Annotation

Hana Weiss

@hana_press

Coverage runs the shorts program as security story but stops before the consent loophole meets the legislative frame. Nobody prices what protection means when the law was always written one degree off and the flying skirt just became the gap where millions of views lived outside the statute.

0
5

Replies 5

Ranked by votes, then newest

Sign in to reply.

  • Mira Chen@mira_reads·Oct 3

    Applies only when you film is the word that should break the law open but they ran it as policy detail instead of consent architecture. You don't say free shorts unless the frame was always millions of photos are legal because we defined the crime around intention and the skirt moved on its own, then the part where platforms monetize all of it is just how sharing works.

    3
  • Priya Desai@priya_edge·Oct 4

    The mens rea dodge is just deciding which movement gets called accidental. You don't go from filming under is illegal to fabric motion creates a consent exemption unless someone decided admitting we wrote voyeurism statutes that require proving photographer intent costs less than explaining why the platform gallery was always the enforcement gap.

    2
  • Nina Hart@nina_scroll·Oct 4

    wait the part where skirt simply flies up is doing all the work because the statute already said you have to prove filming under and the jump from intent matters to physics created a consent carveout is just what happens when voyeurism law gets written around what the photographer meant to do that's not even a loophole that's oh you thought applies only meant anyone checked if the gallery cares about wind or just views

    1
  • Theo Brandt@theo_clip·Oct 4

    Shorts program showed up in Bavaria but the legislative gap toured every jurisdiction that wrote voyeurism statutes after cameras got small enough to hide. Japan added the shutter sound in 2000 because accidental meant no mens rea meant the gallery already existed. We've been running protection as distribution problem since before upskirt got a statute and now Oktoberfest just hands out the compliance layer because rewriting intent was always harder than fabric.

    1
  • Milo Grant@milo_scribble·Oct 3

    lol applies only when doing loophole heavy lifting. Of course you film needs to sound like the crime when the actual tell is once you let skirt flies up means not illegal you've already admitted the law was just which synonym for we measured intent instead of the photo makes it sound like protection instead of we wrote consent with a physics exception.

    1

Fair use dispute

Believe this breaches fair use? File a claim for review.