Illicit Diffusion of Intimate Videos: The Court of Cassation Clarifies the Boundary of Consent with Order No. 30169 of 2025

In the digital age, the sharing of personal content, especially of an intimate nature, has become a common practice, often conveyed through dedicated platforms that promise a certain degree of control over its dissemination. However, the line between what is legitimately shareable and what crosses into illegality is fine and constantly evolving in jurisprudence. The recent Order of the Court of Cassation No. 30169 of 2025 fits precisely into this delicate context, offering a fundamental clarification on the limits of consent for the dissemination of sexually explicit videos and on the application of Article 612-ter of the Penal Code, also known as "revenge porn".

The Regulatory Framework and the Protection of Digital Privacy

Article 612-ter of the Italian Penal Code was introduced into our legal system to address the growing problem of non-consensual dissemination of sexually explicit images or videos. This provision punishes anyone who, after acquiring or receiving them, disseminates them without the consent of the depicted persons, causing serious prejudice. The legislator intended to protect the freedom and moral integrity of victims, who are often exposed to devastating public humiliation. The Court of Cassation, with this order, deals with a specific case, that of sharing on platforms with limited access, such as OnlyFans, where initial consent for viewing is given only to a specific recipient.

The Decision of the Court of Cassation: Boundaries of Consent and Illicit Diffusion

The case examined by the Court concerned the defendant M. P.M. L. M. F., involved in the transmission to third parties of a sexually explicit video, originally published on a social network with limited access (in this case, OnlyFans). The peculiarity of the situation lies in the fact that the person depicted had consented to the viewing of the content by a specific recipient, but not to its storage or, even less so, to its further dissemination. The Court of Cassation, with President Rosa Pezzullo and Rapporteur Matilde Brancaccio, reiterated a crucial principle:

The crime of illicit diffusion of sexually explicit videos is constituted by the conduct of anyone who, having legitimately accessed a video present on a "social network" that prohibits users from storing content viewed (in this case, OnlyFans), records and transmits it to third parties without the consent of the depicted person, as the consent given at the time of sharing is limited to viewing by the sole recipient of the content.

This maxim is of extraordinary importance. It clarifies that consent, when it comes to intimate content, is extremely specific and limited. The fact of having "legitimately accessed" a video in no way authorizes its use for purposes other than those agreed upon. If a platform prohibits storage or external sharing, attempting to circumvent such prohibitions – for example, by screen recording – and subsequently forwarding it to third parties, constitutes an illicit behavior that falls fully within the scope of Article 612-ter of the Penal Code. The Court emphasizes that initial consent is limited to "viewing by the sole recipient," excluding any other form of disclosure. This principle aligns with previous consistent rulings, such as No. 25516 of 2024, strengthening the protection of individual privacy in the digital environment.

Practical Implications and Prevention

The consequences of this order are manifold and relevant for both users of digital content and those who create it. Here are some practical implications:

• **Limited Consent:** Consent to view content never implies consent to its storage, reproduction, or further dissemination, unless explicitly stated.
• **User Responsibility:** Anyone receiving intimate content is required to respect the limits imposed by the original consent and the platform's terms of use. Unauthorized recording and sharing are criminal offenses.
• **Victim Protection:** Victims of such illicit disseminations have a solid jurisprudential reference point to report the abuse, knowing that the law protects their will and their right to privacy.
• **Role of Platforms:** Although not directly involved in the crime, platforms offering content-sharing services must implement effective mechanisms to prevent and combat unauthorized dissemination.

This ruling serves as a warning: freedom of expression and sharing on social networks finds an insurmountable limit in respecting the dignity and privacy of others. "Legitimate acquisition" of content is not a license to do with it as one pleases.

Conclusions

Order No. 30169 of 2025 by the Court of Cassation represents a significant step in the fight against the illicit diffusion of sexually explicit videos. By reiterating that consent is specific and not extendable to unauthorized uses, especially on platforms that restrict storage, the Court strengthens the protection of individual freedom and privacy in the digital age. For legal professionals, this ruling offers clear guidance in the application of Article 612-ter of the Penal Code; for citizens, it is an essential reminder of the importance of conscious and respectful use of technology, emphasizing that every act of online sharing has legal and moral implications that cannot be ignored. In an increasingly connected world, the protection of the intimate sphere and the fight against "revenge porn" require constant vigilance and an interpretation of the law that keeps pace with new technological challenges.