Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Adder

There is exactly zero government involvement here. Ty is arguing that a participant who feels victimized is barred by the privacy interest of the alleged victimizer. It's not at all analogous.



I share your sense of qualitative difference although I'm not sure there's much remaining practical difference in the social media age.

I didn't say that there was government involvement. I'm saying that to say that there's no privacy interest in bedroom activities is absurd. Gawker.com would probably also recognize that point.

I don't think that a single thing as described makes him have done anything illegal. Doesn't mean he acted correctly. Similarly, I think that she and babe.net violated his privacy even though there isn't a damned thing that he can do about it. I feel exactly the same about revenge porn and exes who post private photographs, videos, etc.