2257 Info on Video Trailers, Movies?

[digitaldivas]

Some do, some don't. Curious about the legality of this. Is it prudent to have?

[Quentin]

Some do, some don't. Curious about the legality of this. Is it prudent to have?

It's not just prudent, I believe it is required under the law in order to be compliant with 2257.

See 18 USC 2257(e)(1), specifically:

(e)(1) Any person to whom subsection (a) applies shall cause to be affixed to every copy of any matter described in paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of this section, in such manner and in such form as the Attorney General shall by regulations prescribe, a statement describing where the records required by this section with respect to all performers depicted in that copy of the matter may be located. In this paragraph, the term ?copy? includes every page of a website on which matter described in subsection (a) appears.

This requirement is reiterated in the Code of Federal regulations under 28 CFR 75.6:

Statement describing location of books and records.
(a) Any producer of any book, magazine, periodical, film, videotape, digitally- or computer-manipulated image, digital image, or picture, or other matter (including but not limited to an Internet computer site or service) that contains one or more visual depictions of an actual human being engaged in actual sexually explicit conduct made after July 3, 1995, and produced, manufactured, published, duplicated, reproduced, or reissued after July 3, 1995, or of a performer in a visual depiction of simulated sexually explicit conduct or actual sexually explicit conduct limited to lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person made after March 18, 2009, shall cause to be affixed to every copy of the matter a statement describing the location of the records required by this part. A producer may cause such statement to be affixed, for example, by instructing the manufacturer of the book, magazine, periodical, film, videotape, digitally- or computer-manipulated image, digital image, picture, or other matter to affix the statement. In this paragraph, the term ?copy? includes every page of a Web site on which a visual depiction of an actual human being engaged in actual or simulated sexually explicit conduct appears.

That said, you should really discuss this with an attorney.

I know it sucks to pay an attorney, but in the long run where things like 2257 compliance are concerned, the only thing more expensive than talking to an attorney might turn out to be NOT having already talked to an attorney when you had the chance... if you catch my drift.

[_Richard_]

it's prudent

[digitaldivas]

Cool, thanks, boys. Yes, I was just making sure what I had already expected. Doing movie trailers for my affiliate program and had it in the beginning, it just seemed "tacky", lol. Good thing I didn't delete them. Yes, 2257 has already been on the site.

[J.R.]

Its best to include it

[adultGeek]

not pleasant..!!

[The Porn Nerd]

The big studios do it but the smaller producers don't seem to. I don't - there's a link on the site that covers that. besides, if an affiliate, like a tube or blog, is going to use the video then they would (should) have a link back to the site with the 2257 link on it.

Then again, having it in the pre-roll may make it look more "professional" to surfers used to the Reality Kings and Brazzers of the world. I'd A-B test it.

PS: Attorneys ALWAYS say CYA in EVERY situation so I'm sure one would say include it, just to be safe.

[shake]

If you do a 2257 screenshot in the video, it gives you an extra spot to re-enforce your brand.

[ExtremeBank_Adam]

So, I guess we should be watermarking every photo with 2257 information, too?

In this paragraph, the term ?copy? includes every page of a website on which matter described in subsection (a) appears.

We have a 2257 link at the bottom of the page, just like it says.