Does the Internet Limit Human Rights Protection? The Case of Revenge Porn

• Author: María Rún Bjarnadóttir
• Pages: 204-215

2016

María Rún Bjarnadóttir

204

3

Does the Internet Limit Human

Rights Protection?

The Case of Revenge Porn

by María Rún Bjarnadóttir*

© 2016 María Rún Bjarnadóttir

Everybody may disseminate this ar ticle by electronic m eans and make it available for downloa d under the terms and

conditions of the Digital P eer Publishing Licence (DPPL). A copy of the license text may be obtain ed at http://nbn-resolving.

de/urn:nbn:de:0009-dppl-v3-en8.

Recommended citation: María Rún Bjarna dóttir, Does the Internet Limit Human Right s Protection? The Cas e of Revenge

Porn, 7 (2016) JIPITEC 20 4 para 1.

Keywords: Human rights; Article 8 ECHR; revenge porn; freedom of expression; internet jurisdiction

bound by the Convention. A number of domestic calls

for criminalisation of posting of revenge porn have

been replied with arguments for freedom of expres-

sion, worries that such means will contribute to a

fragmented internet, and of a slippery slope of state

interference. Further, as revenge porn touches upon

the balancing between competing human rights, the

possible result of outsourcing human rights assess-

ment to private entities becomes a point of discus-

sion in the paper.

Abstract: With the enhanced distribution pos-

sibilities internet brings, online revenge porn has

gained spotlight, as reports show that the act can

cause serious consequences for victims. Research

and reported cases have led to criticism of states lack

of legal and executive means to protect victims, not

least due to jurisdictional issues. Framing the mat-

ter within states responsibility to protect rights un-

der Article 8 of the ECHR, presents the issue of pos-

sible breach of human rights obligations of states

A. Introduction

1

With the borderless nature of the internet1, the

ambit of state interference regarding individuals

and their actions has become ever more relevant,

as technology has brought about challenges in

respect to jurisdiction and enforcement of domestic

legislation and human rights obligations. Actions

that in the ofine context are clear in a legal and

societal sense have proven to be challenging in the

online sphere. This poses questions concerning

whether human rights obligations of states are being

upheld in the online sphere, or if going online enacts

a different standard for states to measure up to.

2 With respect to human rights, the role of states has

been described as threefold: the obligation to respect,

to protect and to full human rights. The obligation

1 Johnson, David R. and Post, David G. Law and Borders: The

Rise of Law in Cyberspace. 48 Stanford Law Review 1367.

1996.

to protect necessitates that individuals within the

jurisdiction of a state should enjoy the protection

of their rights. When, due to internet architecture a

state cannot uphold its role as guarantor of human

rights in the online sphere, what is the acceptable

outcome from a legal perspective? Does the domestic

legislation have to be put aside for the greater good

of a free internet, or does the situation undermine

human rights protection on a domestic level? The

answers to these questions can vary, but this paper

will examine the case of online revenge porn.

3

With the enhanced distribution possibilities the

internet brings, online revenge porn has gained

more attention as reports show that the act can

cause serious consequences for victims. Research

and reported cases have led to criticism of states and

their lack of legal and executive means to protect

victims, not least due to jurisdictional issues.2

2 Citron, D.K. Hate Crimes in Cyberspace. 2014. Harvard

University Press and Hill, R. “Cyber-misogyny. Should