Beyond Revenge Porn: Content Consent and Revoking Permissions to Share
Written by Paul Tuohy
Since my last post, I was examining data science applications for assisting the removal of revenge porn: the proliferation of images/videos of nude pictures without consent of the subject. However my problem statement has broadened beyond revenge porn. After thinking more about the impacts of what is being asked in regards to revenge porn—which is the removal of content that was never granted consent to be shared—I think consent of sharing content should apply to any piece of content (not just porn). This is a murky area because the definition of ownership and therefore consent around content posted online is fairly vague. But I think a methodology/prototype that helps to give back ownership of content to the subject within the content could provide greater social good when consent is no longer granted.
What do I mean by "when consent is no longer granted" ? The subject's request to remove porn that they are in does not have to occur under the pretence of 'revenge porn'. If an individual (or individuals) created porn and shared that online with consent, it is still appropriate for them to remove that consent at a later date and then request it's removal. I.e. whether or not consent was given at all when hosted online is irrelevant (except in judicial cases) once the subject no longer consents to it being hosted. Later, I would like to see how this lines up with current legal perspectives and laws that been put in place in regards to revenge porn. Furthermore, ownership of content and the consent of being a subject in content hosted online should be examined further. For now I want to address what content beyond porn may fall under the same consent framework as revenge porn.
Negative ramifications of being the subject of a proliferated content is not limited to porn. Memes, like Scumbag Steve, can cause real negative social ramifications to the subject. The same could be said for porn that is hosted online without consent but not out of revenge (or maliciously) and therefore doesn't fall under the definition of revenge porn. So what my immediate research has led me to is that this is not just about finding techniques and applications for removal of Revenge Porn. This is about the removal of content that the subject no longer grants consent to being shared. This could include porn, Revenge porn, memes and any other content that may or may not have negative ramifications for the subject.
A lot of what I'm discussing is philosophical and borders legal enquiries. This may not be necessarily important for my research or my assessment. But it does provide context and background for why I'm exploring this particular field. I feel like ownership of online content is a maturing perspective that is reflected in NFTs, and how we handle that ownership in regards to consent needs to match current social perspectives. Consent, in a sexual context and in a relationship context, is dynamic and can be granted and revoked at any time. How individuals conduct themselves online or more importantly how online corporations/platforms grant individuals ownership of content online needs to reflect this maturing perspective. Hopefully, my research will assist in developing techniques and applications for acting out takedown requests when consent is no longer granted to content hosted on online spaces.
Briefly, as a future reference, I'll mention a number of tools that may be utilised to develop a prototype: deep learning-based nudity (skin) filters, facial recognition filters, hashing systems, and image trawlers. I'll build up this list and elaborate more on them as I continue my readings.
Here are some questions that I may or may not follow up with but have crossed my mind:
- How much do porn sites and social platforms assist in takedown notices in regards to content (e.g. revenge porn) ?
- Is non-consensual anti-social actions, like revenge porn or meme proliferation, protected/criminalised in the judicial system ?
- Would an application that removes non-consensual content be conducted by hosting platforms or external organisations that trawl sites ?
- Is there an isolated group of sites (e.g. Reddit, Twitter) that amount to roughly less than 20% of the internet, but account for the majority (greater than 80%) of the proliferation of all content ? If so, would removal of content only have to focus on these sites ?
- What are the current laws (terms and conditions) in regards to content ownership when hosted on a platform (Youtube, Twitter, Pornhub) and can they be removed completely if requested ?
- Once content is shared or remixed, like a book or film, does it no longer become the subjects/artists work and therefore does not belong to anyone ?