So somebody who reuploads a video that they like should be held to the same standard as the original uploader of revenge porn?

I think this is a lot of convenient dodging and dancing around the idea that Section 230 might possibly need to be revised.

If someone reuploads a video they're breaking copyright law at the very least. I know it's a common occurrence in the porn industry, but taking something you don't have the rights to and uploading it to the internet is still illegal.

You can't download Star Wars and put it on YouTube. Uploading someone else's porn is not only similar, it's also much more personal.

I'd say that unless they know the exact circumstances and all the details about the production process, reuploading pornographic content of real people should be considered nonconsensual until consent can be proven. It's not hard to accidentally reupload content that was originally leaked by an abusive ex and you have no business choosing where to upload the content anyway.

I think it's important for people in the porn industry to be able to remove as much of their released material as they want at a later date. Reproductive rights and the freedom of choice over one's body is under pressure in more and more countries in the world and an old leaked porn shoot can leave some nasty damage.

Alright, if the artist releases their content under the right licenses with the right statements reuploading is acceptable.

I've yet to see any Creative Commons porn sites, though. I don't think it's a very realistic scenario.

You're missing the scenario. If somebody uploads revenge porn to hurt somebody else then they don't care- they want the content reuploaded and spread around. Copyright law doesn't do anything here.