Quote:
Originally posted by FightThisPatent
Another confusing point is about the "effective date".
It's interpreted different ways about the "grandfathering".
Content that was published before the effective date (ie. sept 24, 2004) are not required to have 2257 documentation.
But first, how can you prove it? You may have purchased your content a year ago, and you put it online a year ago, how can you prove that it was published before the effective date?
How can you document when you posted an image up to prove to DOJ that it should be exempt?
The safest fallback is to treat each image as if it needs 2257 documentation, regardless of the "effective date".
This would mean webmasters banging on the doors of content producers to get the model ID.
Thiere is a huge logistical nightmare for content producers who don't already ship out blackened ID.
Webmasters will have to verified as having a license and for which specific sets/models.. and many content producers don't have database systems.
For webmasters, expect alot of delays in getting your request addressed due to some non-computerized record keeping systems of content producers.
Then there is the whole issue of should the content producer hand out blackened ID, or the full ID. For now, i would say handing blackened ID accomplishes the first real objective of 2257 which is allows the webmasters to see that the model is over 18.
If the first test case proves that blackened ID is considered tampered, then that will launch a lawsuit on the constitutionality of handing out personal info.
The legal beagles are watching 2257 and will be challenging the law. For now, compliace with current and proposed 2257 should be done in the spirit of the law..
Many content producers already sent out blackened ID.. so you can atleast know that the model is over 18.
There are many facets to 2257 in both current and proposed.. and while i do my best to help explain them, it's very generic and you should really consult an attorney if you are concerned about whether you could go to jail or not.
-brandon
|
That post was a flash of fucking brilliance and wins the daily FoFB Award. The author of this post has earned $20 from FLASHCA$H and our eternal gratitude for making time spent on the boards more worth while. THANK YOU!
Email
[email protected] or ICQ 261-416-675 to arrange for your cash.
http://www.flashoffuckingbrilliance.com
thanks, again, brandon!