Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sb2448 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee adopts amendments to allow civil claims for unauthorized disclosure of intimate images
Summary
The committee passed SB2448 with amendments requiring courts to prohibit further dissemination (destruction/return of images) and to allow estates to sue for deceased depicted individuals; supporters emphasized survivor recourse while advocates cautioned about discovery and victim-blaming risks.
The Senate Committee on Labor and Technology on Feb. 13 recommended passage with amendments of SB2448, a bill enacting civil remedies for the unauthorized disclosure of intimate images.
Jane Stornicki, legislative counsel for the Uniform Law Commission, told the committee the bill "allows a plaintiff to bring a civil claim for the unlawful dissemination of intimate images" when an intimate image is intentionally disclosed without consent and the plaintiff can satisfy awareness requirements. She said the bill dovetails with a separate criminal measure (SB2135) that includes a reasonable-expectation-of-privacy requirement and that the civil measure is intended to address classic 'revenge porn' situations where victims lack clear civil recourse under current Hawaiian law.
Supporters, including Yasmine Cheney of the Commission on the Status of Women and Imua Alliance's registered representative Chris Caulfield, urged civil options for survivors. Several witnesses, notably Lynn Costales of the abuse treatment center and Dennis Dunn, emphasized concerns about the bill's use of the term "private" and the potential for discovery to subject survivors to intrusive inquiries. Costales said uniform-model language "does not leave a whole lot of wiggle room to expand protections for survivors," and urged tightened protections to avoid victim blaming.
In response, Stornicki said the drafters remained open to Hawaii-specific modifications, including language to clarify privacy thresholds, and agreed to consider adding deceased depicted individuals so that "the decedent's estate would bring a claim" if appropriate. The chair's amendment adopted language to require courts to prohibit further dissemination (including destruction/deletion/return of the image) and to require identification of persons or entities who received disclosure; it also inserted language vesting rights in the estate of a deceased depicted individual. The committee adopted the chair's recommendation by voice vote.
The committee's action sends the bill forward with directions to refine discovery protections and clarify the privacy definition during follow-up discussions.
