Quote:
Originally posted by GatorB
If you HONESTLY think 2257 is about copyright or models consent then I have a gold mine in Florida to sell you.
Bush, Ashcroft etc don't believe porn is a legitimate business. Which ironically will be their downfall with these new 2257 rules. 2257 is about REGULATION, if something is not legitimate how can you regulate it? You don't see the FDA regualting the quality of crack do you? The government can't say on the one hand that porn is not a legitimate business so therefore it doesn't deserve consititional protections yet at the same time trying to regulate how it is run.
|
No 2257 is a law to verify the identity and age of the performers. However it gives the publisher the right to insist the documentation is required.
Whatever Bush and Ashcroft think is irrelevant, under the constitution freedom of speech is a fundimental right. So porn is a legitimate business and not illegal like crack. Bad example.
But if they were a bit more clever they could of made it a lot more difficult to produce/publish porn inside the US.
I was saying that if you publish porn you need to be able to prove certain things, are you saying you should not have to prove the age of the models?
Like I said in that other thread, no wonder the banks are wary of us.