Quote:
Originally Posted by Balalsubturfyooj
Ok Sands,
You are telling me every webmaster is required by US law as to have each and every adult record on their ages, home address and other misc contact information that is protected under US law(s) ?
If you had read what I have posted instead of trying to troll you would have read that the issue is not really the 2257 but who has the legal right to the private records of the actors... The 2257 law states very clearly that if there is no actual control over the content that such parties are not required to keep the 2257 record. I still think keeping the 2257 record pointing to the actual records is a good thing but that is not what I have been stating... The "actors" records are protected under US law...
When you purchase adult content as to sell... yea of course you will need the actual records of your actors... however the associate programs that most webmasters use have full control over the rights to their content and the associates have no control...
If I'm not mistaken... the paragraph is about 3/4 way down the new 2257...
Am I going to fast for you... should I type this in slower for you ?
.
|
No, dickless, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that every webmaster who publishes sexually explicit content, as definied by 2257, must maintain records. Those records, according to the new 2257 regulations, can be redacted to the point where sensitive information is hidden (such as address), but pertinent information used to identify the person, such as name and driver's license ID (obviously) must remain in the records.
The question of whether or not it's protected under US law is a very fucking big one, and a major point of contention with 2257. It's a big reason why the proposed regulations are very bad: because they violate the privacy of performers who will have copies of their ID's in the hands of thousands of webmasters, and of those mom and pop webmasters will may have to publish their names/addresses on their websites.
Not having control over the content is an issue for content producers, meaning that if a content producer creates a scene, and sells it to a webmaster, and the webmaster publishes it on his own personal site, then the content producer does not need to maintain records of that URL since he does not own that site and it is not in his control. Therefore, using the very basic logic that most 5th graders are capable of, we can surmise that webmasters who publish explicit content on their sites, having full control of this content, must maintain records.
It's not about control over the rights of the content, it's about control OVER WHERE IT IS PUBLISHED. This is the point I keep trying to get you to understand. Obviously if you produce a scene, sell it to a webmaster who uses it on his own paysite, you as the content producer will not be held responsible for keeping records on his usage! It's not about who owns it. It's about who publishes it! Therefore, associates do have control over it since they are publishing on their sites.
Understand that.