GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - View Single Post

Dirty Dane · 06-08-2005, 05:59 PM

Not trying to accuse someone specific here, but lets take a look at the laws:

Violation of 2257 - up to 5(?) years
Violation of 2251 - not less than 10 years ++ (US - and similar laws in mostly all countries)

If you look more detailed at 2251, that means you can get locked up for a loooong time, if you advertise websites which involves a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct.

I think models security is first priority, but what I don't understand is that giving out the impression that 'converting' everything into SC or use FHG should make affiliates safer? Yeah, they can't come for you for 2257 violation, but if violate 2251 you are in even more deepshit....an advertised textlink is enough. Make some changes on promo, continue business as usual, convert free sites into "get away with it from 2257".... do whatever, but dont forget 2251!

Most of this business has been based on trust. The affiliate trust the sponsor that his content is legal, and the sponsor trust his affiliates in not promoting his content as underage. But in the end, that trust is worthless, if you end up in court and can't convince the judge. Probably this is why, except for also killing the industry, they made those new laws to prevent a business based on trust. No more "hey - she looks legal"...

That leads to my questions;
- How many affiliates have actually asked for IDs before the new 2257, to assure that the models/paysites they promote are 18+?
- How many requests have sponsors/producers received, and given out IDs voluntary to affiliates?
- If most of you can say zero or few on the two questions above, don't you think that is reason we would end up, sooner or later, where we are today?

The problem is that most affiliates don't have/had the nerves to ask for IDs to assure he is doing the right thing. Especially if you are a "small fish" and dealing with the "big guys", and further if he states that "we will NOT give out IDs." They might be afraid of getting answers like "thats our policy, if you dont like it, dont promote us". - or they are afraid to offend the sponsor with requests about "suspicious" content.
Its not a good feeling to ask, but at a professional level I would say it is necessary and such affiliate should be taken serious. Its not the same thing as "send me some signups and I give you pass

" - "give me a pass so I can send you signups

" . If you advertised and made a signup to a site that turns out to have minors, then its too late!

Dont know what is your thoughts about this:
Would you as sponsor hand out ID, not because of 2257, but if someone would assure they are not violating 2251?
Plan B - If privacy is the reason for decline, would it not be a good thing to make paper contracts between sponsors and affiliates that would hold in court, in 2251 cases?

06-08-2005, 05:59 PM
Dirty Dane Sick Fuck Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: www Posts: 9,491	2251 vs 2257 vs giving out IDs vs... Not trying to accuse someone specific here, but lets take a look at the laws: Violation of 2257 - up to 5(?) years Violation of 2251 - not less than 10 years ++ (US - and similar laws in mostly all countries) If you look more detailed at 2251, that means you can get locked up for a loooong time, if you advertise websites which involves a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. I think models security is first priority, but what I don't understand is that giving out the impression that 'converting' everything into SC or use FHG should make affiliates safer? Yeah, they can't come for you for 2257 violation, but if violate 2251 you are in even more deepshit....an advertised textlink is enough. Make some changes on promo, continue business as usual, convert free sites into "get away with it from 2257".... do whatever, but dont forget 2251! Most of this business has been based on trust. The affiliate trust the sponsor that his content is legal, and the sponsor trust his affiliates in not promoting his content as underage. But in the end, that trust is worthless, if you end up in court and can't convince the judge. Probably this is why, except for also killing the industry, they made those new laws to prevent a business based on trust. No more "hey - she looks legal"... That leads to my questions; - How many affiliates have actually asked for IDs before the new 2257, to assure that the models/paysites they promote are 18+? - How many requests have sponsors/producers received, and given out IDs voluntary to affiliates? - If most of you can say zero or few on the two questions above, don't you think that is reason we would end up, sooner or later, where we are today? The problem is that most affiliates don't have/had the nerves to ask for IDs to assure he is doing the right thing. Especially if you are a "small fish" and dealing with the "big guys", and further if he states that "we will NOT give out IDs." They might be afraid of getting answers like "thats our policy, if you dont like it, dont promote us". - or they are afraid to offend the sponsor with requests about "suspicious" content. Its not a good feeling to ask, but at a professional level I would say it is necessary and such affiliate should be taken serious. Its not the same thing as "send me some signups and I give you pass " - "give me a pass so I can send you signups " . If you advertised and made a signup to a site that turns out to have minors, then its too late! Dont know what is your thoughts about this: Would you as sponsor hand out ID, not because of 2257, but if someone would assure they are not violating 2251? Plan B - If privacy is the reason for decline, would it not be a good thing to make paper contracts between sponsors and affiliates that would hold in court, in 2251 cases?