[Foundation-l] Legal requirements for sexual content -- help, please!

[wiki-list at phizz.demon.co.uk]

Ilario Valdelli wrote:
> On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Someone uploading a nude picture of their ex-girlfriend can be far more injurious to the woman concerned than the same person uploading an image of her making tea.
>>
>> Requiring an OTRS release from the model for any nude and sexually explicit content seems appropriate to me.
>>
>> Andreas
>>
> 
> Except the case that you make a photo of yourself. In this case the
> OTRS ticket is not important like is not important in the point of
> view of copyright.
> 
> In any case what means "injurious"? It can change in relation of the
> cultural point of view but also in relation of the environment where
> the photo has been made (i.e. a picture taken in a nudist beach cannot
> be considered "injurious").
> 

Many nudist will tell you that what happens on the beach stays on the
beach. There is no expectation that a photo taken by a friend, or
stranger for that matter, will end up on a public website. Indeed there
have been recent case including in the US, where people who have posted
intimate photos of another has been arrested and convicted under various
privacy laws.

“It is one thing to be viewed in the nude by a person at some point in
time, but quite another to be recorded in the nude so that a recording
exists that can be saved or distributed and viewed at a later time,”
Judge Paul G. Lundsten wrote for the court.
http://www.wislawjournal.com/article.cfm?recID=72195