Having an erotic video deleted is the question we are asked most often by people who shot years ago and live differently today. The honest answer stands at the beginning and not at the end: lawfully published material with a valid contract you as a rule no longer get out of the net. Anyone who promises something else is selling you hope. This article explains why that is so, and then goes through what actually works — because that is more than nothing, and in some pairings the legal position sits clearly on your side.
Why lawful material stays
Three things come together. First you granted usage rights with the contract, and an effective contract binds. Second the production has invested and relied on being allowed to exploit. Third the material is technically distributed: on servers, in downloads, with licensees and on portals that nobody knows.
Even a successful claim against the production therefore only reaches the production. The copies others have taken do not disappear from that. That is the reality behind every piece of advice that you simply have to demand deletion.
That is why the most effective decision sits before the shoot and not after it: in the scope of the granted usage rights. Anyone who limits there has a lever later at all.
If the use leaves the agreed frame
This is where what works begins. Your consent reaches as far as the contract, and not one step further. If the material is used outside this frame, the use is not permitted, and then you have claims.
Typical cases: the contract allows streaming in the subscription area; the material appears as a freely accessible trailer. It allows no advertising; your face stands on a homepage. It is limited to a period that has expired. It forbids passing on to third parties; the material runs at another company.
In such cases you can demand cessation, under certain circumstances damages, and the addressee is clear: your contractual partner. The first step is therefore banal and important — get the contract out and read what you granted then. After that you know whether you have a breach in front of you or a permitted use that you do not like.
Material without valid consent
This pairing is to be judged legally quite differently, and it comes out clearly in your favour. If no effective consent to the distribution exists, the publication is unlawful. That includes shots from the private circle, material made secretly, shots that an ex-partner distributes, and everything that arose on set without agreement.
Then you need no contract interpretation, but fast action: secure evidence through screenshots with date and the full address of the page, a report to the platform, a lawyer, and depending on the case a report to the police. The distribution of intimate shots without consent is not a peccadillo.
Please do not delete chats, emails or messages in these cases, even if the impulse is understandable. They are your evidence. If you are in this situation, get in touch with us via contact, even if you were never booked through us — we tell you which step comes first.
Unauthorised copies on third-party sites
The most common annoyance is copies on portals that never had a licence. A distinction is important here that saves a lot of frustration: against the copyright infringement it is first of all the rights holder who can act, that is the production. Your own lever is the right to one’s own image, and it applies if the distribution sits outside what you have permitted.
In practice that means working on two tracks. Tell the production where its material is running unlicensed — that is its economic damage, and it has the means to act against it. And in parallel use the reporting paths of the platforms themselves, which as a rule hold a form ready for unauthorised content.
Do not expect finality in this. Portals react differently, some quickly, some not at all, and the same file turns up on the next page again. It is maintenance work, not a single process.
Search engines: the most practically effective step
What people find they find through search engines. That is why the application to have results removed is often more effective than the fight against every single page. The large search engines hold forms ready for that, among other things for intimate shots distributed without consent and for results on your name.
The content does not disappear from the net through that, but it disappears from the path almost everyone takes. For the effect in everyday life — applications, neighbourhood, family — that is the largest single difference. Count on processing time and on having to report again for new finds.
In addition everything helps that weakens the connection between stage name and legal name. What works in that and what only looks as if it does is in working anonymously: what works, what does not.
Information under the Datenschutz-Grundverordnung
A path often overlooked: towards the production you as the data subject have information claims under the Datenschutz-Grundverordnung. You can demand to learn which data about you are processed and to which recipients they have been passed on.
This information is rarely the solution, but often the beginning. Anyone who knows to which licensees the material has gone can address those specifically, instead of searching the net. The application is possible informally and has to be answered within the statutory deadline.
You can also demand deletion and restriction of processing. Count on the production relying on the legal basis of the contract and on retention duties, for example for the age proof. That is often correct and limits this path.
When you need a lawyer
In three pairings you should not write yourself: if material without consent is in circulation, if money is demanded so that something disappears, and if you want to enforce a contract breach and the production stonewalls. Media or copyright law is competent, not the all-rounder from the town.
Beforehand a folder is worth it: the contract, the invoice, screenshots with date, a list of the finds and a short timeline. Anyone who goes into the advice with that saves hours, and hours are the billing unit with lawyers. An initial consultation is markedly cheaper than the proceedings that later come from it.
And the point that matters most to us: the strongest deletion strategy is the decision before the signature. Anyone who knows which channels they release and which they do not has to repair less later. Our standards on that and what we check before every booking are under safety.
Note: This article provides a general overview and is not a substitute for legal advice.
Questions about this?
Schreib uns, oder sieh dir an, wie eine Zusammenarbeit abläuft.