Raw LLM Responses

While I am no ethics expert, I am a non-US (and non-Common Law) lawyer. I follow your train of thought, but have the following remark. You approach the question from a philosophical/ethics point of view, but ground your complete reasoning in US law. Criminal law is an applied form of ethics, but they don't match completely. However, criminal law should aspire to be a all-encompasing application of ethics. Criminal law (and law in general) is country-specific, ethics is not (or shouldn't be). For example, you refer to the right of people to take pictures of a person without consent. This is US law. In my country (Belgium) this is not the case. To portret somebody, you need their consent. To publish a picture of somebody, you again need their consent. If you have the consent of someone to take their picture, you do not automatically have the consent to publish said picture. The person who took the picture still holds the copyright, and the right of any remuneration of the picture taken. (Note: the infringement on the "right of depiction" is not considered a crime.) As such, if "revenge porn" is published without consent, under Belgian law, the depicted person already has a means of justice, as they can file for damages and prohibit the further publication of said picture. Granted, it's a civic action and not a criminal one, but still. Not quite sure where I was/am going with these remarks, just wanted to point out that ethics, criminal law, and what should or should not be considered a crime, should be viewed from a wider, legal perspective. Should posting "revenge porn" be a crime (in a legal sense), or not? How does it interact with freedom of press/information, and copyright. Is it unethical? These questions can and will be answered differently, and the issue will be resolved differently, depending from which legal jurisdiction you approach the question.