GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - View Single Post - New 2257 Laws

tony286 · 07-18-2004, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by scoreman
BVF: 2257 is a record keeping law, and does not have language in the actual law that makes any allowances for models who are clearly 18+. Despite the committee notes listing the reason behind the law being age verification and protection of minors, the actual law itself does not differentiate between a model who clearly looks 18+ (like MILF) from a 18 year old model made to look like she is 14. The bottom line here is the law says if you choose to put naked pictures on the web, you will need model ids.

I also disagree with those who believe that softcore pics and video will be exempt. Sexually explicit imo will be naked pics and penetration will not be a qualifying factor. Ask any mom and dad across the nation if they want their 6 yr old looking at a webpage of a naked girl and they will likely say no, and it will be because to them its sexually explicit.

Here is a plan folks that may work:

The SCORE Group plans to deliver to our affiliates the following:
a) A spreadsheet with all of our models, cross referenced with our FHGs, POTD, banners, buttons, etc. Many of our webmasters use images beyond what is provided through our free content sections of our program, and for that reason we plan to provide a spreadsheet with our entire model database. No easy feat, but its work that has to be done if this law passes as currently written.
b) Included with the spreadsheet will be a folder containing the ids. Our model directory will be cross referenced to where in the folder you can find which particular id.
c) The ids are kept in a two folders. In folder one all of the ids have only the models face and birthdate. The rest is blacked out. These ids will be freely viewable and will provide the webmasters reassurances that the ids are in fact in existence. In folder two is all of the ids unedited, only these ids sit inside of a password protected/encrypted folder.

The webmasters are not provided with the password to view the unedited images. In our opinion that information is only needed in the event of an inspection. In the event the feds come knocking, the package we deliver to our affiliates will contain contact information via multiple phone numbers. When the feds come knocking here is the scenario I see:
a) First the feds have to come on a business day (monday-Friday only 9-6pm I believe). So its not like the feds will come on a Sunday morning and the webmasters will not be able to reach us. I plan to provide cell numbers to quite a few parties here at The SCORE Group (myself being the top most number) so I find it hard to believe we will not be reachable.
b) The webmaster calls and tells me they have Federal Marshalls/FBI agents at their door. I plan to ask to speak with them. Get them on the phone, identify myself (it will probaly help that I am a bar licensed attorney in Florida for this planned discussion I will have with Federal agents). I plan to ask them for their names, badge numbers and for a copy of the search warrant or authorizing documents for the inspection faxed to my office for review. Once I know that its a legitimate search, I will without delay provide the password and the webmaster unzips the untouched ids.

I believe this plan will work for a number of reasons. The law, as written, does not require that the documents be in a non encrypted format. The reading of the law also provides a framework for how the searches will take place. The searches are suppose to be done in a manner that is not disruptive of the workplace and the protocol for the search is that after the search is conducted the Federal agents are suppose to provide to the record keeper a list of the deficiencies in their records. Notice it does not say that upon a missing record not being in possession you immediately go to jail. I believe in a record search, it will be a time consuming thorough process and in my plan the delay will be less than 15-30 minutes tops. The webmaster will be printing the untouched documents out before the Federal agents even probably get through page one of the list of models they would like to see ids on from the master list.

My plan here addresses our two primary concerns, model privacy and protection of confidential proprietary information. Just as Lightspeed does not want to give out Ms Stones' id neither do we want to divulge the names and addresses of our top models. I am also concerned about the liability we would face if one of our models was stalked or worse killed from an id disclosure we provided to an affiliate.

What my plan does not address unfortunately is the colossal mountain of work this plan will take for just us, let alone the affiliates. I feel very badly for the affiliates as I believe the burden of the lionshare of the work this law creates for the adult industry will be borne by the free site marketeers who have thousand and thousand of webpages they have created, many of which they have long lost memory of where exactly they are now.

Thats a great plan. I was thinking they just dont knock on your door. Saying let me see your records because if they havent looked at your site. How would they know if what you are showing them jives with your sites? Will a certain pic they see throw a inspection because just looking at your records they wouldnt know what you had and didnt have.