Quote:
|
Originally Posted by GatorB
What if a beef farmer in Enlgand tried to sell unlabled beef in America? What would happen to him?
Tell that the the US AG. It's HE that is saying it's the same thing. Yet I get ripped by people who want to believe in their own versions of the law. I'm just giving you info straight from the horses mouth. Don't kill the messenger people.
|
Your point is taken but I think what others are trying to say is that we are marketing a product on the Internet which is accessed by anyone in the world (anyone in a free country) and that we are not specifically targeting an American market like your ag exporter example. Now if I had the US flag as a background image on all my sites and named them "Calfornia Babes" then I'm obviously targeting Americans and should be required to include the appropriate labels.
I am currently, and have been for months now, placing on the front page of each site a 2257 compliance statement as well as stating where the Custodian of Records is located. As a Canadian webmaster I think that's fair. If sponsors want to give me the documents for all their models that's cool too. I have no problem producing the documentation if requested to. As for keeping a catalog of all URLs that point to 'actual sexual' content then that's just too bad. Proving a model is over 18 is one thing but what the DOJ is asking is fucked up.
This law has absolutely nothing to do with protecting children and I don't think anyone here would argue any different. Clinton's Communications Decency Act was an obvious attempt to censor the Internet in the US and control thought. These new regs however are a little different - they legislate a witch hunt.