Quote:
Originally posted by sarah_webinc
I will no doubt use your service at some point because some of the suppliers I have used are on there but there are still a ton that aren't and especially those that have stopped selling.
|
There is a part of the proposed 2257 about only applying to newly published images (after the effective date of the changes going into effect).
This would mean that you wouldn't have to go back to all of your content to get whatever is required for full 2257 compliance.
The issue would be to be able to prove that the content was acquired and "published" to your website prior to the effective date.
An area of debatable interpretation on the date of publishing could be that every page a surfer views is "published", therefore you would have to have documentation for every image.
There are many different legal opinions floating around, so it does get to be confusing and there aren't any hard facts (ie. prosecutions).
The safest approach, as with any law, is to abide by the law by best efforts. Be able to demonstrate that you are trying to comply with the law. Doing nothing will surely get you less sympathy in front of a judge since 2257 Recordkeeping Statue has been on a law for a decade.
And as the saying goes "ignorance of the law is no excuse", especially in a courtroom.
This might mean that webmasters have to make the hard business decision of throwing out content that can't be documented (either by date of license/purchase, whether it has atleast blackened out Model ID, etc).
Content Producers are in the same boat if the Model ID that they got from the model doesn't include a US driver's license or a passport. Some will have to toss out their content and if they are participating in 2257lookup, then we can let the webmaster know which sets need to come down.
-brandon