|
the argument against 2257 only has a little to do with being burdensome (It's really not). The reason I get ID has less to do with age really than positively identifying a performer that I am making a contract with.
2257 is requiring you to prove that you are taking pictures (or whatever) with someone who is of legal age to do so. Laws typically aren't made to enforce you to prove that you can legally do something. If the model is 18 and you are as well, you are adults and can do what adults do without proving otherwise. It's realistically on the shoulders of enforcement agencies to prove otherwise.
I have no problem with keeping records, it's just good business sense. Realistically, I would rather DOJ inspect tube sites (for US based locales, of which there aren't many) and/or block US access to those that fall outside their jurisdiction and don't wish to provide documentation.
As I said in another thread. Our laws start at our borders. The instance that digital signal on the internet crosses into US territory, we have every right to expect the content contained within it or that it helps to compose, to be subjected to US Law. Just because it's being hosted elsewhere doesn't negate the fact that it's being viewed here. There's more to the law than the hosting locale.
|