header-logo header-logo

06 May 2015 / Samantha Pegg
Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

Flawed law

The new “revenge porn” offence is only a partial solution, says Samantha Pegg

The disclosure of private sexual images, particularly by aggrieved ex-partners, is not a new phenomenon, but their ubiquitous presence on the internet has made it all the more galling for victims. Is the new “revenge porn” offence really the best way of preventing victimisation or is it an easy answer to a complex problem?

As has been recognised by various commentators victims of revenge porn already have civil remedies available to them and disclosing a pornographic image may also be an offence under the Communications Act 2003 or the Malicious Communications Act 1988. Disclosing or threatening to disclose private sexual images can also amount to an offence under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 where there is a course of conduct. 

The new “revenge porn” offence at s 33 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 is actually titled the rather less snappy “disclosing private sexual photographs and films with intent to cause distress” and requires the disclosure of these images to someone

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll