The non-consensual sharing of intimate images or videos, often referred to as revenge porn, can make you feel exposed and out of control: the content is online or circulating in a chat, and you do not know whether to keep it, report it, file a criminal complaint or seek damages. I want to help you separate these issues, because removal, criminal protection and damages have different functions and may require parallel steps.
The starting point is simple, but decisive: content may have been created or sent voluntarily and still remain destined for the private sphere. I will explain which elements may be relevant for the offence provided for by Article 612-ter of the Italian Criminal Code, how to prepare a useful report for the platform and what consequences may remain even when the post is deleted.
When the sharing of intimate images may constitute an offence
Article 612-ter distinguishes two conducts. The first concerns anyone who, after having created or unlawfully taken sexually explicit images or videos intended to remain private, sends, delivers, transfers, publishes or disseminates them without the consent of the portrayed persons. The penalty provided for by the rule is imprisonment from one to six years and a fine from 5,000 to 15,000 euros. The current text, including amendments applicable since 17 December 2025, is available in Article 612-ter of the Criminal Code on Normattiva.
The second conduct concerns anyone who receives or acquires the material. If that person disseminates it without consent, Article 612-ter also requires the intent to cause harm to the portrayed person. This does not mean that a forwarding is irrelevant simply because the person doing it is not the first author of the publication: messages, comments, threats, mockery and the manner of sharing can serve to reconstruct the purpose of the conduct.
The affective relationship can affect the seriousness of the fact. The rule provides for an increase in penalty if the dissemination is carried out by the spouse, even if separated or divorced, or by a person who is or has been bound to the offended person by an affective relationship. An increase is also provided for dissemination through IT or telematic tools, a frequent circumstance when the material passes through socials, chats, e-mails or websites.
Since 17 December 2025, Article 612-ter also contemplates an increase from one third to two thirds if the fact is committed as an act of hatred, discrimination, prevarication, control, possession or domination as a woman, in relation to the refusal to start or maintain an affective relationship, or as a limitation of individual freedoms. However, the name given to the event is not enough. It is necessary to trace the concrete fact back to the requirements provided by the law.
Consent to recording does not coincide with consent to dissemination
Consent must concern the contested use itself. Sending an intimate photograph to a person, consenting to a recording or allowing a file to remain on a device does not, by itself, equate to authorizing its publication on a profile, forwarding it in a chat or delivering it to third parties. The fact that a relationship has ended or that there has been an argument does not transform private content into freely distributable material.
The reconstruction does not end with the question "who took the photo?". What also counts is what private destination the content had, who could see it and what the people involved said to each other. A conversation in which one asks not to share the file, the private setting of an account or the exchange limited to two persons can help clarify the context; however, they do not replace the overall assessment of the facts.
Not even a restricted circle makes dissemination neutral. Sending to colleagues, friends, family members or members of a group can produce a concrete harm and make it more difficult to contain further forwardings. The public nature of the profile is not the only criterion. The scope of circulation and the available evidence change, but it is not necessary to wait for the material to go viral to consider protection.
Removing content without losing essential evidence
The report to the platform serves to stop or limit online availability. If the content is hosted on a social network, a website, a storage service or a sharing platform, it is advisable to use the channel provided by the manager for intimate content shared without consent. The report must refer to the single content: the exact URL address, the account name, the date, time and a clear motivation are more useful data than a generic protest.
For information hosting service providers falling within the scope of the European Digital Services Act, Article 16 imposes accessible electronic reporting mechanisms and requires notices to be sufficiently precise and motivated. The provision expressly indicates the usefulness of the exact electronic location, such as the URL. Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, Article 16, on EUR-Lex also provides for an acknowledgment of receipt and a communication of the decision when the report contains an electronic contact address.
A report does not guarantee immediate removal. The platform must evaluate the content according to the applicable rules, while criminal protection follows a distinct path. It is therefore useful not to consider removal as the sole objective and, at the same time, not to wait for criminal proceedings before asking for the intervention of the service manager.
Before the post, profile or message is no longer visible, neatly keep the elements necessary to identify them: link, account, date and time, context screenshots, received messages and platform communications. Documenting does not mean relaunching the material. Avoid sending intimate images to acquaintances to ask for confirmations, republishing them to denounce what happened or creating new non-essential copies.
If the content reappears on different accounts or in other services, each new presence may require a separate report with the relative link. The deletion of a story or a post does not prove, by itself, that no further copies exist. For this reason, the useful sequence is to contain dissemination, keep references and keep track of responses received, without unnecessarily increasing circulation.
Criminal complaint: why deadlines matter
In the ordinary case, the offence is prosecuted upon criminal complaint by the offended person. The criminal complaint is the declaration with which one asks to proceed criminally for a fact provided by law as an offence; it does not coincide with a report to the platform nor with simply recounting what happened to people close by. For Article 612-ter, the deadline to file it is six months.
Prosecution of the State's own motion is provided in determined situations. The text of Article 612-ter establishes that proceedings are carried out without a criminal complaint in cases of dissemination committed to the detriment of a person in a condition of physical or psychological inferiority or of a woman in a state of pregnancy, in addition to the case of connection with another crime prosecutable of the State's own motion. The rule must be read on concrete facts: being or having been partners is an element that can be relevant as an aggravating circumstance, but does not replace verification on prosecutability.
The six-month deadline must not be confused with the time necessary for a platform to respond or for the offender to be identified. Waiting for an informal solution can be risky. If you receive promises of deletion, requests for money, pressure or threats, keep the communications and do not base irreversible decisions solely on messages received in chat.
Not knowing the personal name of the person who disseminated the material does not prevent reporting the fact. Accounts, nicknames, URLs, telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, messages, any payment requests and profile data are elements that help identify the conduct. It is important to distinguish facts and suspicions. You can indicate what you saw directly and clarify which connections still require investigation.
Damages compensation: which consequences can be considered
The removal of the content does not automatically cancel the damage already produced. Dissemination can affect privacy, dignity, relational life and the well-being of the portrayed person even if the post is subsequently obscured. A potential claim for damages does not derive automatically from the mere existence of an image online: it is necessary to link the damage to the fact and prove its consequences with concrete elements.
Both non-pecuniary prejudices, such as the violation of dignity and the suffering resulting from dissemination, and financially demonstrable disbursements or losses directly linked to the fact can be relevant. There is no fixed sum. The assessment considers, among other things, the content, the number and type of people reached, the duration of publication, subsequent forwardings and documented consequences.
Compensation can be requested in an autonomous civil lawsuit or, within the limits and times provided for by the criminal proceedings, by joining as a civil party. The two avenues are not interchangeable at every stage and the choice affects the procedural path. The claim for damages requires a distinct basis from the criminal complaint, even when it originates from the same facts.
Messages, manager responses, screenshots, certificates of expenses incurred and documents demonstrating specific consequences can have a different utility. It is not necessary to accumulate material without criteria; instead, what is needed is to keep what allows reconstructing the dissemination and its impact. If the fact includes threats, blackmail, unauthorized access to an account or repeated harassment, such conducts must be described separately because they can assume autonomous relevance.
Which first step to consider in the concrete situation
The priority is to limit dissemination without compromising documentation. If the content is still visible, note down the essential references and use the service's reporting channels. If there are requests for money, threats of publication or fears for your safety, do not send further material and do not access other people's accounts without authorization.
To orient yourself, it can be useful to gather in a single space the links, context screenshots, account names, dates, chats and platform responses. The order of data avoids misunderstandings. When the material concerns a minor, it must not be forwarded or duplicated: the situation may involve additional criminal rules and requires timely intervention with the competent authorities.
Frequently asked questions
Can I protect myself if I had voluntarily sent the images?
Yes, consent to sending does not automatically coincide with consent to dissemination. It is necessary to understand what use of the material had been authorized, to whom and in what context. For criminal classification, how the content was acquired and, for those who received it, the potential intent to cause harm also count.
Do I have to wait for the content to go viral before reporting it?
No, it is reasonable to intervene as soon as you learn about it. Content shared within a limited circle can already be harmful and each new forwarding can make it more difficult to contain. The report should precisely identify the post or file; before removal, keep URL, account, date, time and essential context.
How much time do I have to file a criminal complaint for revenge porn?
The deadline provided by Article 612-ter is six months. In some specific situations, the law instead establishes prosecution of the State's own motion. Since platform reporting and criminal complaint are distinct tools, it is not prudent to wait for the response of the social or website manager before considering the criminal deadline.
Can I report the fact if I do not know the true identity of the account?
Yes, you can indicate all data that identify the content and the profile. URLs, nicknames, screenshots, telephone numbers, e-mails, dates and messages can be useful even without a certain name. However, it is good not to attribute the fact with certainty to a person solely based on suspicion: separating what you know from what you hypothesize makes the reconstruction clearer.
Does the deletion of the post prevent me from claiming damages?
No, removal can limit further damages but does not automatically eliminate those that have already occurred. For a compensation claim, actual dissemination, consequences suffered and evidence linking them to the fact remain relevant. Keeping track of publication and its repercussions therefore remains important even after obscuring.
Protecting privacy without facing the problem alone
Each tool responds to a different need. Reporting aims to limit the availability of the content; the criminal complaint can activate criminal protection in the foreseen cases; compensation concerns the damaging consequences to be proven. If you need to understand which steps are compatible with what happened, you can contact me bringing the essential references, without unnecessarily sending or duplicating the intimate material.