theft than anything else.

 

 

modern feminists, and the manginas who apologize for them, yes.

 

 (...) sinister mind with an evil agenda (...)

 

 

Wow, someone's been socialized on redpill, am I correct?

Technically, publishing photos that don't belong to you is also copyright infringement. Technically.

That's why we call it digital theft, which is a real thing.  What would you rather call it?  Piracy sounds silly.  Invasion of privacy doesn't really cover it, because that would just be the act of hacking in and seeing the pictures.  Taking the pictures and posting them up is closer to theft than anything else.

Well you (whoever the 'we' is) can call it whatever you like, doesn't really make it fit. Invasion of privacy would be best, privacy is still invaded and abused when the photos are shared. I suppose it is piracy as well, as they are distributing content without the owner's permission.

Edited September 4, 201411 yr by Malcador

Don't look but don't touch

 

- Internet, 2014 AD

Purely for research purposes of course I have viewed the whatsherface from Hunger Games pics. They are just slightly risque' selfies and pretty flattering.

you didn't see all of it, I accidentally came across one pic of her which is pretty explicit (by explicit I mean it's basically her having sex), and by the sound of it there are more like it, including videos.

 

anyway, it is definitely invasion of privacy because these pics were never intended to be seen by anyone else other than the women and their significant others. as for theft, that's the least important part of this whole thing. 

 

That's why we call it digital theft, which is a real thing.  What would you rather call it?  Piracy sounds silly.  Invasion of privacy doesn't really cover it, because that would just be the act of hacking in and seeing the pictures.  Taking the pictures and posting them up is closer to theft than anything else.

Well you (whoever the 'we' is) can call it whatever you like, doesn't really make it fit. Invasion of privacy would be best, privacy is still invaded and abused when the photos are shared. I suppose it is piracy as well, as they are distributing content without the owner's permission.

 

 

I just don't understand why you want to pigeon-hole theft into referring to physical items.  As mentioned, identity theft is well accepted, even though you aren't losing your identity when someone commits that crime against you.  

 

Piracy, to me, refers more to taking something available commercially and not paying for it.  But lets avoid that can of worms.  

 

I agree there is an invasion of privacy here, but once they were downloaded, I'd call it digital theft.

I just don't understand why you want to pigeon-hole theft into referring to physical items.  As mentioned, identity theft is well accepted, even though you aren't losing your identity when someone commits that crime against you.  

 

Piracy, to me, refers more to taking something available commercially and not paying for it.  But lets avoid that can of worms.  

 

I agree there is an invasion of privacy here, but once they were downloaded, I'd call it digital theft.

Just how I see it defined, you're forcing a loss of something. You could say you do lose your identity though, at least in terms of the entries in databases which the system has to treat as truth. Ah well, much ado about nothing.

In order for something to be theft you must deprive the original owner of it; "dishonest appropriation of another's property with intent to permanently deprive them of it" OED, Mirriam Webster "the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it ".

 

If you duplicate something, even if it's unauthorised, then it cannot be theft since the original owner still has the original. Calling it theft is technically as incorrect as calling it rape, it's just a less emotive comparison. It's unauthorised distribution of copyright material, and probably some sort of computer crime (hacking) for the initial access.

 

Arguably, in identity theft the owner is deprived of use of their identity due to having their credit rating trashed and the rest of the stuff that typically happens, so the usage there is a lot fairer and more arguable.

Edited September 4, 201411 yr by Zoraptor

Let's set aside the criminal question for a moment.

 

There has NEVER been more freely available voluntary porn, both professional and amateur

 

   ....but you absolutely have to violate the privacy of people who clearly don't want you to?

 

The only reason you'd do that is because you like the violation. Which is so weak as to not even deserve the description ****ed up.

The only reason you'd do that is because you like the violation.

 

LoL

Let's set aside the criminal question for a moment.

 

There has NEVER been more freely available voluntary porn, both professional and amateur

 

   ....but you absolutely have to violate the privacy of people who clearly don't want you to?

 

The only reason you'd do that is because you like the violation. Which is so weak as to not even deserve the description ****ed up.

People want to see people they know naked far more than they want to see "chick #252415142" getting naked on a camera. 

 

*adjusts glasses* I'd guess it's because it's much easier to self insert when you've got a known person (or at least the version of them you've idealized within your mind) who's naked, rather than some woman who could be anyone off the street. People like to feel that connection between themselves and those around them, and the fantasy that any of the celebs found here, or even an acquaintance would have or send photos of themselves in states of undress/arousal is going to be far more attractive than the fantasy that that chick from the porno flick will come have sex with you.

 

Not defending the actions of people, just stating the propable reason behind it. Basically it's the same reason that people go psycho and kill their stars so they're never "tainted".