RawAlex

Actually, the funny part is that you do still need docs, but you just don't know it. You have been mislead - or you are part of a conspiracy to avoid 2257 documents. Another great reason to ask for documents no matter what, because you never know. Did they crop out the couple fucking in the background on the picture?


Boyalley, the point is this: The FBI points at an image on your website, and says "show me the model release for this image on your porn site". You have to either (a) produce a document, or (b) produce proof that it isn't covered. How do you suggest to do that?

The point of splitting hairs is this: nobody has clearly defined at what level they are checking the "porny-ness" of an image or video. If a series of pictures is taken and published together, and some are nude and some are not, are all of them porn? After all, they are part of the same work.

Now, what if still images are extracted from a video, which starts dressed and ends up in a gangbang... do the image captures of the models with their clothes on need documents? What happens if still images were shot while a video camera was running? Are those images somehow different from stills extracted from a video? After all, they are all part of the same work, and that work is pornographic in nature, subject to 2257 requirements.

All I am saying is that your lawyer's opinion is interesting, but without some of the basic terms more clearly defined, it is just speculation.

I am waiting to see what the lawyers closest to the subject have to say at the point that a ruling is made and things are put in place. Until then, this is very speculative and lacking in information.