☰ Sidebar
Voting period for this idea type has passed

SXSW Interactive 2014

The Grim Reality of Revenge Porn and Defamation

A conversation between consultant Jonathan Bailey an online publishing consultant and plagiarism expert and attorney Katie Sunstrom. Jonathan will share his experiences assisting victims of revenge porn and online defamation in getting embarrassing photos, videos and false defamatory information removed where possible. Katie will share her experiences in representing clients to do the same. They will together discuss the cross-over issues between the developing areas of case law surrounding revenge porn and online defamation and how those areas are developing from already-established areas of the law. They will discuss the emotional, financial and professional toll that is taken on their clients, the similarities with other forms of abuse and discuss safeguards for minimizing these activities.

Share this idea

Related Media

Additional Supporting Materials


  1. How are these cases being litigated using existing case law and statutes?
  2. Does there need to be a change in policy or legislation? State-centric? Federal? Global? Can the industry self-regulate?
  3. What about the First Amendment?
  4. Can I use DMCA take down procedures to have illicit photos and content removed? Defamatory comments?
  5. What can we learn from the online piracy debate to educate us in dealing with these privacy issues? If large, international companies have been unable to do more than slow the widespread, unlawful and unwanted consumption of their works, what hopes do individuals have when their rights are violated in much more serious ways?



Katie Sunstrom, Attorney, Lorance & Thompson, PC

Meta Information:

  • Tags: legal, privacy
  • Event: Interactive
  • Format: Dual
  • Track: Social and Relationships
  • Level: Intermediate
Show me another idea

Add Comments

comments powered by Disqus

SXSW reserves the right to restrict access to or availability of comments related to PanelPicker proposals that it considers objectionable.