View Single Post
Old 06-01-2005, 08:48 PM  
r-c-e
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,070
Quote:
Originally Posted by ModelPerfect
On second thought, I'm not exactly sure this definition applies. This definition clearly states that "sexually explicit conduct" includes both actual and simulated conduct. However, in 2257, it clearly states that the maintenance of records requirement applies to those publishing images "that contains a depiction of an actual human being engaged in actual sexually explicit conduct". The fact they added "actual" to the definition implies that "simulated" conduct is acceptable, which seems to exclude part of the definition of "sexually explicit conduct".

Furthermore, under "Sec. 75.7 Exemption Statement", it states one exception to the record keeping requirements is when "(2) The matter contains only visual depictions of simulated sexually explicit conduct". This supports that idea that 2257 only covers the publication of images depicting actual sexually explicit conduct.

So it appears that we have a little more flexibility on the issue. However, 2E on the original citation kind of screws us. I don't really see a different between actual and simulated on that one, and a lot of simulated acts could potentially fall under this actual category. Heck, simple frontal nudity could potentially fall under this one, depending on how it's interpreted. *Sigh* they hate us.
I would take a guess here and say this is protecting movie production companies with simulated sex scenes. Would Angelina Jolies sex scene with Antonio Banderas be under 2257? My guess is that it is not.
r-c-e is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote