Attention - BIZ Thread: 2257 - what's the latest ruling on livecams?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • MaDalton
    I am Amazing Content!
    • Feb 2004
    • 39861

    #1

    Attention - BIZ Thread: 2257 - what's the latest ruling on livecams?

    i'm not a live cam specialist, anyone knows what someone would need to do to comply with 2257 regarding live cams? do sessions need to be recorded and archieved?

    thanks!
    AmazingContent.com - providing only the best content and service since 2003
    Monetize your content on Veegaz.com - one of Germanies largest VOD sites
    Got German traffic? We convert it into money for you!
    Email: oltecconsult [at] gmail [dot] com
  • CarlosTheGaucho
    Confirmed User
    • Oct 2005
    • 9570

    #2
    Well the only thing I can contribute is that recording live shows was never required, just model release and more importantly ID, but that's like three years ago..
    Need hosting, cloud, CDN or solutions for your AI? Go faster while saving with The Last Host you'll ever need!| Double Impact PR | Telegram carl_boro | Read My Educational Series | Read my Adult Biz Chronicles|

    Comment

    • CarlosTheGaucho
      Confirmed User
      • Oct 2005
      • 9570

      #3
      bump would be also interested to know although we record everything
      Need hosting, cloud, CDN or solutions for your AI? Go faster while saving with The Last Host you'll ever need!| Double Impact PR | Telegram carl_boro | Read My Educational Series | Read my Adult Biz Chronicles|

      Comment

      • O MARINA
        I'm clockin' ya, Versace shade watchin' ya
        • Mar 2003
        • 13794

        #4
        Originally posted by MaDalton
        i'm not a live cam specialist, anyone knows what someone would need to do to comply with 2257 regarding live cams? do sessions need to be recorded and archieved?

        thanks!


        bumpshizzle

        Comment

        • MaDalton
          I am Amazing Content!
          • Feb 2004
          • 39861

          #5
          no one knows? or no one cares?
          AmazingContent.com - providing only the best content and service since 2003
          Monetize your content on Veegaz.com - one of Germanies largest VOD sites
          Got German traffic? We convert it into money for you!
          Email: oltecconsult [at] gmail [dot] com

          Comment

          • The Duck
            Adult Content Provider
            • May 2005
            • 18243

            #6
            I am also interested in this info.
            Skype Horusmaia
            ICQ 41555245
            Email [email protected]

            Comment

            • Quentin
              Confirmed User
              • Dec 2002
              • 1280

              #7
              While it might not seem so on its face, this is an extremely complicated question.

              In FSC v. Gonzales (which as I understand it has been administratively closed but is very likely to pick up again at some point), the judge did give some guidance as to what he felt was a reasonable interpretation of the statute and the corresponding regulations with respect to live feeds, but I don't believe that guidance has any value as precedent or case law, because the case was paused/administratively closed before being fully adjudicated.

              Bottom line: this is a question for a qualified attorney with relevant expertise. There will likely be disagreement even among attorneys who match that description, because until a case that is on-point is fully adjudicated, all of this is open to interpretation, and interpretations will vary, even among experts.

              Or, as attorney JD Obenberger put it on his site XXXLaw.net:

              "Explicit streaming video and live feeds are almost certainly among the kinds of material generically described as "other matter" in the Statute. Therefore, the producer of explicit feeds must in every respect comply with the provisions of Section 2257. Special practical difficulties arise that are distinctive to live feeds with respect to a location for the mandated disclosure statement and for the name or number of the work. The information acquisition and record keeping must go on continuously. Because an approved method of compliance is described neither in the Statute nor in either the existing nor proposed Regulations, the scheme of compliance for those who produce such feeds should be designed in close consultation with a lawyer and a technical expert, and provide for notice all the way through to the destination subscriber."

              - Q.
              Q. Boyer

              Comment

              • Abbie
                Confirmed User
                • Aug 2005
                • 1004

                #8
                Having worked in this cam business for too long, I highly recommend you speak with Michael from http://AdultBizLaw.com he's been my savior in exactly this aspect of the cam business

                Comment

                • MaDalton
                  I am Amazing Content!
                  • Feb 2004
                  • 39861

                  #9
                  Originally posted by Quentin
                  While it might not seem so on its face, this is an extremely complicated question.

                  In FSC v. Gonzales (which as I understand it has been administratively closed but is very likely to pick up again at some point), the judge did give some guidance as to what he felt was a reasonable interpretation of the statute and the corresponding regulations with respect to live feeds, but I don't believe that guidance has any value as precedent or case law, because the case was paused/administratively closed before being fully adjudicated.

                  Bottom line: this is a question for a qualified attorney with relevant expertise. There will likely be disagreement even among attorneys who match that description, because until a case that is on-point is fully adjudicated, all of this is open to interpretation, and interpretations will vary, even among experts.

                  Or, as attorney JD Obenberger put it on his site XXXLaw.net:

                  "Explicit streaming video and live feeds are almost certainly among the kinds of material generically described as "other matter" in the Statute. Therefore, the producer of explicit feeds must in every respect comply with the provisions of Section 2257. Special practical difficulties arise that are distinctive to live feeds with respect to a location for the mandated disclosure statement and for the name or number of the work. The information acquisition and record keeping must go on continuously. Because an approved method of compliance is described neither in the Statute nor in either the existing nor proposed Regulations, the scheme of compliance for those who produce such feeds should be designed in close consultation with a lawyer and a technical expert, and provide for notice all the way through to the destination subscriber."

                  - Q.

                  thanks quentin, that's a lot of words for saying nothing - lol

                  lawyers... sigh...
                  AmazingContent.com - providing only the best content and service since 2003
                  Monetize your content on Veegaz.com - one of Germanies largest VOD sites
                  Got German traffic? We convert it into money for you!
                  Email: oltecconsult [at] gmail [dot] com

                  Comment

                  • pr0
                    rockin tha trailerpark
                    • May 2001
                    • 23088

                    #10
                    i hate when people spend 5k to ask a lawyer a question

                    and then tell other people to spend 5k to ask the same one

                    attorney client privilege is doesn't mean you can't be like "YOUR FINE" or "YOUR SCREWED" i mean come on...give us a taste!
                    __________
                    Loadedca$h - get sum! - Revengebucks - mmm rebills! - webair (gotz sErVrz)

                    Comment

                    • After Shock Media
                      It's coming look busy
                      • Mar 2001
                      • 35299

                      #11
                      Originally posted by pr0
                      i hate when people spend 5k to ask a lawyer a question

                      and then tell other people to spend 5k to ask the same one

                      attorney client privilege is doesn't mean you can't be like "YOUR FINE" or "YOUR SCREWED" i mean come on...give us a taste!
                      Pr0 truth be told.
                      Most people never speak to any lawyers even when they say they better ask one.
                      The lawyers themselves are typically just giving opinions when they are asked anything about 2257 laws, go research how many have tried a 2257 case.
                      The same lawyers will most often give different advice or opinions than another industry lawyer will.

                      [email protected] ICQ:135982156 AIM: Aftershockmed1a MSN: [email protected]

                      Comment

                      • pornlaw
                        Confirmed User
                        • Feb 2007
                        • 1902

                        #12
                        Originally posted by After Shock Media
                        Pr0 truth be told.
                        Most people never speak to any lawyers even when they say they better ask one.
                        The lawyers themselves are typically just giving opinions when they are asked anything about 2257 laws, go research how many have tried a 2257 case.
                        The same lawyers will most often give different advice or opinions than another industry lawyer will.
                        Sad but true...

                        Well here's my opinion.... having never tried a 2257. In fact, I believe there has been only 2 recent cases involving 2257 and both were plea bargained out. The most recent here in LA, the govt dropped all charges in regards to 2257 violations.

                        I tell cam site operators to record, index, log and store every stream and feed. JD actually said the same thing just in a more round about manner.

                        The more interesting question is the use of foreign cam girls by US cam companies.

                        Right now we are still awaiting the new regs and I suspect they will discuss the issues presented by cam sites. Until then and until a cam site is prosecuted no one can give a definitive answer.
                        Michael

                        www.AdultBizLaw.com

                        Comment

                        • MaDalton
                          I am Amazing Content!
                          • Feb 2004
                          • 39861

                          #13
                          Originally posted by pornlaw
                          Sad but true...

                          Well here's my opinion.... having never tried a 2257. In fact, I believe there has been only 2 recent cases involving 2257 and both were plea bargained out. The most recent here in LA, the govt dropped all charges in regards to 2257 violations.

                          I tell cam site operators to record, index, log and store every stream and feed. JD actually said the same thing just in a more round about manner.

                          The more interesting question is the use of foreign cam girls by US cam companies.

                          Right now we are still awaiting the new regs and I suspect they will discuss the issues presented by cam sites. Until then and until a cam site is prosecuted no one can give a definitive answer.
                          thank you. do streamray or cams (just examples) record all streams that are sent by private cam girls? i have difficulties believing that.

                          i guess the good thing is that even if this would be required, no one will care till the first one gets sued. because there's no content that you will need to throw away because of missing docs
                          AmazingContent.com - providing only the best content and service since 2003
                          Monetize your content on Veegaz.com - one of Germanies largest VOD sites
                          Got German traffic? We convert it into money for you!
                          Email: oltecconsult [at] gmail [dot] com

                          Comment

                          • l0lf4c3
                            Confirmed User
                            • Feb 2008
                            • 574

                            #14
                            I believe you do not need to record every stream, you only need to monitor them and make sure that nothing happens what is against the regulations or the websites rules.

                            Since you can not control live content, you need to make sure that no unregistered person appears on the feeds. If you get caught with a screenshot or recorded session where the persons are not registered, you'll be sorry. Thats why live cam sites need 24/7 control.

                            Governmental identificational documents are required, some sort of a signed agreement is required as well. I suggest to try registering a model account somewhere and check the agreement they require. You'll see what documents are needed while registering.

                            Also you should check the model rules on cam sites (usually a modell account is required to reach them) , this way you can put the actual requirements/regulations together for live content.

                            Cheers

                            Comment

                            • John.
                              Confirmed User
                              • Jul 2007
                              • 2264

                              #15
                              Interesting topic.
                              Sig too old.

                              Comment

                              • Jim_Gunn
                                Confirmed User
                                • Feb 2003
                                • 5702

                                #16
                                Every cam company and individual cam girl would be wise to record all their cam shows anyway for the archives, never mind for 2257. Why throw away good content that can possibly be viewed again? If I had any involvement with cam girls, I would make sure that we use actual video cameras with a mini-DV tape inside as webcams to make sure that the footage gets archived for future use.

                                Comment

                                • Robbie
                                  Leaner, Meaner, Faster
                                  • Aug 2002
                                  • 20960

                                  #17
                                  Originally posted by MaDalton
                                  thank you. do streamray or cams (just examples) record all streams that are sent by private cam girls? i have difficulties believing that.

                                  i guess the good thing is that even if this would be required, no one will care till the first one gets sued. because there's no content that you will need to throw away because of missing docs
                                  I've never been inside the members area of any of the big cam sites...but I'm pretty sure that they record all the shows automatically and use them as "archives" for when that model is off-air. At least that would seem to be the smart thing to do. The whole "2257" or as we used to call it a "model release" seems so stupid sometimes that it's enough to drive you crazy. Common sense seems to say that if it's a solo girl all by herself then she should be able to provide ONE id and model release. But I'll bet if the govt. got all stupid about it (and we know they will)...then they will end up wanting a seperate model release, copy of id, and date of production and "name" of production for every single cam show that girl does. It's just like everything else the govt. tries to do...a mess.
                                  Last edited by Robbie; 06-04-2008, 08:43 AM.
                                  -Robbie
                                  ClaudiaMarie.Com

                                  Comment

                                  • MaDalton
                                    I am Amazing Content!
                                    • Feb 2004
                                    • 39861

                                    #18
                                    Originally posted by Jim_Gunn
                                    Every cam company and individual cam girl would be wise to record all their cam shows anyway for the archives, never mind for 2257. Why throw away good content that can possibly be viewed again? If I had any involvement with cam girls, I would make sure that we use actual video cameras with a mini-DV tape inside as webcams to make sure that the footage gets archived for future use.
                                    in a studio maybe, but you really want the girls at home to change tapes during cam session? and who will capture the tons of tapes? i don't see that happening, if something gets recorded then directly on the streaming server i'd say
                                    AmazingContent.com - providing only the best content and service since 2003
                                    Monetize your content on Veegaz.com - one of Germanies largest VOD sites
                                    Got German traffic? We convert it into money for you!
                                    Email: oltecconsult [at] gmail [dot] com

                                    Comment

                                    • Jim_Gunn
                                      Confirmed User
                                      • Feb 2003
                                      • 5702

                                      #19
                                      Originally posted by MaDalton
                                      in a studio maybe, but you really want the girls at home to change tapes during cam session? and who will capture the tons of tapes? i don't see that happening, if something gets recorded then directly on the streaming server i'd say
                                      In any studio I ran for certain this would happen. Why throw away free content? If the girls at home were smart they would be doing it themselves to create their own archives, but I suppose if there are dozens or hundreds of models working from home it would be cumbersome to organize that. In that case an automated setup to record off the server as you suggest could work.

                                      Comment

                                      Working...