Cuomo Signs Bill Providing Civil Right of Action and Criminal Penalties for 'Revenge Porn'
The new law will take effect in two months, after which victims of “revenge porn” will also be able to seek a court-ordered injunction to have their images removed from a website.
July 23, 2019 at 11:30 AM
5 minute read
People who share so-called revenge porn, or the nonconsensual distribution of intimate images, will soon be subject to civil litigation and up to a year in jail after a bill on the practice was signed into law by Gov. Andrew Cuomo Tuesday.
The new law will take effect in two months, after which victims of “revenge porn” will also be able to seek a court-ordered injunction to have their images removed from a website.
“Our laws have not kept pace with technology and how abusers can use it to harass, intimidate and humiliate intimate partners,” Cuomo said. “By criminalizing the publication of revenge porn, we are empowering victims of this heinous act to take action against their abusers and showing them a path to justice.”
The new law empowers victims and prosecutors to seek both criminal and civil recourse against perpetrators of “revenge porn.” The new crime will be a class A misdemeanor, which carries up to a year in jail under the state's penal code.
The law specifically defines “revenge porn” as the unlawful dissemination or publication of an intimate image when done with the intent to cause harm to the emotional, financial, and physical welfare of another person and when the image was created with a reasonable expectation that it would remain private.
That will give prosecutors a new tool to bring charges of “revenge porn” against perpetrators, but that task won't be without its limits. They'll have to prove the defendant's intent to cause harm to the victim in the ways defined by the bill.
They'll also have to show that the victim wanted the intimate image or video to remain private, and that the perpetrator knew or reasonably should have known that.
The legislation has been carried by Assemblyman Edward Braunstein, D-Queens, for the last several years. It had mixed results in the state Assembly during that time, until Democrats coalesced around the measure this year.
He said the law will make New York the first state in the country to provide an avenue for victims of “revenge porn” to seek a court-ordered removal of their intimate images from a website.
“This new law will make it a Class A misdemeanor to disseminate revenge porn, providing prosecutors with the tools necessary to punish those who engage in this type of reprehensible behavior,” Braunstein said. “Additionally, New York will become the first state in the nation to allow victims to seek a court-ordered injunction to require websites to remove the offending images.”
Such an injunction will still be allowed for websites headquartered outside the state of New York, according to Democrats who supported the bill. The state's long-arm statute, which allows litigation against companies who do business in the state, would subject them to such an order.
State Sen. Monica Martinez, D-Suffolk, carried the legislation in the Senate this year. She's one of a handful of Democrats who were first elected last year and helped shift majority control of the chamber from Republicans to Democrats for the first time in nearly a decade.
“We are sending a strong message that this behavior will no longer be tolerated in the state of New York, and in doing so we are empowering victims to take a stand against this kind of violation,” Martinez said.
The law will also allow victims of “revenge porn” to seek civil litigation against a perpetrator for damages and other relief.
Such a lawsuit will be allowed up to three years after an image or video of the victim is shared or posted online. But if victims don't discover that an image or video of them has been shared until years later, they'll have up to one year after that discovery to bring litigation, according to the bill.
The grounds for bringing civil litigation also differ from the standard involved in a criminal prosecution of the practice. Plaintiffs will have to show that the perpetrator distributed an image or video of them unclothed or in a sexual context without their consent for the purposes of harassing, annoying or alarming them, according to the bill.
The legislation had been pushed by a handful of lawmakers in previous years, but was met with opposition at times in the Assembly. The lower chamber has often been wary about adding new crimes to the penal code.
The bill ultimately passed unanimously in both the Assembly and Senate when it came to the floor of both chambers for a vote in late February. It was delivered to Cuomo's office for a signature on Monday.
The law will take effect in late September, according to the bill.
READ MORE:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCourt System Names New Administrative Judges for New York City Courts in Leadership Shakeup
3 minute readRetired Judge Susan Cacace Elected Westchester DA in Win for Democrats
In Eric Adams Case and Other Corruption Matters, Prosecutors Seem Bent on Pushing Boundaries of Their Already Awesome Power
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250