Quote:
|
Originally Posted by GatorB
Yes but secondary prodcucers are required to have EVERY url where their content is located. Now sponsors that get their content from somewhere else are considered secondary producers. Now if your a sposnsor that gives out content aren't you required to have the EXCAT urls that your affiliates will have this content? How do you police that?
|
Sigh. Affiliates aren't secondary producers if they are getting their content from a sponsor that bought it from someone else. They are then technically a tertiary in the mathematical chain of things, though I doubt the government has given any thought to the difference between an affiliate and a sponsor, or a primary content producer versus a customer.
Frankly, I don't think, reading through the new regs the way they were finally adopted, that the government has the least clue about how our business works or what the relationships between the different entities and parties involved actually convey or represent.
Add to that the fact that the government most likely has made their target list already of whom they intend to investigate first, and the whole situation begins to resemble a badly run goat rodeo.
I've heard of situations already where two attorneys, both card carrying bar members able to practice in two different states, have diametrically opposing counsel for the same client in regards to the same situation.
I'm also curious as to what may happen if one of the targets happens to be a US citizen that doesn't own their company or their company is owned outside the United States.
At the end of the day, the attorneys are going to be happy campers with this deal, they're surely the only ones that are going to benefit when the investigations, and potential indictments, start coming down the pipe.