.png)
SHAH ALAM - Having a personal photo or video reposted without permission can be distressing, particularly when it is edited, taken out of context or used to attract views, engagement or financial gain.
Lawyer Nizam Bashir said victims should first preserve evidence before seeking removal, including screenshots and screen recordings showing the complete post, account name, profile link, caption and comments.
"The victims should also save the direct link to the content, record the date and time and keep any messages, threats or comments received as a result of the post," he told Sinar Daily.
Viewing figures, the original file and records of reports to the platform should also be kept, although the original file does not automatically establish copyright ownership.
The post can then be reported to the platform, particularly if it involves harassment, threats, intimate images, exposed personal information or possible copyright infringement.
"If an account refuses to remove the content, a lawyer may demand removal, seek an undertaking against further publication, or apply for a court order," Nizam said.
He advised against publicly confronting the account owner or retaliating, which could spread the material further.
Police reports can be made over potentially criminal posts, with the matter referred to the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC).
Nizam said Sections 507B to 507F of the Penal Code and Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 could apply.
However, not every unwanted repost is a crime. Posts that merely upset someone are insufficient, he said, but immediate action may be warranted if a repost exposes identifying information that could put someone at risk.
Doxing, or publishing identifying information to expose someone to harassment or danger, can be an offence under Section 507E of the Penal Code where the required intention or knowledge exists.
Identifying information can include a photograph and the statutory example covers posting intimate photographs without consent. The maximum penalty is three years' imprisonment, a fine, or both.
He said a photo or video being publicly accessible does not give others permission to reproduce or modify it.
"Lack of consent alone does not make every repost unlawful. The content, context, purpose and applicable legal exceptions matter," he said.
Editing material or changing a caption to create a misleading impression could raise defamation or harassment issues.
"A meme or edited clip is therefore not automatically copyright infringement but calling something a 'meme' does not excuse defamation or harassment," he said.
A viral post may also be used to build followers, promote products or generate affiliate income, but profit alone does not determine whether the use is unlawful.
The Personal Data Protection Act 2010 generally regulates personal data processing connected with commercial transactions, although exemptions apply.
"Whether a commercial account's use falls within the Act requires assessment," Nizam said, adding that copyright, defamation and harassment issues may still arise.
Responsibility may also extend beyond the original uploader.
"The original poster may be liable for creating or publishing unlawful content. People who repost it may also be liable."
Nizam however, added that content going viral does not, by itself, make everyone involved jointly liable.
