Skip to main content
This is part four of a five-part story. To start from the beginning, go here.
Ron Wyden built the internet because he worried about the northern spotted owl.
OK, that's an oversimplification. But in 1995, Wyden feared the loss of timber jobs under new environmental regulations would submarine Oregon's economy. He hoped to replace them with tech-sector work.
Two decades later, the loss of logging jobs remains a heated debate in Oregon. The results of Wyden's effort are mixed. No major social media platform is headquartered in Oregon, but many of the tech startups sprouting in the city are inextricably linked with those big platforms. Data compiled by the Oregon Department of Economic Analysis shows tech work has replaced timber jobs.
What Was the Result for Victims of Revenge Porn?
Melanie Kebler, a former state prosecutor who now works for the Oregon Crime Victims Law Center, represented the victims in two of the first "revenge porn" cases charged in Oregon, both in Washington County in 2016.
The perpetrators in both cases were convicted—one of uploading videos to nine porn sites and the other of putting up photos of his former girlfriend, naked, on the internet.
But Kebler had no legal power to pursue the online platforms where the crimes occurred.
Victims of revenge porn—mostly women, research shows—have some legal recourse to seek criminal charges or civil damages against perpetrators who post their images or videos.
What they don't have, because of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, is leverage with Comcast, Facebook or other giant online platforms to remove the images. That's because the federal saw says internet service providers aren't liable for the content they carry.
"It's often very hard to figure out who's hosting the content, and when victims do, the companies often won't take any responsibility," Kebler says.
Even in cases where the perpetrators are charged criminally, the images may stay online indefinitely because internet service providers are under no obligation to remove content, and sites often pirate content from each other.
Some platforms move quickly to remove images. (PornHub is known to be especially responsive.) Others plod—or don't respond at all.
"The onus is on the victim to keep searching for images," Kebler says. "It's a real quagmire for them. Even if they get one site to take them down, they pop up somewhere else."
Kebler says the effect of revenge porn on her clients is "devastating."
"Anyone you meet may have seen images of your most private moments," Kebler says. "It's embarrassing and humiliating."
Kebler acknowledges the position of Wyden and other advocates for an unfettered internet, but thinks Section 230 needs to be updated. "I don't think anybody realized 20 or 30 years ago that these kind of images would spread so fast or be so harmful," she says. "There has to be a way to protect free speech but make it easier for victims to access justice."