Germany ruling about an ex lover's naked images

[Brickjectivity]

I agree with this ruling. Even though the partner originally agrees to intimate nude photos, I think that once the relationship breaks up such intimate nude photos should be under their own control.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35159187

 

[Sunstone]

I agree with the ruling too. In the absence of a written contract specifying otherwise, I think that nudes should belong to the person they were taken of.

 

[Apex]

I agree with this ruling. Even though the partner originally agrees to intimate nude photos, I think that once the relationship breaks up such intimate nude photos should be under their own control.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35159187

How do they plan on enforcing this ruling?

 

[Brickjectivity]

How do they plan on enforcing this ruling?

They don't have to enforce it, and courts cannot do any enforcing. What the ruling can do is to cause other courts in Germany, especially lower courts, to abide by the same guidelines and make the same decision under similar circumstances.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Aww, I guess I won't be going to Germany.

 

[Mister Emu]

I agree with this ruling. Even though the partner originally agrees to intimate nude photos, I think that once the relationship breaks up such intimate nude photos should be under their own control.

Do you believe you should be able to retroactively rescind the giving of anything else?

In the absence of a written contract specifying otherwise, I think that nudes should belong to the person they were taken of.

Do you believe this to be true of all photography? If I sent you a christmas card with a family picture on it, should I be able to legally demand you destroy it?

I can't fathom the idea that consent for past actions can be revoked.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Do you believe you should be able to retroactively rescind the giving of anything else?

For most other things no.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I can't fathom the idea that consent for past actions can be revoked.

It does seem legally rather dubious.

 

[Revoltingest]

It does seem legally rather dubious.

The concept is standard in many real estate deals.
Property titles often have limitations upon how the property can be
used, or how ownership shall change upon some event in the future.
Examples.....
- Life estates terminate upon one's death.
- Deed restrictions can require a single usage, eg, land donated for a park.

The concept can be applied to nude pix when they're shared with an
understanding that they're only appropriate in a particular relationship.
When it ends, it's reasonable that ownership of one's pix revert to one.

It would be good to have such an arrangement in writing beforehand.
But people lack foresight at the very time when such pix are taken.
So a legal framework to handle ambiguities is useful.