Quote:
|
Originally Posted by orcastudios
Some of you are missing the fine-points of the new proposed regulations. You must have your 2257 documents ready to show the inspectors when they arrive at your front door. The documents MUST be in alphabetical order. You must also have your documents CROSS-INDEXED by the stage names used by the performers AND by the locations of where these performers can be found (video name, URL, etc.) If one document is out of order (eg: not alphabetized) then that is a violation. The inspectors may visit you up to three times a year.
The obvious purpose of making this so difficult is to drive the porn industry out of business.
(And to the poster above who said that there is no funding or organization to do this - the Justice Department has set-up a new Obscenity Division to handle this.)
|
Since none of that is likely to fly, meaning I don't see thousands upon thousands of affiliates complying to that degree or being able to comply to that degree, what is the alternative?
I'd certainly love to hear Lenny's solution, but I doubt he has one. Mouthy obnoxious twits never do.
Like I posted earlier, I intend to lead anyone who cares to look on a path linking them directly back to the sponsor/program/owner's own 2257 information page. I see no other alternative, except to shut all your sites down of course. Unless you change out your sites to send hits to pay sites and FHG's via text links only, Yes, go with the clean look.
To me it is the most ridiculous thing to suggest that someone merely promoting (as in linking to) an adult pay site needs to be responsible for keeping records on all of IT'S content. A link to those records should suffice for affiliates. Hopefully there will be some upcoming court battles over this and maybe, just maybe we will see some changings such as I'm suggesting here. It would certainly be a hell of a lot simpler and make more sense to have affilliates linking to the sponsor's 2257 information than all this garbage about distributing millions of documents.
I don't see why anyone calling themself a webmaster would want to argue with that.