Who owns an unsolicited dick pic?

[TeaGinandFags]

Possibly a bit niche, but I was the recipient of one of these and I was thinking that I might be able to use it. Or rather part of it.

One for the legal beagles methinks.

My idea is thus: in conjunction with some pals, I'm writing a story about this very experience and couldn't think of a better cover.

Obviously, the offending, if not unattractive, part will be cropped off^, so wouldn't count as revenge porn* but what about things like copyright? Or other complicated stuff? Would the sender have a claim? If there is a claim, he had forgotten to inform me about a missus he still had at the time, so could she benefit?

Your thoughts and suggestions are all welcome.

*Revenge IS part of the motivation for using it. Not just the convenience. Silly bastard didn't hide his face.
^If only life would imitate art (sigh).

Isn't using it illegal even one of yourself something about distributing porn (not those exact words)

Technically, the photographer.

I wouldn’t share it though for many reasons, primary being it could be classed as revenge.

I've no idea

But LOVE this !!!

Hope you can put ALL the fucking nobheads faces on the cover

They fucking deserve it

The photographer owns the photo. Always. Unless it says otherwise. Don't do it - plenty of blokes will send willingly and give you the copyright

The photographer owns the copyright in the image. If you use it without permission, he will be able to take action against you.

Only porn if naughty bits visible.

Not porn.

I heard of a lady who started a website where unwanted dick pics were gathered and rated.

The senders HATED it.

Yet still thought it ok to send the pics.

Do you know the bloke?

Cant quite understand how you're going to use an unsolicited dick pic, without using the dick?

@SummerSplashing

1. an ex. He sent several. All unsolicited.

2. it can be cropped with the missing half inferred. After all, it's supposed to be on the book ....

You just made my day! 😂 I noticed how I relaxed from day's stress when reading this thread. 😁

@TeaGinandFags

oh the temptation to ask him why he thought you'd want to see his little Willy when you've moved on to bigger & better

& he'd probably see you using on your book as some kind of proof it/he was the best ever!

just ask for men to volunteer, I'm sure you 'll get plenty of volunteers!!

You suggestion is tempting, but I'm not sure even I've got that much brass neck. Maybe I need some Gordon's or Slipsmith's sloshing around inside me. 🥳

As for his ego, how much in love with yourself/ deluded do you have to be to feel good about being on the cover of a book entitled "Wanker"? (Working title.)

There again, would he really be stupid enough to provide me with free publicity by taking me to court and admitting to cyberflashing?

You know, it might be worth it.

it might well be!!

I'll send you a bottle of Gordon's!! 🤣🤣

Too kind. 🥳🥳🥳

The photographer owns the copyright in the photograph so here it will be the owner of the penis who photographed himself. Copyright is a strict liability tort so if you used it as a book cover, he would be able to get an injunction.

Apart from that, publishing it is an invasion of privacy - again, easy to get an injunction.

I am not sure why you say it wouldn't be "revenge porn" - sounds like it would meet the statutory criteria: -

33 Disclosing private sexual photographs and films with intent to cause distress
(1) It is an offence for a person to disclose a private sexual photograph or film if
the disclosure is made—
(a) without the consent of an individual who appears in the photograph or
film, and
(b) with the intention of causing that individual distress.

There again, would he really be stupid enough to provide me with free publicity by taking me to court and admitting to cyberflashing?

If he was properly advised by lawyers who know what they are doing, both his name and your name would be anonymised to prevent his identification precisely to avoid the action defeating the claim to privacy.

@WigsNGowns

1. would any injunction be against the book, or the cover?

2. i would appear to require some form of consent, at which point every objection magically evaporates. Is the correct?

1. would any injunction be against the book, or the cover?

The photograph specifically - but it gets complicated if the book has already gone to press and the person is seeking an interim injunction (a short term one until the trial)- to do with cost of pulping the books versus damages.

I was assuming the book itself was fiction? If the book is actually a factual account of a private relationship then there may be privacy issues in relation to the book itself.

i would appear to require some form of consent, at which point every objection magically evaporates. Is the correct?h

There are two sets of rights in play here - one is the copyright in the photograph and one is the privacy rights of the person whose body/penis is depicted.

You would need consent in respect of both of those sets of rights from whoever owns them. I'd guess they are both the same person but they may not be - a photograph could be taken by a lover for example.

Also you'd need to be sure that the person purporting to consent was in fact the copyright owner and the person depicted. If you can't see their face, it could be a random porn shot taken from the internet.

Is there no fair dealing exception that OP could fit this under? Artistic criticism maybe?

I was absolutely astounded when my friend received one and entered (no pun intended) into a brief relationship. Why?

The exception for artistic criticism only applies to works that have been made available to the public by the copyright owner. None of the other exceptions apply. Using a photo as the cover of a book is clearly not fair dealing.

You also need consent of the subject of the photo to distribute in some countries (not England and Wales, no idea on rest of the UK) eg US. There could be an interesting discussion on whether you also need the owner of the dick's consent if a cross-border dick pic (if not the photographer). Cross-border dick pick law may be a new and emerging specialism for IP lawyers.

Artistic criticism!

I'm wetting myself!

Mumsnet always delivers.

I'm starting to feel that my happy ideas won't wash. 😢😢

Since he took the pics in his then wife's back bedroom, perhaps she may have a vested interest ...

Would you good and kindly folk knows if the location has a legal interest? Additionally, since he (omitted to mention that he) was married at the time, dors she have a beneficial interest in any monies earned?

Please,do tell. 😊

No, the location has no legal interest. If he is divorced and there has been a financial settlement, she has no claim on any money earned.

What if op gets an oil painting made of the dick pic and then uses that as the book cover? Or a parody cartoon?