Quote:
Originally Posted by geedub
You should quit porn and become a comedian because your opinions are hilarious!
|
Except for the fact that site owners (all site owners) would then have to have records of the scenes they use, therefor pirate sites would not exist on US servers or any country the feds wanted to swing their big dick in.
If 2257 would have been written better AND enforced, like I said, we would not be in the situation we are in right now were everyone has to suck pirate cock to get poor converting traffic. And that is not an opinion, it is a fact. And it is not hilarious. It is a solution to a problem that plagues us all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PornoMonster
2257 is to protect Children, not Webmasters or Producers.
LOL
|
No shit?
Good thing the tubes have warning pages and are 2257 compliant, to protect the kids from exposing them from pornography and to make sure they don't publish scenes that involve minors. 2257 is working out like a dream for them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by topnotch, standup guy
QUESTION: By the mere act of removing watermarks, in and of itself, do tube site owners, in your opinion, forfeit their "user uploaded" status and thereby their exemption from 2257 regulations?
.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Obenberger
Of course.
But they can be counted on to deny that they do that, asserting that it was uploaded in that condition.
Just by selecting what uploads see the light of day is enough to "otherwise manage the sexually explicit content" and any kind of selection process at all that delays the appearance of uploads for review is enough to call what they do insertion on a web page. There are arguments they can make about CDA and copyright, but I think that, given what the selection process actually appears to be, in breaking the hearts of all those male masturbators whose submissions are routinely deleted, the tubemasters lose and face prison time if 2257 survives.
|
Every tube has to manually approve every video that is loaded to it. Every single scene gets looked at and manually added or denied. The bigger tubes usually delete those with watermarks on them. It boggles my mind how anyone could even try to deny they are not cherry picking content, as that is how the scripts function. Each and every scene has to be added, queued, and published. It's a multi-step process. Every one of them is completely guilty, with many of them outsourcing uploading to the Philippines.
I honestly don't understand how some of the industry lawyers have not eaten these sites alive yet. Or are you all on Manwin's payroll?
Personally, I have zero faith in 2257 but I hope they bring the hammer down harder than any hammer has every dropped before. It's time the porn industry got its diaper changed and the shit removed.