I have posted this a 1000s times it seems, but everybody seems to ignore it. 2257 applies to only actual sexually explicit images. The definition of sexually explicit is spelled out in 2256:
Quote:
''sexually explicit conduct'' means actual or simulated -
1. (A)
sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex;
(B)
bestiality;
(C)
masturbation;
(D)
sadistic or masochistic abuse; or
(E)
lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person;
|
Then you have to hop back to 2257 which says only actual and to leave off part E. Granted there is a little wiggle room. For example if you have a shot of a gal with her legs open and her hand is on her cooch is she masturbating or covering up? That would be a jury question. The simple solution is to be very careful and don?t use material where the hand is near the cooch. For programs like Lightspeed the easy solution is to not provide affiliates with sexually explicit content. IMO 90% of their content isn?t sexually explicit so it is just a matter of keeping that other 10% away form affiliates.
And Yes, I agree this is hideous. IMO the industry shouldn?t be so passive. They should have a lawsuit ready the day this thing becomes effective and ask for an immediate injunction to keep this from being enforced until the legal issues surrounding this can be sorted out. But alas the industry will sit on its ass and wait for people to be arrested.