Texas House Bill HB1877

Texas 2015 - 84th Regular

Caption

Relating to civil and criminal liability for the disclosure of certain visual material on the Internet; creating a criminal offense.

Impact

The proposed legislation aims to impose both civil liability and criminal penalties on individuals who share intimate visual content online without consent. Under HB1877, victims can seek actual damages, including court costs and attorney's fees if they successfully sue for damages arising from unauthorized disclosures. Furthermore, the bill enables victims to petition the court for injunctive relief to prevent further unauthorized dissemination of their intimate materials. This dual approach could significantly enhance legal remedies for victims of ‘revenge porn’ and similar offenses, potentially transforming how such issues are addressed in Texas.

Summary

House Bill 1877 introduces significant amendments to Texas law concerning the civil and criminal liability associated with the unauthorized disclosure of certain intimate visual materials on the internet. The bill defines 'intimate visual material' as any visual content that displays a person's intimate parts or depicts them engaging in sexual conduct without their consent. By establishing these definitions, the bill aims to create legal protections for individuals whose private images are shared without permission, particularly vulnerable individuals who may face emotional and reputational harm due to such disclosures.

Contention

While the bill is largely positioned as a protective measure for individuals against unauthorized intimate material disclosures, it is not without contention. Critics may argue about the definitions of what constitutes 'intimate material' and the potential for misuse of the law against legitimate expressions in public or consensual contexts. The bill also excludes liability for interactive computer services when acting as intermediaries, thus navigating the complex landscape of online content sharing platforms. The implications of these exclusions raise questions regarding how liability is assigned in the growing digital content marketplace and could spark debates on balancing protection with free expression.