Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Balalsubturfyooj
As I have said the 4472 does not void the 2257 nor does it rewrite the term secondary producer.
I have read through the required laws and I can not understand how sarettah can be so dense !
.
|
And I don't understand why someone as stupid as you can manage to breath.
4472 SEC. 502. OTHER RECORD KEEPING REQUIREMENTS.
(a) In General- Section 2257 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by inserting after `videotape,' the following: `digital image, digitally- or computer-manipulated image of an actual human being, picture,';
(2) in subsection (e)(1), by adding at the end the following: `In this paragraph, the term `copy' includes every page of a website on which matter described in subsection (a) appears.';
etc etc etc.. I posted the entire amended version of 2257 earlier.
4472
AMENDS 2257, it does not void it, it makes it stronger.
and above I posted the exact phrasing that addresses producers and who they are.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by me
`(iii) inserting on a computer site or service a digital image of, or otherwise managing the sexually explicit content, of a computer site or service that contains a visual depiction of, sexually explicit conduct; and
|
You are largely quoting caselaw that is made mute by the changes to 2257 that are incorporated in 4472
Now, go back and redo your research, read 4472 sections 502 and 503 and then tell me about 2257. Full text of 4472 is here
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill...bill=h109-4472
Idiots like you are dangerous because you try to sound like you know what the fuck you are talking about when you do not.
Glamgirls.. It is simple. If you are going to put explicit pictures on a website in the US then get a fucking lawyer.
.