Paris Hilton did it and years later, following Paris' classy lead, Kim Kardashian followed suit and her career rocketed from non-existent to omni-present.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
In NSW, however, PR agents will now have to advise their clients on alternative ways to achieve instant stardom to those on Hollywood Boulevard.
The Crimes Amendment (Intimate Images) Bill 2017 was assented to in June 2017. NSW followed Victoria's and South Australia's lead which criminalised this behaviour in 2016.
It makes it an offence to "intentionally record or distribute, or threaten to record or distribute, an intimate image of a person without their consent".
In hindsight, the likes of the Kardashians might still achieve fame via this tried-and-tested method if consent is not an issue.
The prohibited act is commonly referred to as 'revenge porn', whereupon a scorned lover gets their own by sharing unsavoury photos or video on the world wide web. The offence carries a maximum penalty of three years of imprisonment, an $11,000 fine or both.
It is an offence to intentionally record or distribute an intimate image of a person in a private act or exposing a person's private parts without their consent and in circumstances where a reasonable person would expect a right to privacy. Think photos of a shower at home versus a nudie run at the cricket.
It is also an offence to threaten to record or distribute an intimate image without the consent of the other person, if the offender intends to cause that other person to fear that the threat will be carried out and actual fear needs to be proven by the prosecution.
A court will be armed with the power to order material be ‘taken down’ and if an offender fails to take reasonable action to do so, they could face an additional two-year jail sentence and a $5,500 fine.
The maximum jail sentence for minors under 16 years is the same as adults, however special consideration will be given to cases involving children to ensure that the new offences do not inappropriately or unfairly criminalise children's behaviour.
The Director of Public Prosecutions will take a cautious approach with child offenders, requiring the director's consent before any child is prosecuted.
Like all good legislation, this amendment is ambitious. It hopes to serve as a deterrent to people seeking revenge porn, to proactively remove images protecting the privacy and dignity of a private person, and to punish offenders for retribution and further prevention of future conduct.
Whether it will achieve its aims is unknown but unlikely. How do we identify these cyber-criminal masterminds? If America cannot work out who hacked the Democrats' emails, has NSW Police got much chance in identifying jilted lovers?
Will it really serve as a deterrent unless people are aware of it and how do we make people aware of it? Isn't revenge porn rampant with tinder-fevered teens, spiking Facebook feeds with these private photos?
Even if they are taken down, is it any good once your whole school (teachers included) have seen you naked as a bud? And what is the true deterrent to children if they won't be treated the same when it comes to punishment?
In the meantime, think again before you send your lover a tantalising photo, encourage your kids to keep their social media clean, and always close the door when you're taking a shower.
