McGlynn, Clare, Erika Rackley, and Ruth Houghton, “Beyond ‘Revenge Porn’:
The Continuum of Image-Based Sexual Abuse” (2017), 25: 1 Fem. Leg. Stud. 25
Prosser, William L., “Privacy” (1960), 48 Calif. L. Rev. 383
ACTION for damages for assault and battery, negligence and
public disclosure of private information.
John E. MacDonell, for plaintiff.
No one appearing for defendants.
GOMERY J.: —
 The plaintiff, Jane Doe 72511 (“Jane”), seeks default judg-
ment against her former boyfriend N.M. (“N.M.”) and his parents
A.M. and F.M. (the “M.s”) for damages arising from his abusive
behaviour towards her and his posting, without her knowledge
and consent, of a sexually explicit video of her on a pornographic
 Jane and N.M. met in high school and began dating in
December 2012. After Jane realized she was pregnant with N.M.s’
baby in May 2013, their relationship deteriorated. He accused her
of ruining his life and began seeing other women. One night
when Jane was seven months pregnant, N.M. dragged her down
the stairs of his parents’ home, choked her, threatened her with a
knife and forced her out of the house.
 Jane gave birth to a son, M.K., in November 2013. N.M.s’
physical and verbal abuse of Jane escalated. He would often drag
her up or down the stairs, throw her around, cover her mouth
with his hand and choke her. N.M.s’ parents, the M.s, witnessed
his verbal and physical abuse because it took place at their home.
They did nothing to stop it or to prevent further attacks.
 One day in March 2014, after Jane left the M.s’ house to
catch the bus, N.M. chased after her, wrestled her to the ground,
forced her into his car, dragged her back out of it by her feet and
smashed her head against the car window. Jane phoned the
police. N.M. was arrested and later convicted of assault.
 In June 2016, Jane learned through a friend that N.M. had,
without her knowledge or consent, posted a sexually explicit video
of them on a pornography website. The video, entitled “yellow
hoe sucking a big one”, had been posted in March 2014 and
was linked to ten other pornographic websites.1 Jane’s face was
clearly visible in the video while N.M.s’ face was not. When Jane
1 I have reproduced all text messages as they were written.