View Single Post
Old 08-04-2007, 06:55 PM  
crockett
in a van by the river
 
crockett's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 76,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorB View Post
But we all know that the DOJs interpretation is bullshit. Using that logic if I "re-publish" porn from the 70's I would need 2257 docs even though 2257 didn't exist back then. But you can't so the logic is flawed.

The DOJ requirement for secondary producerw is like going to a club/bar whatever and getting carded at the door, then once inside getting carded again by the chick that seats you, then getting carded by your waitress, then having to go up to the bartender and show him your ID too. Personally I think one you're in the door you've proven you're over 21. The people that actually made the porn movie and actually have the original 2257 docs should be the only ones required to keep such information.
Well just so you know that is in fact the case. One of the inspections that was carried out targeted a film that should have been 2257 exempt by age, but was re-released a few years ago.
__________________
In November, you can vote for America's next president or its first dictator.
crockett is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote