Revenge Porn and Defamation: How These Legal Claims Overlap

The non-consensual sharing of intimate images — commonly known as "revenge porn" — often involves more than just the images themselves. Accompanying captions, messages, and context can be defamatory, creating overlapping legal remedies. This guide explains how revenge porn legislation and defamation law work together to protect victims.

The Criminal Offence of Revenge Porn

Section 33 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 makes it an offence to disclose private sexual photographs or films without the consent of the person depicted, with intent to cause distress. The maximum sentence is 2 years' imprisonment. The Online Safety Act 2023 extended this to include "threats to disclose" intimate images.

However, the criminal offence only addresses the images themselves. It does not cover the defamatory statements that often accompany them.

How Defamation Law Adds Protection

When intimate images are shared with defamatory context, the victim has additional civil remedies:

• False captions — images shared with false statements like "this person is a sex worker" or "this person has an STI" are defamatory
• Implied meanings — sharing intimate images on platforms associated with the sex industry may carry the defamatory innuendo that the person is a sex worker, even without an explicit statement
• False context — presenting consensual images as if they were taken non-consensually, or vice versa, can create false and damaging impressions
• Doxxing with allegations — sharing personal details alongside intimate images with false claims about the person's character or behaviour

Advantages of Combining Both Claims

Pursuing both criminal revenge porn charges and a civil defamation claim offers several advantages:

• Different evidence standards — criminal prosecution requires proof beyond reasonable doubt; defamation is on the balance of probabilities
• Different remedies — criminal prosecution can result in imprisonment; defamation can result in damages, injunctions, and court-ordered removal
• Broader scope — defamation covers the false statements, while the criminal offence covers the images
• Compensation — defamation damages compensate for reputational harm, which is not the primary focus of criminal sentencing

Privacy Claims as an Alternative

In addition to defamation, victims may have claims under:

• Misuse of private information — the tort of misuse of private information protects against the disclosure of intimate images regardless of whether any accompanying text is defamatory
• Data protection — intimate images are "special category data" under UK GDPR, and their disclosure without consent may breach data protection law
• Harassment — the sharing of intimate images as part of a course of harassment is separately actionable

Obtaining Injunctions

Courts can grant urgent injunctions to prevent further sharing of intimate images and defamatory statements. In cases involving both:

1. An interim injunction can be obtained within hours in urgent cases
2. The injunction can cover both the images (under privacy/harassment law) and any defamatory text
3. Third parties (platforms, search engines) can be required to remove content under a Norwich Pharmacal order
4. Breach of an injunction is contempt of court, punishable by imprisonment or fine