2257 Article On XXXLaw.net, good read..

no way its definitely the end of the adult internet!

The adult Internet ended when VISA pulled out 5 years ago.

I think those are the current regs, not the new ones.

That's possible Parts seem to be, others seem to cover the grounds of both..

"It imposes no obligations on producers of material that does not include actual, sexually explicit conduct. Thus, there is no obligation under this provision regarding graphic representations of mere erotic nudity or of simulated sex. But it does cover the waterfront of actual, sexual conduct: It includes all varieties of sexual intercourse, vaginal, anal, or oral, straight or gay, and bestiality, masturbation, and sadistic or masochistic abuse. The determination of whether the act applies to images that do not clearly display penetration or the other covered activities is simple: If it was really going on, the Section applies, even if the actual sexual conduct can't be seen in the image, due to obscuring, covering, or any other reason. (There are compelling and eminently practical reasons why that the wise content provider should harvest identity documents and information in every graphic depiction of erotic nudity whether, strictly speaking, required by the Statute, or not, and should maintain them as though covered by the Statute.)"

Thanks for the link.. now we just have to watch it for changes.

Here's a great link: http://my.execpc.com/~xxxlaw/2257Tables5.24.05.htm

The "old" law, is current law too. It has the part that covers sexual content.

This is the article that bothered me....

http://www.avn.com/index.php?Primary...tent_ID=227704

Specifically...

That may prove to be the rub. The Free Speech Coalition (www.freespeechcoalition.com) is working to challenge the regulations on a number of legal grounds, but no one is sure yet if the challenges can be heard in time to prevent arrests or the mass disappearance of ?undocumented? content from the adult Web. ?I?m not even sure an injunction is going to stop the inspections,? Obenberger says, noting that he expects to see inspections and arrests starting June 24, the first day the Justice Department can enforce the revised regulations. ?[An injunction] might stop prosecutions, but it won?t stop the inspections. There is some reason to believe people are going to be arrested and charged as soon as possible.?


Walters adds, ?Hopefully the courts will act before 30 days expire, but those parts of the regulations that don?t specifically say ?June 23, 2005,? can take effect immediately. As a practical matter, any attempt to start enforcement early would make them look overzealous ? sort of a ?damn the torpedoes? attitude.? Still, he?s not entirely sure Justice views that attitude as a bad one.