Quote:
|
Originally Posted by GatorB
I understand them just fine. How come these are NEW rules if they have existed since 1995? The 1995 thing is about the CONTENT. Meaning any CONTENT made after July 3,1995 falls under 2257. Show me where the SECONDARY producer requirement has existed since 1995? I fact under Sundance is not suppose to exist at all. Also show me how the DOJ could even prove that say in 1998 you didn't have a 2257 statement on your website? I mean unless you never updated it. That's just retarded. I think the DOJ has enough people to go after that are currently running websites than to chase after ghosts.
|
I don't need to show you anything but I will tell you...AGAIN....that if you had a good understanding of the current law that you would know that secondary producers were still supposed to have the ID's back then. The law was not worded as clearly as it should have been which is why the new regs directly address the issue more clearly.
Sundance is not an issue here. The DOJ clearly stated their feelings on this.
I don't claim to know it all but I do know way more about 2257 than you and 99.9% of this board. I even corrected a few attorneys on different panels at Cybernet and they acknowledged that I was correct.
Will people be prosecuted based on their past websites alone? Not likely but that doesn't mean that this information can not be used as an additional charge to coerce a plea bargain out of a scarred webmaster.