(August 1, 2017 at 10:49 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:(August 1, 2017 at 10:24 pm)FFaith Wrote: When I said they gave permission to have the pictures taken, I meant to have the pictures created, not taken as in stolen.
Ok, then why does that matter? The issue is that they did not give consent to have their pictures posted publicly and viewed by anyone other than the person they sent it to.
(August 1, 2017 at 10:42 pm)pool the matey Wrote: CL, the photos were stolen by phishing.
Like for example, imagine you're at work someone calls you pretty urgently and tells you your house is on fire but you remember your pet is inside your house! So you rush home, open your front door and rushes in leaving your keys in the lock. The "hacker" takes this opportunity to make a duplicate of your key and leaves the original key as it was. You see there's no fire and figures someone mistook your phone number or something, so you go back to work. The "hacker" takes this opportunity to enter into your house with the duplicate key and then steal your pet!
I know how they were stolen.
I think the analogy that Steel gave a few pages back was much more accurate of phishing than this.
Once the pictures are out there, the damage is done and they will exist on the internet being viewed forever. Me not viewing them is not going to make things any better for the actors, so I'm not going to pretend that I have the ability to help them in that situation.