Understanding “NCDII”
The term “Non-Consensual Distribution of Intimate Images” (NCDII) may seem complicated. This page explains the term and how it’s applied in legal and non-legal settings.
“Non-Consensual Distribution of Intimate Images” might be referring to a specific definition that a statute uses or it might be referring to more general behaviour. For example, there is a legal definition of the non-consensual distribution of intimate images which is relevant for someone going through a legal process. However, if someone is looking for supports and resources to address the behaviour or harm associated with image sharing, the term may have a different meaning outside of the legal context or proceeding.
Legal Definitions of NCDII
Some of the NCDII definitions include.
CA Criminal Code S. 162.1 (2015)
To publish, transmit, sell, advertise or otherwise distribute” a private nude, semi-nude or sexually explicit image “(i) knowing that the person in the image did not consent to the distribution, or (ii) being reckless as to whether that person consented to the distribution”
BC Intimate Images Act Bill 12 (2023)
To publish, transmit or otherwise make available a visual recording or representation of an individual whether or not identifiable or altered engaged in a sex act, nude, nearly nude, exposing genital, anal regions, breasts and the person had a reasonable expectation of privacy at the time of the recording and distribution.
It is helpful to note that under the BC Intimate Images Protection Act, both still and moving images can be considered NCDII. “Distribution” also includes threats to distribute intimate images.
Beyond the Legal Definitions of NCDII
Not all instances of non-consensual image sharing will meet the criteria outlined in legal definitions of NCDII, but that does not mean that the behaviour is not harmful resulting in profound impacts on survivors.
A review of the individual elements of the term “NCDII” can assist with understanding NCDII experiences and whether or not they meet the legal definition of NCDII. This analysis provides insights regarding the experiences of NCDII survivors and how they can be supported in legal and non-legal settings.
Non-Consensual
When someone shares another person’s images without their consent, it is an unacceptable violation of privacy. A consent approach is important to understand NCDII.
When a survivor sends an image, the sending relies on certain terms of consent – for example:
- It is only to be viewed by the person they sent it to
- It is to be deleted immediately
- It is to be deleted after the end of their relationship.
When an image is shared outside the terms of consent, it is a non-consensual distribution of intimate images. For example, consent for private use does not imply consent for sharing, and consent to share an image on one occasion does not imply consent on other occasions. The survivor may change the terms of their consent, for instance, when a relationship ends, they might no longer consent to their ex-partner keeping their intimate images.
It is also important to consider that some actions might not exactly fit the definition of intimate image sharing, but they may still violate a survivors’ terms of consent or their safety. An example of this would be if a survivor discovered that someone had stored or saved their intimate image when there was an expectation that it would be deleted. While this might not meet the legal definition of an intimate image being shared, these actions can still be a violation of privacy, especially if there is concern that an image will be shared (even prior to a threat being made). In these circumstances, the survivor may need support about how to advocate for themselves, for example, how to make a request that their image be deleted.
It’s important to consider that someone may have been pressured into sharing an image or may have agreed to share an image as a form of “harm reduction”, for example, if they weren’t ready to engage in other sexual activities, or if they were being threatened. Understanding that coercive patterns of abuse, may result in a person feeling that they had no option but to “consent” to an image being taken and/or shared. The term coercive control means “an act, or a pattern of acts, of assault, threats, humiliation and intimidation that abusers use to harm, punish or frighten survivors” (Refuge, n.d.)
This behaviour is important to consider, because NCDII is often part of a continuum of other forms of violence.
When someone uses an image in a way that does not align with the consent when they agreed to share the image, trust has been violated. If someone shares another person’s image without their consent or outside of the terms of consent that existed when the image was shared, it is not the survivor’s fault, and responsibility lies with the person who shared the image. There are laws to protect against the non-consensual distribution of intimate images, and it is important to recognize that in BC, people have the right to a reasonable expectation of privacy even if “they have shared the intimate image themselves” Gov’t of BC, 2024
For more resources on Consent and Coercive Control:
Read More: “Consent” on the Smart Sex Resource
Read More: The Learning Network, Children Experience Coercive Control: What you Need to Know
Read More: Intimate Image Abuse – Despite Increased Reports to the Police, Charging Rates Remain Low
Distribution
“Distribution” can mean many different things. It does not need to be as high-tech as posting an image to Pornhub or hacking into an account to obtain images. It can be as low-tech as showing a picture on a phone’s screen to a friend or teammate, or printing and distributing physical copies of an image. Distribution may be online and very widespread, but it also might be more limited such as handing out physical copies of an image. Regardless of the method, an image being shared without a person’s consent is a violation of trust. How survivors and anti-violence workers respond to their image being shared may depend on how it was shared, for example, whether copies have been distributed online through social media or email or distributed as physical copies.
As the definition outlined on Techsafety.ca points out, distribution might refer to an image being published, distributed, transmitted, sold, being made available, or advertised.
For more information:
Government of BC: Intimate Images and Consent
Tech Safety Canada: What to do if someone has shared your intimate image
Intimate
What is considered “intimate” may rely on specific elements of a legal definition. For example, the Canadian Criminal Code’s definition states “private nude, semi-nude or sexually explicit image,” whereas the BC Intimate Images Protection Act applies when a person– whether or not they are identifiable– is “engaged in a sex act, nude, nearly nude, exposing genital, anal regions, breasts”.
It is important to consider these legal definitions in the bigger picture of survivor-centered support. There may be situations where an image does not quite fit the legal definition to be considered an intimate image, but it may still be extremely personal to the survivor. They will still require support in navigating their options, and in managing the experience of having their privacy violated.
There are also cultural considerations when it comes to identifying what is an “intimate” image. For example, some definitions of NCDII might not capture that for a woman who wears a Hijab, an image of her without her Hijab is intimate. A survivor-centred understanding of intimate images is essential to supporting the experiences of survivors who have experienced NCDII, especially when their experience may not fall within what is legally actionable. There may also be creative solutions to address images that don’t include nudity.
Read More: Government of Nova Scotia, Review of the Intimate Images and Cyber-protection Act: Public and Stakeholder Consultation: What We Heard Report
Images
“Non-consensual distribution of Intimate Images” does not just refer to pictures and photographs. The BC Intimate Images Protection Act’s definition includes a “visual representation or recording”, which includes videos as well. Depending on the definition, AI generated images may also be included, as well as digitally altered images. Many definitions recognize that the person in the image does not need to be identifiable in order to take action to get the image taken down.
For more information about NCDII, you can keep exploring this tool, or you can take a look at websites like techsafety.ca, which provides information about technology-facilitated gender-based violence in Canada, or the BCSTH tech safety page, which has BC specific information.
If you would like more information about what kinds of resources this website provides, you can look here.
Would you like to provide some feedback about this toolkit?
Participation is optional and confidential.
