90% of People In This Industry Will Ignore 2257 - GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

X

woj

<&(©¿©)&>

Join Date: Jul 2002

Posts: 47880
Share

Post
#51

06-04-2005, 08:11 PM

50....,...,..

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
GatorB

The Demon & 12clicks

Join Date: Oct 2001

Posts: 18208
Share

Post
#52

06-04-2005, 08:11 PM

Originally posted by dopeman

but that just means we're both screwed.

It 's simple if you sponsor give you content you ask for the 2257 info. iof they say no don't use that content, but also send them a reminder that they are in fact violating 2257 and there you COULD report them.
Comment
directfiesta

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: Oct 2002

Posts: 30230
Share

Post
#53

06-04-2005, 08:12 PM

Originally posted by GatorB

Well if they still allow the use of the their content using those models they HAVE to give you the docs if you ask for them. If they don't THEY can get busted for violating 2257.

Come on... The publisher is responsible ... of publishing without docs.

I know that Asspimple is stoopid ... As he says, it is a FACT !

But I can't figure out how he can breathe or type , at the same time ....
Comment
GatorB

The Demon & 12clicks

Join Date: Oct 2001

Posts: 18208
Share

Post
#54

06-04-2005, 08:17 PM

Originally posted by directfiesta

Sponsor is NOT responsible of the affiliate in NO way.

Scenario 2: Sponsor sends pics, movies but NO documentation. Affiliate should not publish these pictures or movies, otherwise he is AGAIN responsible.

if affiliate ASKS for documentation, but sponsors refuses sponsor IS in trouble.

Three commenters commented that the record-shifting requirements
under Sec. Sec. 75.2(a) and (b) are impermissibly burdensome.
According to the commenters, primary producers would resist turning
over records that contain trade secrets, such as the identities of
performers. The Department declines to adopt these comments. The D.C.
Circuit Court clearly held in American Library Ass'n v. Reno that the
record-keeping requirements were not unconstitutionally burdensome. Any
primary producer who fails to release the records to a secondary
producer is simply in violation of the regulations and may not use the
excuse that the records contain alleged trade secrets to avoid
compliance.
Comment
FleshJoe2005

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jan 2005

Posts: 287
Share

Post
#55

06-04-2005, 08:20 PM

Originally posted by directfiesta

Sponsor is NOT responsible of the affiliate in NO way.

Scenario 1: Sponsor sends pics, movies and documents. Affiliate doesn't comply to 2257 by throwing out the documentation. AFFILIATE's problem.

Scenario 2: Sponsor sends pics, movies but NO documentation. Affiliate should not publish these pictures or movies, otherwise he is AGAIN responsible.

Thank you thats exactly what I meant.

Why do I have a strong feeling that all sponsors are laughing behind their hand and are going to rely exclusively on overseas affiliates? Hmm... Is there ANYTHING in the regs that says the sponsor is in violation if they provide content thats not 2257 compliant?

EDIT: See reply #54 it answers my question.

Last edited by FleshJoe2005; 06-04-2005, 08:21 PM.

I convert male sextoy traffic at ~1:30!!!
Send me your traffic and we'll split 50-50.
ICQ: 325-310-821
Comment
dopeman

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jan 2005

Posts: 294
Share

Post
#56

06-04-2005, 08:20 PM

Originally posted by GatorB

It 's simple if you sponsor give you content you ask for the 2257 info. iof they say no don't use that content, but also send them a reminder that they are in fact violating 2257 and there you COULD report them.

i've asked them, and none of have given me a single document. so i decided to just say screw it, and take down all pics, videos and thumbs including old galleries i have posted. as now - under the new regulations - secondary producers (TGP OPERATORS AND GALLERY SUBMITTERS) have to have hardcopy ID documentation of every model they have published. it's simply not logistically possible for me to remain compliant. but i still don't know if taking everything down last week squares me away. they say the new regs don't go into effect until june 23rd. under the previous regs, i did not have to have all the docs. i mean they can't retroactively punish someone for new regulations, right?
Comment
FleshJoe2005

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jan 2005

Posts: 287
Share

Post
#57

06-04-2005, 08:23 PM

Originally posted by dopeman

i've asked them, and none of have given me a single document. so i decided to just say screw it, and take down all pics, videos and thumbs including old galleries i have posted. as now - under the new regulations - secondary producers (TGP OPERATORS AND GALLERY SUBMITTERS) have to have hardcopy ID documentation of every model they have published. it's simply not logistically possible for me to remain compliant. but i still don't know if taking everything down last week squares me away. they say the new regs don't go into effect until june 23rd. under the previous regs, i did not have to have all the docs. i mean they can't retroactively punish someone for new regulations, right?

Yes you dont need to worry about what you were doing before June 23. Until that date the old regs hold where you didnt have to have the docs.

I convert male sextoy traffic at ~1:30!!!
Send me your traffic and we'll split 50-50.
ICQ: 325-310-821
Comment
directfiesta

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: Oct 2002

Posts: 30230
Share

Post
#58

06-04-2005, 08:23 PM

Originally posted by GatorB

if affiliate ASKS for documentation, but sponsors refuses sponsor IS in trouble.

Three commenters commented that the record-shifting requirements
under Sec. Sec. 75.2(a) and (b) are impermissibly burdensome.
According to the commenters, primary producers would resist turning
over records that contain trade secrets, such as the identities of
performers. The Department declines to adopt these comments. The D.C.
Circuit Court clearly held in American Library Ass'n v. Reno that the
record-keeping requirements were not unconstitutionally burdensome. Any
primary producer who fails to release the records to a secondary
producer is simply in violation of the regulations and may not use the
excuse that the records contain alleged trade secrets to avoid
compliance.

That's nice ...

So now you will have to get the affoliate to sign in 3 copies a form that he adknowledges that he did receive the info ... otherwise he can blame the PRIMARY PRODUCER which would have no way of proving different ...

Fuck 2257. Canada Host, Canadian Citizen, Euro Billing .

I know that Asspimple is stoopid ... As he says, it is a FACT !

But I can't figure out how he can breathe or type , at the same time ....
Comment
adonthenet

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: Feb 2005

Posts: 16753
Share

Post
#59

06-04-2005, 08:26 PM

I must agree .
Comment
dopeman

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jan 2005

Posts: 294
Share

Post
#60

06-04-2005, 08:28 PM

Originally posted by directfiesta

That's nice ...

So now you will have to get the affoliate to sign in 3 copies a form that he adknowledges that he did receive the info ... otherwise he can blame the PRIMARY PRODUCER which would have no way of proving different ...

Fuck 2257. Canada Host, Canadian Citizen, Euro Billing .

the prosecutor will say 'well you shouldn't have published that thumbnail to that gallery without the documentation'.

you can blame the sponsor all you want, but if you publish a thumbnail, a gallery or a blog or whatever - you need to have the docs in your files ahead of time.
Comment
mardigras

Bon temps!

Join Date: Feb 2003

Posts: 14194
Share

Post
#61

06-04-2005, 09:01 PM

Prisons are big business. Communities that have them fight to keep them. Ask them why.

.
Comment
OG LennyT

Wall Street Pimp

Join Date: Jun 2003

Posts: 14345
Share

Post
#62

06-04-2005, 09:26 PM

Originally posted by FleshJoe2005

Can someone write me a '.htaccess' fix that redirects anything with '.gov' and '.mil'?

Thanks!

Tradeking - my online broker | 4.95 a trade | make real $$
Comment
stev0

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 6801
Share

Post
#63

06-04-2005, 09:28 PM

Wait and see if this law goes into effect at all... then worry about it
Comment
dopeman

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jan 2005

Posts: 294
Share

Post
#64

06-04-2005, 09:30 PM

Originally posted by stev0

Wait and see if this law goes into effect at all... then worry about it

it's a done deal. there's just a 'grace period' until june 23rd for everyone to get their shit together. after that, we'll see how much they enforce it. that's the real question.
Comment

Previous 1 2 template Next

Working...