Quote:
|
Originally Posted by BoyAlley
G
So, unfortunately, anything we aren't able to get docs for by June 23 is going down.
|
ouch... and i know that is a painful decision that you have made, but one that i certainly do understand in the "better to be safe than go to jail for 10+ years" saying.
by the 2257 requirements on the books for over a decade, content producers should have a photo copy of the license of the models... i know that companies like Matrix Content went through the process to have all of their paperwork digitized to prepare for this very issue.
At the time, they were doing like many were doing, offering the blackened-out versions... but as you have pointed out, this won't cut it now.
So if a content producer couldn't produce the unblackend out version, then they would have already violated 2257, which means it snowballs on you.
The real issue, is whether they will offer the model ID for those webmasters that ask for it.
I can see it being a marketing/competitive angle by some that some would offer the model ID because they are willing, or just want to get more business, while many others would be fearful of giving out like Aria Giovanni's drivers license (that would include her home address).
The purpose of the injunction is to hold off on prosecution over exact issues such as this of the secondary recordkeeper having to have the ID.
After a few years of court time, and the result is that secondary record keepers have to have this, well then that will certainly shape how things are done.
I have talked to some that are demanding ID's from content producer, or they will go elsewhere to get the content, having to take down their content, like you are doing, in order to really stay clear.
Having young looking content, certainly puts you more in the cross-hairs then say MILF-type material, so it would seem to me that young looking models would hold the greater liability for a webmaster when it comes to having 2257 info.
The broader implications of this is content that paysites have given out (ie. "free content") that is sexually explicit (some use the word hardcore). Under the new regs, these affiliates would probably be seen as secondary producers and require docs...
It's all very confusing and constraining and there are no simple answers other than to comply as best as you can. Some will go offshore(outside the US) (really offshore, meaning no US-based related assets or resources conncted to the company), others will demand "2257 compliant" image sets, others will do the take down of "non compliant" images.
It's not the end of the adult entertainment market.. many companies have positioned themselves with proper record keeping. It may be a weeding out process over the next few years, but those that treat this as a business (and now have additional reason to ensure they don't commit a felony) will continue to prosper.
Sounds like you are taking those same steps.
Fight the Short Term!