Quote:
|
Originally Posted by RawAlex
Sorry, but the person putting up the free site would still be the publisher (Not the domain owner, as they will have contractually given the space to the end webmaster - so the end webmaster would once again be liable to provide 2257 information (major entry point).
Further, free hosting is now a huge risk business, as webmasters can post up graphics and images that are not 2257 compliant, and can put the domain holder into a lot of shit. Freehosting is the answer to a question everyone should have stopped asking a long time ago.
Alex
|
Thank you participating
RawAlex. I think you are correct as far as unregulated 'free hosting' not being the answer to 2257 concerns. However, what I had been thinking of is a slightly different situation.
What if the affiliate is acting as the "designer" of the gallery working from sponsor provided content?
The sponsor then hosts/publishes the gallery similar to the way they would a FHG. The key difference would be that the sponsor keeps the gallery exclusive to the affiliate who designed it.
So instead of a FHG this would be a
Custom (designed by affiliate)
Exclusive (nobody else can use it)
Free
Hosted
Gallery
(CEFHG).
By doing so, it seems to me (IANAL) that the responsibility for 2257 would rest with the sponsor. It seems at least on first look to be a similar situation to BYOT.
Regarding the potential risk of hosting the gallery:
The sponsor would retain control by only posting hand approved galleries. No automated approval.
(Unless they had a great deal of trust in a relationship and might enable the equivalent of a partner account for valued high volume affiliates)
Heck while I am out on a limb here - this in fact might result in a sort of inverse TGP situation where they have a full time employee or team reviewing galleries.
Now that I have clarified, what do you think?