Interesting article but very biased. in my opinion.
Firstly Bush and this current administration are going to be anti porn, as they will be anti abortion and gays. But to bring to task a few of the articles statements.
Quote:
|
"during the entirety of the hearings on (18 USC 2257) and the development of the regulations that implement the statute (which requires producers to maintain meticulous records of performers' ages), there was never any discussion with any industry representatives,"
|
This to me shows the stupidity of the regulators. Some attorney is going to drive a bus through this law by stating quite simply it's not workable. Be more worried if they had got someone from the industry to make the law workable and enforceable.
However it will cost some company a lot of money to over turn it and as usual the rest of the industry will sit on the side lines and let them pay on their own.
The original 2257 law was draen up by non industry people, it called for one ID and accepted a lot of easy to get IDs. The industry I worked in started insisting on two IDs, one to be goverment issued, with a picture, DOB and signature.
Quote:
|
And if consumers are also a target, where does that leave us if we feel like distributing homemade digital videos on peer-to-peer networks for others to enjoy? Can we be indicted for not complying with 18 USC 2257?
|
Yes you can and so you should. Who knows what the production circumstances of the porn being distributed. Under age, private, forced, stolen, etc.
Freedom is often an excuse used for anarchy, if we want to guard our freedoms we have to work within the framework of what is acceptable, even if it is on the edge.
And what is acceptable in Denmark should never be forced on those living in Missippi.