Revenge Porn Federal Charges.

Spodek Law Group represents clients across the United States. We help people who are concerned about federal exposure due to allegations relating to various federal crimes, including sexual offenses.

Does the federal criminal statute prohibit the viewing of adult sexually explicit materials?

In most cases, the federal criminal provisions that define the revenge-porn offenses are focused on the acts of publication and distribution, rather than ordinary viewing. The specific language in the statute states:

• “Except as provided in subparagraph (C), it shall be unlawful for any person, in interstate or foreign commerce, to use an interactive computer service to knowingly publish an intimate visual depiction of an identifiable individual who is not a minor if-”

Essentially, for a person to face criminal prosecution under the statute, he or she must engage in an act of publication or distribution. Ordinary possession of adult intimate imagery is not, itself, an “Act offense,” and ordinary viewing of such imagery is generally not considered criminal conduct.

A simple Google search or the viewing of lawful adult materials generally does not satisfy the statute’s “knowing-publication” element. The act of searching for or viewing sexually explicit images featuring consenting adults does not constitute “publication” under the federal criminal statute.

However, these defenses are not available in cases where a person is suspected of having possession of child sexual abuse imagery or sexually explicit images of a child under the age of 18. As explained in the FAQ above, possessing sexually explicit images of someone under 18 (even if not in a state of nudity or sexual conduct) can trigger an “Act offense” under the federal criminal statute. This includes materials that are “believed to be” images of such persons, as well as any material that constitutes child exploitation under the law.

Essentially, there is a legal distinction between possession of adult sexually explicit imagery, which, in general, does not trigger the federal criminal provisions, and possession of material that is suspected of showing child sexual abuse.

If you are concerned about potential federal exposure, you should contact a defense attorney immediately.

When does a private-photo leak satisfy federal publication and harm requirements?

Under the Act, criminal liability may attach when a person knowingly uses an interactive computer service to publish certain nonconsensual intimate visual depictions or digital forgeries, subject to the statute’s specified elements. The criminal provision expressly includes “The term “digital forgery” means any intimate visual depiction of an identifiable individual created through the use of software, machine learning, artificial intelligence, or any other computer-generated or technological means, including by adapting, modifying, manipulating, or altering an authentic visual depiction, that, when viewed as a whole by a reasonable person, is indistinguishable from an authentic visual depiction of the individual.” This covers AI-generated sexually explicit images, even if they are not anatomically complete images of a person.

For adult-related offenses, the Act requires proof that publication of the intimate visual depiction was intended to cause harm or caused harm, including psychological, financial, or reputational harm, to the identifiable individual.

Furthermore, the statute specifies what are (and what are not) covered adult images. Specifically, adult images under the Act must:

• Depicts the uncovered genitals, pubic area, anus, post-pubescent female nipple, bodily sexual fluids, or sexually explicit conduct;
• The person knew or reasonably should have known the identifiable individual had a reasonable expectation of privacy; and,
• “what is depicted was not voluntarily exposed by the identifiable individual in a public or commercial setting;”

In other words, the Act protects “nonpublic images,” or those images that are private or would be private if they were still in the subject’s possession.

In some cases, consenting to the creation of sexually explicit images may not necessarily establish a subject’s consent to subsequent publication or distribution. Even when a subject signs a release form, this does not automatically grant consent for later publication or distribution by any third party.

Finally, while the Act criminalizes the actual act of publishing or distributing intimate images, it also creates “threat” offenses as standalone crimes. Under the Act, intentionally threatening to commit a covered publication offense for the purpose of intimidation, coercion, extortion, or creating mental distress is a separate offense, even if the threat is not carried out. This does not apply equally to adult and child imagery: digital-forgery threats have separate adult and minor provisions and penalties.

Why do minors, suspected abuse material, and related charges change the analysis?

Offenses involving the publication or distribution of intimate imagery of minors trigger different intent requirements and penalties than those involving adults. The Act’s criminal provisions for offenses involving minors include specific types of intentional “harm” such as the intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or “arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.” Covered offenses involving minors may also carry up to three years of federal imprisonment.

In many cases, a private-photo leak can also support charges for stalking, harassment, extortion, or making threatening communications. For example, while the federal revenge-porn provisions focus on the actual act of publication and the underlying intent or result of that act, cyberstalking charges under 18 U.S.C. § 2261A focus on a different set of statutory elements. The statute states:

“A person is guilty of a federal crime if that person use any interactive computer service or any other facility of interstate or foreign commerce to engage in a course of conduct that... Placed a person in reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury... Or committed or attempted to commit a felony or other crime of violence against that person, or intended to kill, injure, harass, intimidate, or maim that person, or intended to cause damage to the property of that person...”

Although the publication or distribution of intimate imagery may trigger a federal offense under the Act, it is not a per se criminal act under federal law unless it satisfies one of the statute’s substantive requirements. The same is true for offenses involving cyberstalking, harassment, extortion, and communicating threats.

Whether you have been accused of a federal revenge-porn offense, have potentially committed a cybercrime, or have discovered that you are the subject of a federal investigation, it is important to seek the advice of experienced federal defense counsel. If you have concerns about your potential federal criminal exposure, you should contact the federal defense attorneys at Spodek Law Group today.

The attorneys at Spodek Law Group carry more than fifty years of combined experience between them.

What removal, damages, and penalties can follow a federal report?

The Take It Down Act became federal law on May 19, 2025. The Act establishes criminal penalties of up to two years in federal imprisonment for covered adult-related offenses; a separate federal civil statute, 15 U.S.C. § 6851, provides a potential remedy of actual damages or $150,000 in liquidated damages.

The Act also mandates that covered platforms adopt a procedure for taking down reported material, and it gives platforms one year from enactment to establish and make available this removal-request procedure. As of May 19, 2026, these procedures were required to be established and in accordance with the requirements of the Act.

Once covered platforms have established the requisite removal-request procedures, they will generally be required to remove reported material within forty-eight hours after receiving a valid removal request. They will also be required to make reasonable efforts to identify and remove any known identical copies of the reported intimate visual depiction. The Act limits platform liability for good-faith disabling of access to or removal of material claimed to be a nonconsensual intimate visual depiction.

The Federal Trade Commission is the government agency tasked with enforcing the Take It Down Act’s platform-removal requirements. The Act authorizes the Federal Trade Commission to enforce the platform reporting, handling, and removal requirements, including through enforcement that may result in civil penalties.

Although the Act’s criminal provisions took effect on May 19, 2025, and its platform-removal provisions became enforceable on May 19, 2026, the exact scope of liability under the federal revenge-porn statute remains subject to further litigation and enforcement. The substantive requirements for criminal liability, the procedural requirements for platform removal, and the enforcement mechanisms used by the Federal Trade Commission have not yet been tested in court. This means that defendants facing potential criminal prosecution and platforms facing federal removal obligations will need to rely on their knowledge of the Act and the arguments they can make on the record.

Which state charges can accompany an internet-based image case?

The Take It Down Act expressly does not preempt state criminal laws or laws under the jurisdiction of other authorities addressing the nonconsensual distribution of intimate images. Many states have their own revenge-porn laws, and a case involving the nonconsensual distribution of intimate images could potentially expose a person to criminal prosecution under both federal and state laws.

Many state revenge-porn offenses share some similarities, with most statutes which require nonconsensual distribution with an abusive purpose or intent. However, there are significant variations in how these laws are applied and enforced. For example, these laws vary in terms of:

• Whether the image must show nudity or whether the image must depict a sexual act;
• What constitutes a reasonable expectation of privacy;
• Whether the victim must be identifiable in the image; and,
• What constitutes the necessary intent or resulting harm.

Like their federal counterparts, state prosecutors who bring charges involving the nonconsensual distribution of intimate images can often support their cases with other allegations as well. Stalking or harassment charges may accompany the criminal charges involving intimate images in many cases.

Texas Penal Code § 21.16, which applies in cases involving the nonconsensual distribution of intimate imagery, reads: “A person commits an offense if: (1) without the effective consent of the depicted person and with the intent to harm that person, the person discloses visual material depicting another person with the person's intimate parts exposed or engaged in sexual conduct; (2) at the time of the disclosure, the person knows or has reason to believe that the visual material was obtained by the person or created under circumstances in which the depicted person had a reasonable expectation that the visual material would remain private; (3) the disclosure of the visual material causes harm to the depicted person; and (4) the disclosure of the visual material reveals the identity of the depicted person in any manner, including through: (A) any accompanying or subsequent information or material related to the visual material; or (B) information or material provided by a third party in response to the disclosure of the visual material.rtrayed in a state of nudity or engaging in sexual conduct...”

In Texas, this is classified as a state jail felony. Defendants who are facing charges under Texas Penal Code § 21.16 need a clear understanding of the law and should engage experienced defense counsel to defend themselves.

Speak With Counsel Before You Answer Anything

If agents have contacted you, the order matters: counsel first, answers second. Spodek Law Group has been practicing since 1976 and defends federal matters nationwide, coast to coast, from offices in New York, Brooklyn, Queens and Los Angeles. Call 888 348 8028.