a 2257 thread for all affils to read....

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • woj
    <&(©¿©)&>
    • Jul 2002
    • 47880

    #101
    100...........
    Custom Software Development, email: woj#at#wojfun#.#com to discuss details or skype: wojl2000 or gchat: wojfun or telegram: wojl2000
    Affiliate program tools: Hosted Galleries Manager Banner Manager Video Manager
    Wordpress Affiliate Plugin Pic/Movie of the Day Fansign Generator Zip Manager

    Comment

    • jonesy
      Confirmed User
      • Jan 2003
      • 6688

      #102
      fuckin woj-bot
      .
      Shooting Bikini Girls

      Comment

      • pxxx
        First African GFY Member
        • Mar 2004
        • 12114

        #103
        This whole 2257 thing is driving me nuts.

        Comment

        • GatorB
          The Demon & 12clicks
          • Oct 2001
          • 18208

          #104
          Originally posted by ClevelandSlim
          finally... the shit was gettin funny, but this statement by chadglni was just too fuckin ridiculously humerous. because making a website has been technically known as "publishing" you can see a difference here between a site owner sticking a thumb on his page to send traffic to the sponsored site where the actual records keeping is maintained. well, what if they change "publish" to "build" it's still the same fuckin thing... you can build a webpage AND just like a store owner can build his store. then placing the magazines inside on a rack would classify him as a secondary producer.

          the fact remains, as long as the statute reads the way it does, it can go either way. the free speech challenges need to include this, and the many other sections that can be interpreted too many different ways to be clarified.

          So I guess what we need is a way to "distribute" porn over the web without "publishing" it. Any ideas?

          Comment

          • Oberon
            Confirmed User
            • Jul 2003
            • 190

            #105
            Originally posted by GatorB
            So I guess what we need is a way to "distribute" porn over the web without "publishing" it. Any ideas?
            Mail-order. Send me money, I'll mail you your HARDCORE CONTENT RIGHT NOW.

            Comment

            • GatorB
              The Demon & 12clicks
              • Oct 2001
              • 18208

              #106
              Originally posted by Oberon
              Mail-order. Send me money, I'll mail you your HARDCORE CONTENT RIGHT NOW.
              A) I said OVER THE WEB

              B) Mail order can get you into trouble especially if you are mailing to places like Utah or Alabama.

              Comment

              • Oberon
                Confirmed User
                • Jul 2003
                • 190

                #107
                Originally posted by GatorB
                A) I said OVER THE WEB

                B) Mail order can get you into trouble especially if you are mailing to places like Utah or Alabama.
                Hey, I made the offer online....

                Comment

                • Redrob
                  Confirmed User
                  • Oct 2004
                  • 4791

                  #108
                  If YOU cause an explicit image to be published on YOUR website, you are a secondary producer......TGPs, Banners, direct linking, deep linking, DVD Covers, etc...... all are included.

                  Comment

                  • Kevin2
                    Confirmed User
                    • May 2003
                    • 1429

                    #109
                    Your host is the distributor the same as the adult store is the distributor.

                    Webmasters Trade Traffic!!!

                    Comment

                    • nikad
                      Confirmed User
                      • Jan 2004
                      • 2579

                      #110
                      no, hosting providers are the equivalent to paper providers, they are not responsible.
                      Can't you see that the main problem is going to be for content producers and paysite owners??? Even if we are all " secondary producers" the only shit we should do to be compliant isi to have a copy of the records form the sponsors we are promoting and a fucking link on the homepage of the site, what is so difficult to understand?

                      The Filthy Few

                      [email protected]

                      Comment

                      • Kevin2
                        Confirmed User
                        • May 2003
                        • 1429

                        #111
                        Originally posted by nikad
                        no, hosting providers are the equivalent to paper providers, they are not responsible.
                        Can't you see that the main problem is going to be for content producers and paysite owners??? Even if we are all " secondary producers" the only shit we should do to be compliant isi to have a copy of the records form the sponsors we are promoting and a fucking link on the homepage of the site, what is so difficult to understand?
                        I know the hosting providers are not responsible. People in this thread are saying that affil's are like adult stores, they (the affil's) are merely distrubutors but I say the host is the distributor not the affil. Affil's are publishers.

                        Webmasters Trade Traffic!!!

                        Comment

                        • nikad
                          Confirmed User
                          • Jan 2004
                          • 2579

                          #112
                          Wrong words concept ok

                          I understand and you are right, but we have to use the right words in order to avoid confusion.
                          For the law webmasters are secondary producers, because they use the internet as media of showing the images, doesn't matter if it is a picture, a video, a paysite, freesite, cj, tgp, blog, banner, peer to peer system, download system, dialer system. The only exception are cartoons and drawings.
                          nik

                          The Filthy Few

                          [email protected]

                          Comment

                          • RawAlex
                            So Fucking Banned
                            • Oct 2003
                            • 9465

                            #113
                            Nikad, you are correct. Loki (and many others) are reading the rules incorrectly, and missing the point:


                            If you build a website, and put a porn picture on it, YOU ARE A PUBLISHER! As a result, you are a secondary producer, and all the rules apply to you.

                            If you buy content from a content company, then you have entered into an agreement to produce that content (you bought the rights) therefore you are a secondary producer and the rules apply to you.

                            If you edit video, and the video contains sexually explicit material, then you have entered into a commercial arrangment to produce the material, then you are a secondary producer and the rules likely apply to you (I am waiting for a real legal opinion on this) - and it might apply to camera people, boom operators, and other people involved in the production of adult material.

                            If you provide text links to porn on another server, no problems.

                            If you provide a thumb link to another website, you need documents for the image in the thumb - even if you are hot linking the thumb from another server or using iframe - you are the one that caused it to be published on your domain.

                            Got a porn picture on your domain? It's your job.

                            We are not distributors. We are publishers. That's life.

                            Alex

                            Comment

                            • nikad
                              Confirmed User
                              • Jan 2004
                              • 2579

                              #114
                              If there are still doubts

                              We are not distributors. We are publishers.
                              We are not distributors. We are publishers.
                              We are not distributors. We are publishers.
                              We are not distributors. We are publishers.
                              We are not distributors. We are publishers.
                              We are not distributors. We are publishers.
                              We are not distributors. We are publishers.
                              We are not distributors. We are publishers.
                              We are not distributors. We are publishers.
                              We are not distributors. We are publishers.

                              The Filthy Few

                              [email protected]

                              Comment

                              • Redrob
                                Confirmed User
                                • Oct 2004
                                • 4791

                                #115
                                We are not men...
                                We are Devo....

                                Comment

                                • baddog
                                  So Fucking Banned
                                  • Apr 2001
                                  • 107089

                                  #116
                                  Loki - I only hope that you didn't make a blog entry suggesting this theory

                                  Comment

                                  • Kevin2
                                    Confirmed User
                                    • May 2003
                                    • 1429

                                    #117
                                    Originally posted by nikad
                                    We are not distributors. We are publishers.
                                    We are not distributors. We are publishers.
                                    We are not distributors. We are publishers.
                                    We are not distributors. We are publishers.
                                    We are not distributors. We are publishers.
                                    We are not distributors. We are publishers.
                                    We are not distributors. We are publishers.
                                    We are not distributors. We are publishers.
                                    We are not distributors. We are publishers.
                                    We are not distributors. We are publishers.
                                    Hit me up 146156431? I want to ask about your hosting prices?

                                    Webmasters Trade Traffic!!!

                                    Comment

                                    • mikeyddddd
                                      Viva la vulva!
                                      • Mar 2003
                                      • 16557

                                      #118
                                      Originally posted by vdc-Loki
                                      First I hate to have to add yet another 2257 thread to the growing pile but I've looked over alot of them and some ppl are ONLY quoting part of a VERY important statement, and in doing so I'm sure alot of u.s. ppl are freaking the fuck out....

                                      Here is the statement as it pertains to secondary producers (READ IT ALL!)

                                      (2) A secondary producer is any person who produces, assembles,
                                      manufactures, publishes, duplicates, reproduces, or reissues a book,
                                      magazine, periodical, film, videotape, digitally- or computer-
                                      manipulated image, picture, or other matter intended for commercial
                                      distribution that contains a visual depiction of an actual human being
                                      engaged in actual sexually explicit conduct, or who inserts on a
                                      computer site or service a digital image of, or otherwise manages the
                                      sexually explicit content of a computer site or service that contains a
                                      visual depiction of an actual human being engaged in actual sexually
                                      explicit conduct, including any person who enters into a contract,
                                      agreement, or conspiracy to do any of the foregoing.
                                      (3) The same person may be both a primary and a secondary producer.
                                      (4) Producer does not include persons whose activities relating to
                                      the visual depiction of actual sexually explicit conduct are limited to
                                      the following:

                                      (i) Photo or film processing, including digitization of previously
                                      existing visual depictions, as part of a commercial enterprise, with no
                                      other commercial interest in the sexually explicit material, printing,
                                      and video duplicators;
                                      (ii) Mere distribution; AFFILS
                                      (iii) Any activity, other than those activities identified in
                                      paragraphs (c) (1) and (2) of this section, that does not involve the
                                      hiring, contracting for, managing, or otherwise arranging for the
                                      participation of the depicted performers;
                                      AFFILS

                                      In short:

                                      if you ONLY Distro it, OR designed website with it you are safe from the extensive record keeping,

                                      Also I read & re-read the whole mess a few times, and though it does NOT say that "It would be acceptable for affils to just have a link to the sponsors 2257 page" with the above statement about the actual deff of a 2ndry producer affils and webdesigners DO NOT FALL UNDER THE SECONDARY PRODUCER CATAGORY.

                                      So to affils "The sky is NOT falling" but we as producers and sponsors have to do alot more work

                                      -Loki-
                                      Upon first reading it I interpreted it the same way.

                                      But, if you have a website you are a publisher and if that website has images as described you are subject to 2257 as per paragraph (2).

                                      So, this does not exclude you because you are already considered a publisher:

                                      [B] (iii) Any activity, other than those activities identified in
                                      paragraphs (c) (1) and (2) of this section

                                      Comment

                                      • nikad
                                        Confirmed User
                                        • Jan 2004
                                        • 2579

                                        #119
                                        Originally posted by Kevin2
                                        Hit me up 146156431? I want to ask about your hosting prices?
                                        hitting you up

                                        The Filthy Few

                                        [email protected]

                                        Comment

                                        • Fuckin Bill
                                          Confirmed User
                                          • Feb 2003
                                          • 1020

                                          #120
                                          Originally posted by ClevelandSlim
                                          finally... the shit was gettin funny, but this statement by chadglni was just too fuckin ridiculously humerous. because making a website has been technically known as "publishing" you can see a difference here between a site owner sticking a thumb on his page to send traffic to the sponsored site where the actual records keeping is maintained. well, what if they change "publish" to "build" it's still the same fuckin thing... you can build a webpage AND just like a store owner can build his store. then placing the magazines inside on a rack would classify him as a secondary producer.

                                          the fact remains, as long as the statute reads the way it does, it can go either way. the free speech challenges need to include this, and the many other sections that can be interpreted too many different ways to be clarified.
                                          No...It can't go either way. It says very clearly, if you put images on a web site, you are a secondary producer. There's no fucking interpretion of anything. How can so many people keep skipping that part? That part was the main, if not the only, reason for the ammendment to the law.

                                          The bottom line is, you don't matter. Not your interpretation, or anyone else's means a fucking thing. The only interpreation that matters is the view of the people writing and enforcing the law. And believe me, you walk into a court and spout that bullshit, they'll show you exactly how they interpret it.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...