This article explores a real-life legal case involving the removal of adult content from the internet. It highlights the challenges faced by individuals seeking to erase explicit materials that were once published with their involvement, often under circumstances that involved misrepresentation, lack of consent, or psychological vulnerability. The goal of this case study is to inform, support, and guide others in similar situations. If you're struggling with the long-term consequences of online exposure, this case study might help you understand your rights and how the law can be used to protect your privacy.
Rebuilding a life after porn: one man’s legal fight to erase his digital past
When Liam (Name changed for anonymity) contacted us, he was at breaking point. Years after a short stint in the adult entertainment industry, the explicit scenes he had filmed under a stage name were still being published, shared, and re-uploaded across the internet without his consent and despite multiple pleas to the companies involved.
The consequences for him were devastating: suicidal thoughts, social isolation, and the near collapse of his personal ambitions and mental health. This case illustrates how the internet can trap individuals in past decisions made during vulnerable periods of life and how internet law, data protection, and copyright strategiescopyright strategies can be used to fight back.
How a brief porn career led to years of online exposure and distress
At the age of 24, Liam was struggling financially and emotionally. He had dreams of being an actor but was repeatedly turned away from auditions. When a producer from a UK-based gay porn company approached him with promises of exposure and earnings, he saw an opportunity. Over three weeks, Liam filmed 25 scenes for three different producers: Boynapped, UKHotJocks, and BadPuppy. He was paid £100 per scene (approximately £3,000 in total).
He signed contracts quickly, without legal advice or a cooling-off period. At the time, he was told and it was strongly suggested to him—that the content would only be made available to paid members through a chain of exclusive hotels and, in some cases, via secure paid membership websites. This turned out to be a serious misrepresentation.
He was never made aware that the content could be re-used, repackaged, and ultimately spread across hundreds of online platforms, both free and paid. The videos appeared on free-to-access porn platforms like Pornhub, on affiliate sites, and even in new promotional material—giving the illusion that the content was newly produced. Some were distributed years after filming. Others continued to rank on search engines for terms like "Irish gay porn star", even though his real name was never used.
Legal obstacles when attempting to remove porn content you have created from the internet
Liam repeatedly asked the platforms to remove the content. At one point, they asked him for $10,000 to buy back his own videos—a sum wildly disproportionate to what he was originally paid or what he could afford. When he tried to negotiate, one company responded by accelerating the release of additional scenes, knowing full well that Liam had attempted suicide due to the emotional impact of the videos.
Many of the production companies had dissolved or stopped trading. Others operated under unclear legal structures, sometimes based abroad. In one particularly troubling moment, Liam recalled fainting during a bondage shoot, only to have the director dismiss concerns for his wellbeing. He described how producers used emotional manipulation, suggesting that porn would help his acting career.
This experience, along with the persistent resurfacing of the content online, triggered symptoms consistent with PTSD. Liam described how the trauma of that period repeatedly resurfaced, particularly during stressful or emotionally challenging phases in his life. The reappearance of his past online was not just a privacy violation; it was a reactivation of psychological harm that he had to re-live again and again.
Legal strategy to remove adult videos and reclaim privacy online
Our approach was driven by a clear strategy: to identify the legal weaknesses in the ongoing publication of Liam’s videos and build pressure on the companies responsible. We began by issuing formal Data Subject Access Requests. This was a deliberate first step to reveal exactly what personal data these companies held on Liam and to assess whether they had a lawful basis to process or distribute this content.
This move quickly paid off. In many cases, the companies failed to provide a signed contract, a release form, or any valid licence that authorised the creation or continued use of the videos. The absence of this documentation undermined the legitimacy of their claims and strengthened Liam’s legal position. By exposing the lack of proper records, we set the foundation for more aggressive legal arguments around consent, data misuse, and breaches of privacy law.
Next, we carefully reviewed and challenged the contracts Liam had signed. These documents had been presented to him under rushed conditions, without any opportunity for independent legal advice. There were serious concerns around whether they had been signed under duress or misleading representations, especially considering the promises made to him about limited distribution.
At the same time, we leveraged powerful GDPR and privacy laws, drawing attention to how the videos infringed on Liam’s fundamental right to a private and family life. These laws provided a crucial legal backbone to our demands for content removal. In parallel, we began negotiations around copyright.
While Liam did not initially own the rights to the videos, we sought to transfer or assign ownership where possible. This would empower him to issue takedown notices directly and have more control over where and how the footage appeared online. Even though Liam didn’t own the original copyright in many of the scenes, we argued that the ongoing publication breached UK and EU data protection law due to the lack of consent and the deeply personal nature of the material.
The outcome: successful adult video removals
Over the course of our campaign, we secured the full removal of most of the videos from major adult platforms, including those run by Triple X Media and UKHotJocks. Triple X Media recognised Liam’s ownership and instructed its distributors to cease use. UKHotJocks removed his content and ceased using his stage name.
However, not every platform complied. Some clips remained online via third-party distributors, especially where copyright ownership remained with dissolved companies like Twisted XXX Media. In situations where removal was refused by more resistant or rough platforms, we utilised DMCA notices through our associates in the United States. The purpose was to increase the seriousness of enforcement—especially as many of these platforms are based in the US and would be more likely to respond to domestic legal notices.
This approach produced positive results. For the few remaining videos that continued to circulate, we worked closely with search engines to have them delisted, ensuring they wouldn’t show up in common search results. While it was impossible to guarantee complete erasure, we successfully reduced the online presence of the content to such an extent that it was no longer easily discoverable or accessible to the average internet user. The outcome gave Liam the breathing room he desperately needed and allowed him to begin rebuilding his life without the constant fear of exposure.
How to fight back legally against porn videos posted online without your consent
One of the most important lessons from this case is that consent is not forever—especially in the digital world. Liam may have once agreed to film those scenes, but that agreement was not a blanket permission for the content to live online indefinitely, reappear without notice, or be spread across countless sites for years to come.
In law, consent must be meaningful and context-specific. When someone withdraws that consent—especially when the material is deeply personal—their request must be taken seriously. We also saw how contracts from years ago may not hold up under today’s privacy laws. GDPR and evolving data protection rules mean that companies need to justify how they use people’s personal data, including images and videos. If a contract doesn’t clearly explain the scope of distribution or if it’s signed under unclear or rushed circumstances, it may be open to challenge. That’s exactly what we did in Liam’s case.
The fact that some companies had dissolved also created an interesting legal angle. While it can complicate enforcement, it also opens up new opportunities. If a company no longer exists, who owns the rights to the content? And if no one has lawful ownership, that often works in favour of the individual trying to reclaim control.
Finally, it’s crucial to understand that you don’t always need to own the copyright to fight back. Your image, your likeness, your name, your private information—all of this is protected under privacy and data laws. And we’ve used those protections effectively, even when our clients weren’t listed as the copyright owner.
Lawyer’s thoughts about the case
This was a deeply emotional case, and one that touched every part of our practice—privacy law, data protection, intellectual property, and human rights. It highlighted the staggering imbalance of power that can exist between vulnerable individuals and content distributors who operate without sufficient regard for consent, legality, or ethics.
What stood out most was how resilient our client remained in the face of dehumanising behaviour from some of these companies. That resilience inspired us to be more creative and persistent with our legal strategy. We’re particularly proud that we were able to remove so much content, despite the legal complexity of the copyright status.
This case reinforces the urgent need for clearer exit rights for adult performers, and for better oversight of digital content that can have lifelong consequences. It also showed us how current data protection frameworks—when used strategically—can empower individuals to reclaim their narrative and their privacy.
Need to remove porn videos of yourself from the internet?
You might have found this page while searching for ways to remove adult content involving you from the internet. Perhaps you're feeling overwhelmed by a past decision that continues to haunt you online, whether it’s a regretful appearance in adult films or personal footage that has been widely shared without your consent.
You’re not alone. We’ve worked with many clients just like you—people who’ve searched things like “how to remove porn videos of myself from the internet” or “help with porn career regret.” Maybe you've looked into your rights under the right to be forgotten right to be forgotten or wondered whether it's even possible to stop these videos from being viewed again and again. The good news is, there are legal solutions available.
At Cohen Davis Solicitors, we understand the emotional toll this takes. Our team specialises in privacy rights, content removal, and internet law. Whether your videos were posted legally or not, with or without your consent, we can help you explore your legal options and take practical steps toward reclaiming your privacy and peace of mind.
