|
I'd recommend reading the entire decision before getting too excited; there's some positive stuff there, but also some indication that the judge hasn't been entirely swayed by FSC's arguments.
In particular, he doesn't buy the argument that 2257 is fundamentally about regulating the adult industry out of business, and does indicate that he believes that 2257 has significant value in combatting child porn. Further, he accepts the argument that keeping track of every URL in the entire world that a depiction appeas on is impossible, but he flat out says that primary producers should be able to track every URL on which a depiction appears "on sites that they themselves control," something which people who run dynamic websites should be concerned about
He also doesn't address the idea of government-mandated office hours.
This is just the injunction hearing, and I'm sure FSC will give a more thorough analysis than this and will learn from the areas in which he disagreed with or flat our didn't believe them. But fundamentally, this doesn't read like a judge who is sees 2257 as intentionally burdensome regulation of the adult industry.
Cheers
-b
__________________
ICQ: 12005327
|