State House Candidate in Virginia Condemns Leak of Sex Tapes

MicroWave@lemmy.world to News@lemmy.world – 221 points –
State House Candidate in Virginia Condemns Leak of Sex Tapes
nytimes.com

Susanna Gibson, a Democrat running in one of seven tossup House seats in the closely divided legislature, denounced the “illegal invasion of my privacy.”

A Democratic candidate in a crucial race for the Virginia General Assembly denounced reports on Monday that she and her husband had performed live on a sexually explicit streaming site.

Susanna Gibson, a nurse practitioner running in her first election cycle, said in a statement that the leaks about the online activity were “an illegal invasion of my privacy designed to humiliate me and my family.”

The Washington Post and The Associated Press reported on Monday that tapes of live-streamed sexual activity had been recorded from a pornographic site and archived on another site. The New York Times has not independently verified the content of the videos. The Democratic Party of Virginia did not respond to a request for comment.

Ms. Gibson, 40, who appears on her campaign website in hospital scrubs as well as at home with her husband and two young children, is running for the House of Delegates in one of only a handful of competitive races that will determine control of the General Assembly. Republicans hold a slim majority in the House, and Democrats narrowly control the State Senate, but both chambers are up for grabs in November.

95

You are viewing a single comment

Public information is not the same as public domain.

all uploaded or streamed content is public information

PUBLIC INFORMATION

INFORMATION

You can't even quote a comment correctly, and you feel compelled to do it twice. You want me to link Chaturbate's ToS page? It's there in black and white. Go touch grass.

I'm not quoting anything. I'm saying the TOS say it's public information, not that they are giving up their copyright (which would be public domain).

You replied to a comment that said the reuploads are copyright infringement, calling it "Wrong", citing the TOS.

And in one of your other comments quoting the TOS, you explicitly say that they state the streams are in public domain (a copyright term), when the TOS actually say they are public information.