I'M BEHIND THE NEW 2257 BILL why ? - GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

X

Fabien

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jul 2003

Posts: 4789
Share

Post
#1

I'M BEHIND THE NEW 2257 BILL why ?

08-04-2004, 01:21 PM

I'M BEHIND THE NEW 2257 BILL

1) No more freebies (movies killed the shit)
2) Text only sites (except sponsors of course)
3) Make more cash $$$$ LIKE WE FUCKING USED TOO
Tags: None
Jace

FBOP Class Of 2013

Join Date: Jan 2004

Posts: 35562
Share

Post
#2

08-04-2004, 01:35 PM

the more i thought about it, the more I am for it too
i have chatted with some of the larger dudes in the biz, and they are all for it too

weed the little free fuckers out, and like said, make us more money!
Comment
gleem

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jun 2001

Posts: 5593
Share

Post
#3

08-04-2004, 01:38 PM

your kidding? read this very carefully

it only applies to US webmasters!!!

Contact me: \\// E: webmaster /at/ unprofessional.com
Comment
hova

Traffillionaire

Join Date: Jan 2002

Posts: 22430
Share

Post
#4

08-04-2004, 01:39 PM

Im for it..........it could be a positive thing (but Im dutch, so.........)

http://traffillions.com/

Sign up and get lifetime revshare on your traffic
Comment
Lycanthrope

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jan 2004

Posts: 4517
Share

Post
#5

08-04-2004, 01:39 PM

Another way to look at though, and this is bad, is that more and more tgps, er fake tgps, will be popping up, further saturating the already over saturated freehosted gallery resources.
Comment
freeadultcontent

Confirmed User

Join Date: Oct 2002

Posts: 9976
Share

Post
#6

08-04-2004, 01:48 PM

Less affiliates, more in house employee's. If I was just a standard TGP or sponsor promoting webmaster I would be concerned.

Exclusive Ethnic & Microniche Sites
Comment
Fabien

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jul 2003

Posts: 4789
Share

Post
#7

08-04-2004, 02:17 PM

Got a point there
Comment
EviLGuY

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Apr 2003

Posts: 12745
Share

Post
#8

08-04-2004, 02:58 PM

Originally posted by Fabien
I'M BEHIND THE NEW 2257 BILL

1) No more freebies (movies killed the shit)
2) Text only sites (except sponsors of course)
3) Make more cash $$$$ LIKE WE FUCKING USED TOO

Sounds good in theory.. it all depends how much enforcement the new law gets. A law that isn't enforced does nothing...
Comment
Sarah_Jayne

Now with more Jayne

Join Date: Dec 2002

Posts: 40077
Share

Post
#9

08-04-2004, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by gleem
your kidding? read this very carefully

it only applies to US webmasters!!!

I still say that all it takes is sponors to put compliance in their TOS to make is so that even those of us outside of the US have to do it if we want to play the affiliate game.
Comment
CamChicks

Confirmed User

Join Date: Sep 2003

Posts: 1552
Share

Post
#10

08-04-2004, 03:06 PM

Originally posted by Fabien
I'M BEHIND THE NEW 2257 BILL

1) No more freebies (movies killed the shit)
2) Text only sites (except sponsors of course)
3) Make more cash $$$$ LIKE WE FUCKING USED TOO

Retarded reasoning.

Originally posted by gleem
your kidding? read this very carefully

it only applies to US webmasters!!!

This will just move money out of the US economy.
US webmasters lose. Offshore webmasters win.
Surfers won't notice.
There will still be just as much free porn on the internet.

camchicks.com
Comment
Dirty Dane

Sick Fuck

Join Date: Feb 2004

Posts: 9491
Share

Post
#11

08-04-2004, 03:26 PM

Originally posted by sarah_webinc
I still say that all it takes is sponors to put compliance in their TOS to make is so that even those of us outside of the US have to do it if we want to play the affiliate game.

Will not work at all...
Why? Because if a european affiliate does that, he/she will break european laws about data protection. In some webmaster programs it says things like "not violate local laws". So what you gonna do about that? Tell people to ignore our local laws?

It's the new 2257 that is stupid. Not the amount or size of affiliates.
Start fight your lawmakers, not bend over. You will only shoot yourself in the foot, and that is exactly what your lawmakers want!
Comment
pxxx

First African GFY Member

Join Date: Mar 2004

Posts: 12114
Share

Post
#12

08-04-2004, 03:29 PM

I have just 2 words to this thread......

Greed Kills!
Comment
iwantchixx

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: Oct 2002

Posts: 12860
Share

Post
#13

08-04-2004, 03:32 PM

Originally posted by gleem
your kidding? read this very carefully

it only applies to US webmasters!!!

not a US webmaster? Not compliant? Don't step foot on American soil again then! Otherwise, call ahead and get a custom orange jump suit taylor made to your body size as well as custom handcuffs. You'll need somethign comphy for where you're going
Comment
jonesy

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jan 2003

Posts: 6688
Share

Post
#14

08-04-2004, 03:40 PM

Originally posted by iwantchixx
not a US webmaster? Not compliant? Don't step foot on American soil again then! Otherwise, call ahead and get a custom orange jump suit taylor made to your body size as well as custom handcuffs. You'll need somethign comphy for where you're going

dont think so.

.
Shooting Bikini Girls
Comment
Sarah_Jayne

Now with more Jayne

Join Date: Dec 2002

Posts: 40077
Share

Post
#15

08-04-2004, 03:47 PM

Originally posted by Dirty Dane
Will not work at all...
Why? Because if a european affiliate does that, he/she will break european laws about data protection. In some webmaster programs it says things like "not violate local laws". So what you gonna do about that? Tell people to ignore our local laws?

It's the new 2257 that is stupid. Not the amount or size of affiliates.
Start fight your lawmakers, not bend over. You will only shoot yourself in the foot, and that is exactly what your lawmakers want!

yes, there are issues regarding the UK Data Protection act here that are unclear. Man, the UK takes few things are seriously as the Data Protection Act.
Comment
Kimmykim

bitchslapping zebras!!!!!

Join Date: Jun 2001

Posts: 16015
Share

Post
#16

08-04-2004, 03:49 PM

Moving offshore or being a non-US program is irrelevant as long as you have US webmasters that must be compliant.

And that includes other sites in the US that you trade traffic with if you're a program owner.

Use your heads, folks, for something other than a hatstand.
Comment
BRISK

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: Feb 2003

Posts: 12240
Share

Post
#17

08-04-2004, 03:49 PM

Originally posted by iwantchixx
not a US webmaster? Not compliant? Don't step foot on American soil again then! Otherwise, call ahead and get a custom orange jump suit taylor made to your body size as well as custom handcuffs. You'll need somethign comphy for where you're going

wrong

I post on GFY so that when people ask me what I do,
I can tell them that I work with the mentally retarded.
Comment
Spunky

I need a beer

Join Date: Jun 2002

Posts: 133978
Share

Post
#18

08-04-2004, 03:50 PM

Originally posted by iwantchixx
not a US webmaster? Not compliant? Don't step foot on American soil again then! Otherwise, call ahead and get a custom orange jump suit taylor made to your body size as well as custom handcuffs. You'll need somethign comphy for where you're going

Your fucking paranoid

YOUR INFORMATION HERE
Comment
tranza

ICQ: 197-556-237

Join Date: Jun 2003

Posts: 57559
Share

Post
#19

08-04-2004, 03:52 PM

Originally posted by gleem
your kidding? read this very carefully

it only applies to US webmasters!!!

Good news...

I'm just a newbie.
Comment
doober

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jul 2003

Posts: 6984
Share

Post
#20

08-04-2004, 04:47 PM

Originally posted by spunky1
Your fucking paranoid

Big time...They wont even get around to it or bother with people outside the USA in the first year or two since they will surely have many of their own to put through the ringer first.
Comment
FightThisPatent

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 4090
Share

Post
#21

08-04-2004, 06:09 PM

After going through all the million 2257 threads, reading the many mispresentations and misunderstandings on 2257, and doing alot of talking with legal folk, I have compiled a summary that touches upon a number of issues.

You can read the 2257 summary at:
http://www.2257lookup.com/2257Summary.html

Hope it helps,
brandon

http://www.t3report.com (where's the traffic?) v5.0 is out! |
http://www.FightThePatent.com | ICQ 52741957
Comment
Centurion

Confirmed User

Join Date: Dec 2002

Posts: 6033
Share

Post
#22

08-04-2004, 06:32 PM

Originally posted by EviLGuY
Sounds good in theory.. it all depends how much enforcement the new law gets. A law that isn't enforced does nothing...

If the current 2257 is not being enforced, why does anyone think that the new law will be?

Where are you going to get the manpower and the money to go around and check the gazillion of sites that exist and then physically go to those locations (after you find them) to make sure they are in compliance?
Comment
FightThisPatent

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 4090
Share

Post
#23

08-04-2004, 06:35 PM

Originally posted by Centurion
If the current 2257 is not being enforced, why does anyone think that the new law will be?

Up until 60 days ago, 2257 wasn't really in DOJ's vocabulary list.

Not only it is a new term they have learned, they feel that current 2257 statue wasn't doing enough, so they made it even more difficult to comply.

Why would Ash-o-cr-ft go through all the hassles of drafting the proposed regulations if they aren't going to enforce it?

-brandon

http://www.t3report.com (where's the traffic?) v5.0 is out! |
http://www.FightThePatent.com | ICQ 52741957
Comment
...

Confirmed User

Join Date: Mar 2003

Posts: 370
Share

Post
#24

08-04-2004, 07:14 PM

Originally posted by FightThisPatent
Why would Ash-o-cr-ft go through all the hassles of drafting the proposed regulations if they aren't going to enforce it?

-brandon

$20,000.00 on a hammer, $30,000.00 on a toilet seat. The government likes to waste money and time.
Comment
FightThisPatent

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 4090
Share

Post
#25

08-04-2004, 07:17 PM

Originally posted by ...
$20,000.00 on a hammer, $30,000.00 on a toilet seat. The government likes to waste money and time.

That's the Department of Defense (DOD)..

-brandon

http://www.t3report.com (where's the traffic?) v5.0 is out! |
http://www.FightThePatent.com | ICQ 52741957
Comment
sarettah

see you later, I'm gone

Join Date: Oct 2002

Posts: 14330
Share

Post
#26

08-04-2004, 08:29 PM

There is an op/ed piece in this months avnonline that pretty well sums up the probable reason that the new changes were drafted.

Ashhahahahaha was called in before Congress to report on the progress of 2257 inspections (in force since 1988). He basically had to report nothing, nada, zilch. But he had the new draft regs in hand and used the excuse that the current regs didn't cover things properly. So he basically was saying "Well, we haven't done inspections because the current rules aren't good enough, but if I have these rules we'll be able to get them done."

So, whether there will be a big old round of inspections to come or not is yet to be seen. These changes were simply a CYA move on the DOJ's part.

(imho of course)

All cookies cleared!
Comment
James White

Confirmed User

Join Date: Apr 2004

Posts: 1405
Share

Post
#27

08-04-2004, 08:32 PM

It is a lot better just cause it will weed out all the noobs and make it harder for them to start.

But, like it was said.. it will cause an issue for Americans only. I wonder how this will turn out.

SIG TOO BIG! Maximum 120x60 button and no more than 3 text lines of DEFAULT SIZE and COLOR. Unless your sig is for a GFY top banner sponsor, you may use a 624x80 instead of a 120x60. Let me repeat... A 120 x 60 button and no more that 3 lines of DEFAULT SIZE AND COLOR text.
Comment
sarettah

see you later, I'm gone

Join Date: Oct 2002

Posts: 14330
Share

Post
#28

08-04-2004, 08:44 PM

The avn piece is here http://www.avnonline.com/index.php?P...tent_ID=108532

from the article:

Recall that the ?Amber Alert Law,? also known as the PROTECT Act, included a provision instructing the Department of Justice (?DOJ?) to report on the inspections it was conducting under 18 U.S.C. §2257, the labeling and record-keeping law (?2257?). It turns out that, just before Congress? deadline, General Ashhahahahaha trundled up Capitol Hill with the required report in hand. The report said what everyone knows, which is that the DOJ has been doing materially no inspecting. But in a face-saving move, Ashhahahahaha brought with him a battery of new 2257 regulations, dramatically modifying the original ones. Ashhahahahaha especially noted that the regulations needed updating to deal with the Internet, implying that the lack of inspections was due to the out-of-date nature of the regulations.

All cookies cleared!
Comment
Centurion

Confirmed User

Join Date: Dec 2002

Posts: 6033
Share

Post
#29

08-04-2004, 09:12 PM

Originally posted by FightThisPatent
Up until 60 days ago, 2257 wasn't really in DOJ's vocabulary list.

Not only it is a new term they have learned, they feel that current 2257 statue wasn't doing enough, so they made it even more difficult to comply.

Why would Ash-o-cr-ft go through all the hassles of drafting the proposed regulations if they aren't going to enforce it?

-brandon

Have you learned nothing?!?!
This administration loves scaring the shit out of the American public!

Be afraid..be VERY afraid! That is their motto!
Comment
Centurion

Confirmed User

Join Date: Dec 2002

Posts: 6033
Share

Post
#30

08-04-2004, 09:18 PM

Originally posted by sarettah
The avn piece is here http://www.avnonline.com/index.php?P...tent_ID=108532

from the article:

Recall that the ?Amber Alert Law,? also known as the PROTECT Act, included a provision instructing the Department of Justice (?DOJ?) to report on the inspections it was conducting under 18 U.S.C. §2257, the labeling and record-keeping law (?2257?). It turns out that, just before Congress? deadline, General Ashhahahahaha trundled up Capitol Hill with the required report in hand. The report said what everyone knows, which is that the DOJ has been doing materially no inspecting. But in a face-saving move, Ashhahahahaha brought with him a battery of new 2257 regulations, dramatically modifying the original ones. Ashhahahahaha especially noted that the regulations needed updating to deal with the Internet, implying that the lack of inspections was due to the out-of-date nature of the regulations.

It is a freakin face saving manuever because he got called on the carpet by Congress.

WILL there be some people fined/imprisoned. Oh yeah, very obviously. Most notably some of the kiddie porno freaks (which should have been there a long time ago), and then ASHOLE can say, "See, we're doing a better job now thanks to these new regulations". Congress will a murmur a "ok..fine"..and things will go back to status quo.

In all this hysteria, people forget that it takes a SHIT LOAD of money & people to patrol, let alone, inspect and then enforce all the laws the apply to the internet. And with all the tax cuts this admin has given out..the money simply is not there for any widespread of truly effective enforcement.

Ask your Congressman/woman or anyone who knows how the DOJ works if they can indeed afford/have the manpower to enforce this law, and see what they tell you! They can't even deal with the freakin' terrorists that have active cells in this country, let alone some 18 year olds with a nudie website!
Comment
EviLGuY

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Apr 2003

Posts: 12745
Share

Post
#31

08-04-2004, 10:08 PM

Originally posted by FightThisPatent
Up until 60 days ago, 2257 wasn't really in DOJ's vocabulary list.

Not only it is a new term they have learned, they feel that current 2257 statue wasn't doing enough, so they made it even more difficult to comply.

Why would Ash-o-cr-ft go through all the hassles of drafting the proposed regulations if they aren't going to enforce it?

-brandon

Why draft it? Because it's election year and being tough on porn looks good?
Comment
hydro

Confirmed User

Join Date: Dec 2003

Posts: 4216
Share

Post
#32

08-04-2004, 10:21 PM

the goverment never enforces its laws on the internet, CAN SPAM ACT is a good example of that, the only ones doing anything about it is microsoft. The ftc has done a few things here and there but nothing that would make headlines. I really don't think that 2257 will change much. Free porn will always be part of the internet and that will not go away
Comment
chodadog

Confirmed User

Join Date: Apr 2002

Posts: 9736
Share

Post
#33

08-04-2004, 10:26 PM

Originally posted by sarah_webinc
I still say that all it takes is sponors to put compliance in their TOS to make is so that even those of us outside of the US have to do it if we want to play the affiliate game.

There are plenty of non-US sponsors out there, and if something like that does happen, way more will start to pop up. Plenty of money to be made from non-US webmasters, as i'm sure you well know.

26 + 6 = 1
Comment
Doctor Dre

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: Jan 2001

Posts: 51692
Share

Post
#34

08-04-2004, 10:32 PM

The point you are missing is that the rest of the world will keep doing the same exact bullshit

Originally posted by rayadp05

I rebooted, deleted temp files, history, cookies and everything...still cannot view the news clip. All I see is that fucking gay ass music video from "Rick Roll". Anyone else have a different link to the news clip?
Comment
Sarah_Jayne

Now with more Jayne

Join Date: Dec 2002

Posts: 40077
Share

Post
#35

08-05-2004, 03:18 AM

Originally posted by chodadog
There are plenty of non-US sponsors out there, and if something like that does happen, way more will start to pop up. Plenty of money to be made from non-US webmasters, as i'm sure you well know.

yeah, it has made me speed up finishing my own paysites. I mine as well be my own sponsor that much sooner and cover my bases.
Comment
mardigras

Bon temps!

Join Date: Feb 2003

Posts: 14194
Share

Post
#36

08-05-2004, 03:28 AM

Originally posted by gleem
your kidding? read this very carefully

it only applies to US webmasters!!!

Not only that, but it doesn't apply to US non-webmasters distributing porn (p2p, e-mail and other ways surfers share amongst each other).

The 2 main things I see coming from these regulations is personal safety issues for models and a rush of foreign porn to take advantage of any slip in US supply.

At the end of the day the govt. will brag about how many porn pages they got rid of while not mentioning the overall increase.

.
Comment
latinasojourn

Confirmed User

Join Date: Oct 2003

Posts: 3191
Share

Post
#37

08-05-2004, 06:51 AM

the law will put producers of original content who own paysites in the driver's seat.

today i disabled posting on all my TGPs and will be replacing everything with my own galleries.

better quality, better accountability.
Comment
latinasojourn

Confirmed User

Join Date: Oct 2003

Posts: 3191
Share

Post
#38

08-05-2004, 06:55 AM

Originally posted by chodadog
There are plenty of non-US sponsors out there, and if something like that does happen, way more will start to pop up. Plenty of money to be made from non-US webmasters, as i'm sure you well know.

as soon as the law starts being enforced you will see e-commerce vendors making compliance mandatory for processing.

Visa will get into the mix you can be sure.

whether foreign producers like it or not, if they will be collecting $ at any point using e-commerce they will be forced to comply.
Comment
eroswebmaster

March 1st, 2003

Join Date: Jul 2001

Posts: 20295
Share

Post
#39

08-05-2004, 06:59 AM

Originally posted by Centurion
Have you learned nothing?!?!
This administration loves scaring the shit out of the American public!

Be afraid..be VERY afraid! That is their motto!

No it has nothing to do with scaring people...this is the MO of the government...can't get you on a "real crime," get you on tax evasion...Al Capone.

Can't get you on "obscenity," take you to court and bleed you dry financially....1980's Edwin Meese / Ronald Reagan tactic.

They will find a way to get you out of biz...with these new proposed changes they don't have to worry about "free speech," they just hit you in areas that are going to cost you money...and if history proves correct watch the dominos fall.

For rent - ICQ 127-027-910
Click here for more details
Comment
the real magoo

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Sep 2001

Posts: 1637
Share

Post
#40

08-05-2004, 07:02 AM

There are over 4billion webpages on the internet today. How will they make sure everyone is following this law? Hire pornsurfers?
Comment
latinasojourn

Confirmed User

Join Date: Oct 2003

Posts: 3191
Share

Post
#41

08-05-2004, 07:16 AM

Originally posted by the real magoo
There are over 4billion webpages on the internet today. How will they make sure everyone is following this law? Hire pornsurfers?

this will get very interesting as soon as enforcement starts.

the way i read the proposed law a clerical error or paperwork procedural error is felonious.

in the absence of any actual violation (i.e. no models used were under 18, and proper IDs can be shown) i'm anxious to see if judges will actual use impose mandatory felony sentencing guidelines for a paperwork error.

if they do, it will be the first time in US history.

i have a sense that (whether ordinary americans like smut or not, ) imprisoning folks who did not use underage models for a paperwork error may backfire politically in a free speech society.

personally, i will have my t's crossed and i's dotted.
Comment
StarkReality

Confirmed User

Join Date: May 2004

Posts: 4444
Share

Post
#42

08-05-2004, 07:33 AM

Originally posted by Centurion
If the current 2257 is not being enforced, why does anyone think that the new law will be?

Where are you going to get the manpower and the money to go around and check the gazillion of sites that exist and then physically go to those locations (after you find them) to make sure they are in compliance?

The current law probably isn't enforced because it's too weak compared to the new version. My (paranoid) theory is that they want to wait with their crusade until they can fuck you really bad...with this new law.

How will it be enforced ? Look what the music industry does with people using p2p networks. They can't go for everyone, but the fact that noone can feel save and everybody could be the next target will be scary enough.

Would you like to be the first ? The example of what happens if you don't comply ? The one who goes to jail ? Would you risk your whole biz, income, future ?
Comment

Previous template Next

Working...