Posting Unrecognizable Photos

[trojanman74]

i was sent photos online from a girl that is friends with my roommate. now she sent me photos of herself that she took for an exboyfriend. she sent me these photos in a romantic trist. a few days later she cut off all conversation with me and asked me to never show my roommate. well i ended up showing my roommate and he ended up telling her. she contacted me this morning and told me she was contacting her family lawyer and was going to sue me if i post them to a forum. i havent posted them, but i was wondering since the photos are all headless, meaning that they are all photos of her neck down, and that all the photos are non-nude of her in her underwear. i was wondering if i posted them Anonymously without posting any descriptive information about her, can i be sue for invasion of privacy? ive got a basic understanding of liable and im hoping by not posting her name, i am clear of that. reading this forum i have an idea that intellectual property laws give me the right to view the pictures but not publish them. so what i am wanting to know is in arizona can i post non-nude non-recognizable photos non-descriptive of girls in their underwear?

 

[Michael Wechsler]

I'll be honest - I've never been asked that question before. If she gave you photos of her body, there still can be personally identifiable marks. Regarding your ownership of the photos, if she gave them to you with no strings attached, it's difficult to make a claim later about withholding rights later on. It's also difficult to make invasion of privacy claims (in states that have them) if the complainant has voluntarily given up her privacy to a good degree. This isn't to say you should be posting the pictures! I'm not sure about the right to publish them online either (separate from the physical ownership of the photos), this being an issue I'd want to look into. I can tell you that most terms of use on web sites specifically state that you agree that you have permission of all people who appear in a picture to publish that picture (see myspace.com and 1zedge.net for examples of two large sites.)

 

[trojanman74]

she is now making claims that she was under 18 when the photos were taken. ill make it a point to state that i have not posted anything to the internet but if she's claiming she was underage at the time, isnt she at fault for passing along child pornography? and now my second thing is if i blur the background of the pictures (in order to eliminate recognizable surroundings such as her room) and if i photoshop any noticable personally identifiable marks, are they still pictures of her? im wondering how they get away with it when they simply blur the faces on people on television and pictures of random people, a la "COPS".