I am never happy anyway, but thank you for explaining

With the self-righteous bullshit attitudes by some of you better-than-thou content providers I can tell you that I'd never be interested in buying your shit. I'd rather buy Cloud9 than Jact anyday.

Who was being self-righteous? I never once said don't buy from anyone, I never once rubbed it in anyone's face that I'm compliant. It's common sense. Lacking some are we?

you would rather buy from Cloud9 because Jact is compliant? That makes a lot of sense.

Those hoiler than thou content providers that follow the law . . . .how dare them.

If I was selling content, and doing everything in my power to be legal and saw how many other arrogant "self-righteous" content providers all thought they were above the law and got all bent outta shape cause someone pointed out that they weren't legal... I'd kinda cop an attitude about it too.

Numb nuts who think they're bigger than the law run the risk of royally fucking up business for everyone else... they can single handedly ruin this business just by being pig headed.

If I was Jact or AaronM... I'd be pissed... I'd say they're actually handling it really well and civilized.

But hey, you're call.... enjoy using that illegal content. Hope it makes you feel important. :321GFY

No genius, pay attention. I'd rather buy Cloud9 content because I trust it more and they're not full of themselves like Jact is. As to being compliant or not, I'll deal with that decision myself and not based on the list.

You're breaking my heart here. No, really, you are. I'm fucking crying here. Oh god, Brujah said I'm full of myself.

:321GFY

you'd rather buy from someone who is breaking the law as opposed to a content provider that cares about it's webmasters?

that makes sense... if you're an idiot

Hahaha... it comes down to "the list" again.

You're right.... ignore the list.... by all means. Might as well go out and steal all the money outta the register at your local convenience store while yer at it.

Want me to make a list that says that the store isn't it in compliance so that it makes it ok for you to do it?

he's full of himself? why? because he obeys the LAW?

well shit, i must be full of myself too, when it comes to my business i comply with regulations

maybe i'm just crazy

I said "not based on the list." Your comprehension is lacking.

Okay I'd like to back the train up to where it went off the tracks. Not sure where exactly Brujah got bent out of shape.

As far as I'm aware the only part of Cloud 9's non-compliance according to this interpritation of the law is that the records are held at a law office and not their place of business. Some lawyers will tell you this doesn't matter, some will tell you this matters greatly. It depends on how strictly you abide and which camp you adhere to.

So I personally wouldn't call it illegal content and haven't. Personally I'm not subject to 2257 but I'll adhere to the most severe interpritation for my clients. That's it, that's all.

Did you really.. really believe that was the meaning of my post, or are you just argue a point that doesn't exist ?

Nobody said the list was the end-all and be all either. It's a GUIDELINE. Aaron was trying to do people a favor.. both webmasters AND content providers. Most people would have said "fuck you" and eliminated 3/4 of their competition in one fell swoop as opposed to trying to help them out.

Not only that, but a lot of the webmasters too.. I've heard a lot of people say that there are too many newbie webmasters.. guess who'd take the fall then, eh? Some not-so-newbies too, according to this thread.

And as for your thing with jact the man, go nuts, he fights his own battles and has his own attitude problem, but don't paint us all with the same mental brush.

Maybe he thinks you look good in tights.

did i really what? you're making less sense with each post

yes my comprehension.... right... so anyway you're going to ignore the list... and the law too? Smart.

How much do you charge for some hit and run jobs I need done?

well damn now you ruined the surprise! :feels-hot

Maybe it's a Guideline, but start reading from the first page again.. and see how it's almost being used as a weapon. To paint everyone with a "N" as running an illegal business in the sense of non-compliance to federal law. That's my impression of it.

I betcha he does.. Almost as good as you look in the tutu.

It's there, clear and simple. You just missed it.

Yeah, some people are going to see it that way regardless of motivation though. Hey, it's still useful information, irregardless, isn't it? :) I mean I had nothing to do with the list, but I do appreciate it's existance as far as giving information that's been lacking in this industry for WAY too long. It's well worth the kick in the ass, the heads up, call it what you will. It's certainly accomplished it's "goals". A LOT of providers got their information into shape and did themselves AND their customers a great service.

Yes but your interpretation sucks. :1orglaugh

No really man... ignore the list and use what ever content you want that isn't compliant. You're the one that will pay for it in the end. :thumbsup

Maybe while you're closing up shop and paying a hefty fine, you'll feel real happy that you showed AaronM up and ignored his crummy list. :1orglaugh

Where do you even begin to get that ignoring the list equates to breaking the law ? Was it because I didn't agree that Cloud9Content is breaking the law ?

I really don't think that Aaron would be giving these people links to resources and showing them advice from lawyers if he was out to get them and brand them as running "illegal content businesses". I don't even see how it was painted in that light. Just because they have an N beside them in the title 18 doesn't mean they're "illegal" it just means they aren't fully compliant to the US law which may or may not apply to them.

If Aaron hadn't updated the list, or added anyone to it, then maybe it would be a weapon.. But as Aaron's said several times, if he gave a fuck about his content site, he'd have updated it in the last year or so. Sure, Aaron lacks tact sometimes and that's a part of his charm, but an ulterior motive, I really don't see it.

:2 cents:

You don't have to listen to me obviously, since I'm self-righteous and full of myself. But hey, figured I'd stick my two cents in.

Oh I'm going to close up shop and pay a hefty fine ? What for genius ? :glugglug

the phrase "did you really" has absolutely NO relativity or application to anything I've stated to you idiot. clearly and simply put YOU missed it. Not I. maybe when you actually get a grip on comprehending the english language i'll listen to something you have to say

Then you've missed the posts where the words Illegal, and Breaking the law have been thrown around and targeting the other content providers.

You're right, I did skim several pages because well, it was just too much. Illegal is subject to local law anyhow. Doesn't matter, the DOJ is never going to pursue porn, right? Riiiiiiiight.

I'll help you.

You asked if I believed Jact was full of himself, because he is obeying the law.

I replied with did you really believe that ? If so you missed the point of my post and are apparently just trying to argue, for the sake of arguing. Now it's obvious that's exactly all it is.

well, if you ignore advice, and don't bother to even check for compliance or listen to others who do...

I'd imagine it wouldn't take long.

I mean, if you take offence from everyone who ever tried to inform you of rules, laws, regulations and what not... well, I'd imagine that you wouldn't be getting very far.

How many of them fixed that within minutes though? If someone commits murder and you say he's broken the law, is it slander? No, it's truth. Taken out of context yeah it's harsh. But what's worse, getting a bit of a smack on the boards, or going to jail for a very long, unhappy time?

I'm not trying to justify it because sure, people have been pricks in this thread.. but this is GFY. Take everything with a grain of salt, remember? :P

I'm not a content provider. Why should I follow legal advice from GFY ? I'll consult my own attorney for legal advice. What exactly is it that you think I'm getting fined for ?

A grain? How about a dumptruck full?

Maybe it's illegal to wear tights in public where you live and he's concerned?

You can't remember what you say one moment from the next?
You get all bent outta shape about this list, so decide "I'm gonna show him by going and buying from someone who isn't compliant... yeah, that'll show him!" and then wonder what you're doing wrong?

I know you said you'd rather... and didn't say you actually would. But you get the idea... be an idiot, ellude that you would be an idiot... same diff.

I'm surprised you don't get mad at your legal advisor too when he gives you advice on who's compliant.

I bet we could make a list of website operators that are subject to US law Title 18 USC 2257 that don't bother to comply.. You think that'd rise a stink? I think it'd raise a stink. Maybe. Just maybe though, since the number who would be compliant would be a far lower ratio.

It's such a trivial thing to add the info, but that doesn't mean it's accurate or reflects a content provider following the law as it is written. Any of them could be using a PO Box ( Suite 101 ) or faking the address altogether.

Amen.

save it for next week, and you will have a new xbox for sure

I'm not surprised you missed the few posts where I already had to clarify it for you that buying from Cloud9 instead of Jact wasn't based on who is legal and who isn't.

I've already got two though. :1orglaugh Can I get a PS2?

Exactly. You base it upon more important reasons. :1orglaugh

Actually, you said you wouldn't base it on the list... sorry I had to clarify it for you.

Need help keeping track of your own mindless ramblings?

Exactly! Like who is customer-friendly, provides good support, easy to deal with, actually has good content, etc.

And not basing it on the list because of the nature in which it is compiled, whereas I would seek my own legal advice and not get it from GFY. It's all in the previous posts. Nothing to keep track of. You just keep missing it.

You've obviously been missing it too. It's been suggested and always has been for people to check with their lawyers. Infact, that's what Aaron said he did... he checked with his lawyers.

Seems smart... doesn't it??

No one ever said to go by the list and use it as your bible. It's a question of trust... do you trust your content provider? Do you really know if they're compliant.

If they have an N on the list, then it's probably in your best interest to find out if they are... isn't it??

You were a brain donor when you were younger, weren't you?

Ahh... I see, so you're basing it on who you know... because you obviously don't know Jact (damn, that sounded good.. don't know Jact :1orglaugh)

Anyway, you can ask a few dozen people on any given board and they'll tell you that Jact ranks very highly in all those categories you just listed.

If that's what you base your content purchases on, then you obviously have bought from JACT Content often! If you're going to make jabs like that because of how I am on a board, you have some serious fucking issues to work out. Business is business, this ain't business.

No one ever said to go by the list ? Are you sure ? I can help you find Aaron, probably Jact, and others stating that certain content providers were breaking the law. Do you need me to help you with that ?

Did the brain donor comment make you feel special or superior ? Way to argue your point! :thumbsup

"probably jact"? :1orglaugh