a solution for non-US webmasters regarding 2257 compliance - GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

X

Nate-MM2

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Sep 2002

Posts: 263
Share

Post
#1

a solution for non-US webmasters regarding 2257 compliance

05-18-2005, 10:02 AM

From what i've read over the past year it seems that aside from the physical records all you need is an address on your website that lists where the records can be found.

The question becomes how to satisfy US-based hosts (and possibly processors) without breaking the privacy laws in your own country.

In one word? Lie.

What would be the harm in putting a fake address on all of your sites? I can't imagine a host (or most processors) flying somebody out to the middle of nowhere just to check and make sure you are compliant.

Any holes in this theory? I don't see how the processor or host could be held liable for their customers actions so I don't think it would be screwing them over.

Just some food for thought.
Tags: None
Nate-MM2

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Sep 2002

Posts: 263
Share

Post
#2

05-18-2005, 10:10 AM

Of course this is geared towards smaller affiliates (ie. AVS webmasters, gallery submitters submitting to TGP's only listing compliant galleries, free site makers submitting to link lists that only allow compliant free sites) but smaller paysite operators may be able to get away with it as well.

This seems like the only option a webmaster might have if they want to continue to do business as usual without breaking their local laws.
Comment
StuartD

Sofa King Band

Join Date: Jul 2002

Posts: 29903
Share

Post
#3

05-18-2005, 10:11 AM

hahahaha.... good luck with all that.

This is me on facebook
This is me on twitter
Comment
Damian_Maxcash

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Oct 2002

Posts: 12745
Share

Post
#4

05-18-2005, 10:13 AM

I wish this sort of thing would happen when I was sober......

Im too drunk to deal with this shit at the moment
Comment
Thomas1007

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2002

Posts: 5542
Share

Post
#5

05-18-2005, 10:19 AM

Originally posted by Nate-MM2

What would be the harm in putting a fake address on all of your sites? I can't imagine a host (or most processors) flying somebody out to the middle of nowhere just to check and make sure you are compliant.

Any holes in this theory? I don't see how the processor or host could be held liable for their customers actions so I don't think it would be screwing them over.

Lemme see now, what IF they decide too? are you willing to take the risk?

BUY THIS SPOT CONTACT ME FOR DETAILS

Contact Email
Comment
Nate-MM2

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Sep 2002

Posts: 263
Share

Post
#6

05-18-2005, 10:19 AM

Originally posted by NichePay - StuartD

hahahaha.... good luck with all that.

I don't see why it wouldn't work?

The only info a host would have in regards to their clients compliance is if they have an address for the records listed on their sites.

They have no way of telling whether or not the correct records are actually at that address.
Comment
Bansheelinks

Confirmed User

Join Date: Apr 2003

Posts: 6023
Share

Post
#7

05-18-2005, 10:20 AM

Originally posted by damian2001

I wish this sort of thing would happen when I was sober......

Im too drunk to deal with this shit at the moment

man, that sounds like the perfect line in a song..........you should copyright that
Comment
Nate-MM2

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Sep 2002

Posts: 263
Share

Post
#8

05-18-2005, 10:21 AM

Originally posted by Thomas1007

Lemme see now, what IF they decide too? are you willing to take the risk?

Yes.

Worst case scenario for an affiliate is that you would just have to move your servers to a different host and start over again with the fake address game.

For paysite operators using US-based processors it would be a bit more difficult.

I'd rather take that kind of risk than break the laws of my own country.
Comment
Thomas1007

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2002

Posts: 5542
Share

Post
#9

05-18-2005, 10:31 AM

Originally posted by Nate-MM2

Yes.

Worst case scenario for an affiliate is that you would just have to move your servers to a different host and start over again with the fake address game.

For paysite operators using US-based processors it would be a bit more difficult.

I'd rather take that kind of risk than break the laws of my own country.

Heres an idea, why not just update your stuff, get all the legal 2257 info, ensure you are within the laws and not worry about it after that?
why take the chance and have to move shit and lie??
makes no sense to me but to each his/her own

BUY THIS SPOT CONTACT ME FOR DETAILS

Contact Email
Comment
broke

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 4501
Share

Post
#10

05-18-2005, 10:33 AM

Originally posted by NichePay - StuartD

hahahaha.... good luck with all that.

Non-US citizens should not worry... no need to hide (or lie).

No country is going to extradite one of it's citizens over the 2257 changes. Let your host worry about their liability.

Perfect Gonzo
Comment
Nate-MM2

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Sep 2002

Posts: 263
Share

Post
#11

05-18-2005, 10:34 AM

Originally posted by broke

Non-US citizens should not worry... no need to hide (or lie).

No country is going to extradite one of it's citizens over the 2257 changes. Let your host worry about their liability.

The problem isn't the US government but hosts & processors forcing compliance.
Comment
Nate-MM2

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Sep 2002

Posts: 263
Share

Post
#12

05-18-2005, 10:36 AM

Originally posted by Thomas1007

Heres an idea, why not just update your stuff, get all the legal 2257 info, ensure you are within the laws and not worry about it after that?
why take the chance and have to move shit and lie??
makes no sense to me but to each his/her own

The 2257 laws and privacy laws of some countries clash head on.

You can't be compliant on both ends, you have to pick one or the other.

This is just a solution for webmasters that choose to obey their own countries laws in spite of the new regulations but still want to keep their US-based processors & host who may force compliance.
Comment
broke

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 4501
Share

Post
#13

05-18-2005, 10:36 AM

Originally posted by Nate-MM2

The problem isn't the US government but hosts & processors forcing compliance.

There really are hosts and 3rd party processors outside of the US that accept US transactions..

Perfect Gonzo
Comment
Shags

Confirmed User

Join Date: Mar 2004

Posts: 735
Share

Post
#14

05-18-2005, 10:36 AM

I sell fake 2257 info

Click Here
Comment
Nate-MM2

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Sep 2002

Posts: 263
Share

Post
#15

05-18-2005, 10:39 AM

Originally posted by broke

There really are hosts and 3rd party processors outside of the US that accept US transactions..

If the worst case scenario comes to pass and for arguments sake let's say all US-based hosts move to force compliance on their clients that $1000/mo 3mbit line you had in Holland just had a price increase to $10,000/mo

Yes there will be options, but you will have to pay to take advantage of those options.
Comment
broke

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 4501
Share

Post
#16

05-18-2005, 10:46 AM

Originally posted by Nate-MM2

Yes there will be options, but you will have to pay to take advantage of those options.

I understand that...

The "chicken little" crap on these forums has just gotten to me. There is NO way this new "law" will make it past the impending court challenges in the US and there is next to nothing for foreign webmasters to worry about.

Perfect Gonzo
Comment
Nate-MM2

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Sep 2002

Posts: 263
Share

Post
#17

05-18-2005, 10:54 AM

Originally posted by broke

I understand that...

The "chicken little" crap on these forums has just gotten to me. There is NO way this new "law" will make it past the impending court challenges in the US and there is next to nothing for foreign webmasters to worry about.

I agree with you that it most likely will never get to this point, but it never hurts to be prepared for the worst. Especially when the preparation takes no time or effort as it wouldn't under this scenario.
Comment
broke

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 4501
Share

Post
#18

05-18-2005, 10:58 AM

Agreed!

Perfect Gonzo
Comment
Sarah_Jayne

Now with more Jayne

Join Date: Dec 2002

Posts: 40077
Share

Post
#19

05-18-2005, 11:05 AM

Originally posted by damian2001

I wish this sort of thing would happen when I was sober......

Im too drunk to deal with this shit at the moment
Comment
w0rstluk

Registered User

Join Date: Feb 2005

Posts: 78
Share

Post
#20

05-18-2005, 11:08 AM

Nate-MM2 for primeminister!
Comment
GatorB

The Demon & 12clicks

Join Date: Oct 2001

Posts: 18208
Share

Post
#21

05-18-2005, 11:18 AM

Originally posted by Thomas1007

Heres an idea, why not just update your stuff, get all the legal 2257 info, ensure you are within the laws and not worry about it after that?:

Here's the problem. They don't want us to comply. Read the rules. According to the ones proposed you need actually physical copies. What sponsor or content provider is going to give Joe Blow webmaster physical copies with the name and address of all the models? If you think just putting a 2257 link on your TGP gallery or webpage is gong to be sufficient you are nuts. Why in the hell would they require you to be at your "place of business" during certain hours of the day for inspection if they could just click a link? Does that make sense?

I guess one could take solace in the fact that in the entire existence of 2257 there has never been one prosecution of it or even one inspection of anyone, even under 4+ of Bush. And how many porn videos have been made of the last dozen or so years since 2257 has taken effect?
Comment

Previous template Next

Working...