Interesting conundrum on §2257

[UnseenWorld]

Suppose you are a webmaster (secondary producer) who has no legal requirement to maintain 2257 documents on models/actors and you buy from an offshore supplier (primary producer) not subject to US law (and who therefor also has no legal requirement to maintain 2257 documents), and if the law does not, as I think it does not REQUIRE anyone to buy only from US sources which are subject to 2257, is there then a body of content out there which is immune to 2257? Before you run out and buy a shitload of Russian content, remember: it'd still be nice to have age documents for plenty of other reasons. A lot of those Russian girls look awfully young for supposedly being 18 or older. Having access to proof that doesn't look immediately suspicious would be nice, wouldn't it?

I just think there might ba kind of loophole in the law here.

[LadyMischief]

Something to look into... Definitely a good reason to buy from those who are compliant until a lawyer can clear that one up.. hmm.

[gothweb]

My guess is that 2257 just makes it illegal to use any content that doesn't adhere to 2257. So if non-US providors want to sell to people in the US, they have to comply.

[UnseenWorld]

Originally posted by gothweb
My guess is that 2257 just makes it illegal to use any content that doesn't adhere to 2257. So if non-US providors want to sell to people in the US, they have to comply.

I don't think there is any law that say so, but I'm sure US webmasters feel a lot more comfortable with home-grown content providers who work in the shadow of the FBI, as opposed to some guy with no reason to give a shit.

[RATBOY]

Originally posted by UnseenWorld


I don't think there is any law that say so, but I'm sure US webmasters feel a lot more comfortable with home-grown content providers who work in the shadow of the FBI, as opposed to some guy with no reason to give a shit.

Call me biased, but I sure as hell would worry about offshore record keeping. I mean, even if they DO give me photos of model ID's, how the hell am I supposed to know they are government issued? Let alone not being able to read Russian.

[Joesho]

Originally posted by UnseenWorld


I don't think there is any law that say so, but I'm sure US webmasters feel a lot more comfortable with home-grown content providers who work in the shadow of the FBI, as opposed to some guy with no reason to give a shit.

anything done in the U.S. is subject to U.S laws, Just fuking comply already geesh....

[jonesy]

If your doing a porn site in and from the US and your asked by law enforcement for docs on the on the ages of the models and you dont have any you are fucked. plain and simple.

How fuckin hard is it to understand?

Usually the licensing/sales/ contract with the company you bought content from has the 2257 provision written in it.

if it doesnt, well your taking a risk.

think of a video store that carried the traci lords vids when she dopped the dime about her age. None of them went to jail because of receipts and contracts ect. for purcahing material. the producers and some manufactuers caught the heat.

[UnseenWorld]

Originally posted by Joesho


anything done in the U.S. is subject to U.S laws, Just fuking comply already geesh....

Yeah, where there is a law. But laws have people who are subject and people who are not, and laws say what kind of work is subject, which implies that anything not mentioned is not. No law applies to everybody everywhere under every circumstance.

[AaronM]

Originally posted by jonesy
If your doing a porn site in and from the US and your asked by law enforcement for docs on the on the ages of the models and you dont have any you are fucked. plain and simple.

How fuckin hard is it to understand?

Usually the licensing/sales/ contract with the company you bought content from has the 2257 provision written in it.

if it doesnt, well your taking a risk.

think of a video store that carried the traci lords vids when she dopped the dime about her age. None of them went to jail because of receipts and contracts ect. for purcahing material. the producers and some manufactuers caught the heat.

You and Joesho are right on the money.

There is no loophole here. I have said MANY times that it is in your best interest to buy from providers who are subject to the same laws that you are.

[beemk]

Originally posted by Joesho


anything done in the U.S. is subject to U.S laws, Just fuking comply already geesh....

he did comply, hes asking a question out of curiosity. i may be wrong, but i think its safe to assume that unseenworld doesnt buy any content from offshore content producers.

[UnseenWorld]

Originally posted by jonesy
If your doing a porn site in and from the US and your asked by law enforcement for docs on the on the ages of the models and you dont have any you are fucked. plain and simple.

How fuckin hard is it to understand?

Usually the licensing/sales/ contract with the company you bought content from has the 2257 provision written in it.

if it doesnt, well your taking a risk.

think of a video store that carried the traci lords vids when she dopped the dime about her age. None of them went to jail because of receipts and contracts ect. for purcahing material. the producers and some manufactuers caught the heat.

I totally agree, and so my question was kind of an intellectual one, not a practical one. Like I said, even if you are not required and your producer is not required under 2257, if the question of age ever comes up, the court will proceed on the basis of perception, and in that case if the model is 18 but likes perhaps a bit younger, and you are lacking in proof, you are royally screwed.

[Joesho]

anybody remember that John guy, you know the attorney general dude. I heard he is a big fan of off shore shit...

[AaronM]

Originally posted by UnseenWorld


Yeah, where there is a law. But laws have people who are subject and people who are not, and laws say what kind of work is subject, which implies that anything not mentioned is not. No law applies to everybody everywhere under every circumstance.

Since you clearly have not consulted with a lawyer, perhaps you should at least READ the laws for yourself.

If you are a webmaster, in the US, then you MUST comply. IF your content provider is not subject to the same laws and has not chosen to be compliant then you are breaking the law.

How does the saying go? Something like "It is better to allow people to think you are an idiot rather than open your mouth and remove all doubt."

Nice thread, idiot.

[Joesho]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by UnseenWorld
[B]

the court will proceed on the basis of perception,

Wrong, courts use what is known as the "INDUSTRY STANDARD" when ruling on questionable gray areas.

and everyone better know to buy shit that is legal and all docs in their proper place.

[AaronM]

Originally posted by UnseenWorld


I totally agree, and so my question was kind of an intellectual one, not a practical one. Like I said, even if you are not required and your producer is not required under 2257, if the question of age ever comes up, the court will proceed on the basis of perception, and in that case if the model is 18 but likes perhaps a bit younger, and you are lacking in proof, you are royally screwed.

Let me get this straight...

You are asking that "what if" question about 2 parties that are not subject to the law and you think that the courts would frown upon a girl who LOOKS under 18?

What courts would have an interest in a case where no law requires proof of age?

This is like saying:

If you live in Amsterdam where it is legal to smoke hash and it is also legal to produce it...You are in deep shit when the courts hear your case.

WTF?

Perhaps you should stick to the "what if's" about US laws as those are difficult enough for you to comprehend.

[rossiya2]

Originally posted by UnseenWorld
lot of those Russian girls look awfully young for supposedly being 18 or older.

Russian girls look younger because they are livelier and have a better social life. They eat natural foods and lack the balooning flesh typical of a western chemical diet. They lack a sedentary lifestyle. Thus a 19 year old girl may have the body of a sixteen year old western counterpart.

Also Russian girls are more mature so if she is sixteen she would easily out-maneuver her 21 year old counterpart on any social level. However her papers should do the talking when it comes to age.

[jonesy]

Originally posted by rossiya2


Russian girls look younger because they are livelier and have a better social life. They eat natural foods and lack the balooning flesh typical of a western chemical diet. They lack a sedentary lifestyle. Thus a 19 year old girl may have the body of a sixteen year old western counterpart..

?LMFAO ... The more i read these boards the more im amazed by the lack of rational and intelligence

[rossiya2]

Originally posted by jonesy


?LMFAO ... The more i read these boards the more im amazed by the lack of rational and intelligence

Never too late you can always return to school.

[UnseenWorld]

Originally posted by AaronM


Since you clearly have not consulted with a lawyer, perhaps you should at least READ the laws for yourself.

If you are a webmaster, in the US, then you MUST comply. IF your content provider is not subject to the same laws and has not chosen to be compliant then you are breaking the law.

How does the saying go? Something like "It is better to allow people to think you are an idiot rather than open your mouth and remove all doubt."

Nice thread, idiot.

I have read the law. I think I see situations where the legislators may have left a loose end. I was hoping for a friendly and intelligent discussion free of personal remarks, cheap and vulgar displays, and the usual harrumphing by the usual harrumphers.

Alas, all to no end. I know there's a certain personality type that has to have the last word, so have at it. Maybe you can be even unkinder than before. Let's see. You've told me elsewhere that you're the wrong person to get into a pissing contest with. Only...I didn't know I was in a pissing contest.

However, I'm not even going to read this thread anymore so that I can regain a certain level of calm which is necessary for doing my work well.

Excuse me while I find a towel.

[PaulSweet]

There is no loophole, you buy from someone who isn't 2257 compliant and you will get in trouble for it - and the person who sold you the content will not be liable since they were never required to be 2257 compliant in the first place.

Its like if you buy a car in russia and bring it to California. It doesnt meet the exhaust emmissions code of California, but you drive it anyways. You get caught and questioned. Is your defense the fact you bought it in russia? If it is, good luck!

[rossiya2]

I would like to make a new certificate program. Then surfers can rest assured that their content is produced under safe, professional, well-lit conditions. Every web page should have the "Laid in the U.S.A. label"

[Webattorney]

Any webmaster that desires to distribute sexually explicit content from the United States must comply with Section 2257, regardless of the source of the content. There is no immunity and no loophole. Keep thinking, though.

[AaronM]

Originally posted by UnseenWorld
I have read the law. I think I see situations where the legislators may have left a loose end. I was hoping for a friendly and intelligent discussion free of personal remarks, cheap and vulgar displays, and the usual harrumphing by the usual harrumphers.

Alas, all to no end. I know there's a certain personality type that has to have the last word, so have at it. Maybe you can be even unkinder than before. Let's see. You've told me elsewhere that you're the wrong person to get into a pissing contest with. Only...I didn't know I was in a pissing contest.

However, I'm not even going to read this thread anymore so that I can regain a certain level of calm which is necessary for doing my work well.

Excuse me while I find a towel.

harrumphers? WTF kind of idiot uses words like that?

As far as you not reading this thread any longer...You and I both know damn good and well that you do not have the willpower to resist reading it. You may not post a reply but that is because you are a coward who is afraid of being proven wrong...yet again.

If you want an intelligent discussion then I sugggest starting an intelligent thread.

"I think I see situations where the legislators may have left a loose end."

How intelligent is the above statement considering that the legislators you are questioning have absolutely nothing to do with either the provider or the client if they are not in the US per YOUR example?

This is another open and shut case of stupidity. I call it like it is. Now use your towell to dry up your tears you pussy assed cry baby.

[gruffy]

Originally posted by rossiya2

Russian girls look younger because they are livelier and have a better social life. They eat natural foods and lack the balooning flesh typical of a western chemical diet. They lack a sedentary lifestyle. Thus a 19 year old girl may have the body of a sixteen year old western counterpart.

Also Russian girls are more mature so if she is sixteen she would easily out-maneuver her 21 year old counterpart on any social level. However her papers should do the talking when it comes to age.

Pass me the crackpipe and I'd be happy to buy "legal age" content from the worlds top identification forgers. Your ass must be fucking crazy.

[rossiya2]

Originally posted by gruffy




Pass me the crackpipe and I'd be happy to buy "legal age" content from the worlds top identification forgers. Your ass must be fucking crazy.

ß çíàþ, êòî èìååò äîâåðèå, è ýòî íå Âû.

[andi_germany]

People you are getting 2 things mixed up:

1. It is forbitten to publish depictions of women or men that are under the age of 18.

2. There is a law (commonly referred to as 2257) that requires US based enteties to keep records of the proof of age of the models in the pictures they produce.


The 2 are related but in now way connected when it comes to punishment. And that I think is the important part.

If the 2nd hand user has no requirement to keep records and the producer (other than US) has no requirement you cannot be procecuted for not complying with the 2257 law simply because it does not apply to you.

You can however be procecuted when you publish pictures of underage models due to several other laws that prohibit such publication. So you have to make sure the model is over the age of 18. Several ways to be at least 90% sure are there. If you can be 90 percent sure you have done enough to not get procecuted.

As jonesy stated above:

think of a video store that carried the traci lords vids when she dopped the dime about her age. None of them went to jail because of receipts and contracts ect. for purcahing material. the producers and some manufactuers caught the heat.

It makes absolutely sense that the ones producing failed to do the checking and fucked up. Why should someone that can prove he bought the content should get procecuted?

The most important thing is to keep you business documents in order. Keep copies of email conversations with the producer, all receipts etc. That will prove that you did everything you could to ensure the models age. Intend is a big issue with all laws. If they cannot prove intent you basically are at low risk.

Now the conclusion basically is that only if you buy teen content you have to be careful. I would say that if you buy mature content noone ever even checks if the model is under 18.

So don't confuse 2257 complience laws with childporn laws. It's 2 different things and you are home free if the content is in fact legal and you point your 2257 notice to the producers address. Just ask him where he can point the 2257 notice and keep the mail of what he tells you to prove that you complied with your requirements and post the notice.

[andi_germany]

Is there a risk in buying pictures?
Yes there is and it will always be there.

Will just buying from US producers be risk free?
Not at all. They simply state they comply and if someone checks they just stated and don't have the documents. I think most producers lack the right documents because the law was just ignored for so long. Some might have it in order now but who can say who?

Conclusion: If you buy teen content you have to live with the risk


There are also other risks that people commonly overlook. Free porn is illegal. You can comply all you want with 2257 if you offer free porn in your tour or on your sites you are already breaking the law.

[AaronM]

Here we go again.....

1: You are the ONLY person to even mention Child Porn in this thread. This is not the topic.

2: It is NOT against the law to post pictures of nude minors.

Please read and understand the threads prior to replying to them.

Oh and Unseen....I know you are still reading this thread.

[andi_germany]

Originally posted by AaronM
Here we go again.....

1: You are the ONLY person to even mention Child Porn in this thread. This is not the topic.

Sure it is the topic because people mistake the penalties for using underage pictures and the penalties for not complying to 2257. 2257 is there for specific reasons and that is to make sure that all models are over the age of 18 when they are displayed in any sexual fashion. This is to protect minors from exploitation. By forcing the producers to review the ID's and filing them the lawmakers thought that more care will be taken.
If you don't have to keep records(2nd hand webmaster and international producers) how can the 2257 penalties apply to the webmaster? The law can simply not be applied to the webmaster but other laws can be if in fact the model was underage

Originally posted by AaronM


2: It is NOT against the law to post pictures of nude minors.

No it's not and you also do not need to have any 2257 notices on your site if you only display nudes. So whats you point?

Originally posted by AaronM


Please read and understand the threads prior to replying to them.

I think you are the one being ignorant to that thread. The question was if it makes foreign content illegal or not and you have nothing better to do than attack the people trying to solve that question.
You are an US content producer so 2257 applies to you. It's simple for you. I think you are just pissed that you have to do all the work while others that are foreign just are exempt. So you tell everyone that you are the great compliant content producer and buying from others will put the average webmaster in jail.

This is pure bullshit

[XXXManager]

AaronM..
Mate..
Bro...

SHUT THE FUCK UP!

The dude just asked a valid and interesting legal question.
Where there is no law, court has to "improvize". He is asking what people with legal perception think.
As far as I know you do good photography, but ain't a lawyer last I checked

As to his example, I understand he is talking about a non-US producer and a US client - unlike you stated. (doesn't matter which of us is wrong though)

I think its an interesting thread/question (from a legal point of view) and I wish boards would have more of those and less "I got to 10000 posts (after spamming the board like hell and having every post saying "I fucked her/show me your tits")

What do you think?

I don't fucing know what is between you two. Maybe you have a "history" together there. But maybe you should keep the bashing for ICQ or Email?

PS.
UnseenWorld: I don't know about the law.
I wonder though what one would gain EVEN if such a loophole exists? Cheaper prices? After all - the same content (even foreign content) can be found by local producer. I heard There is a guy called Aaron from AMP who is producing legal content LOL

[Groove]

Originally posted by AaronM
harrumphers? WTF kind of idiot uses words like that?

I think harrumphers is a great word!

Lighten up man, it's an interesting thread

[LadyMischief]

Originally posted by Webattorney
Any webmaster that desires to distribute sexually explicit content from the United States must comply with Section 2257, regardless of the source of the content. There is no immunity and no loophole. Keep thinking, though.

Apparently, everyone in the thread but myself missed the fact that this has just been cleared up by an attorney. Thank you very much for your information

[AaronM]

Originally posted by andi_germany


I think you are the one being ignorant to that thread. The question was if it makes foreign content illegal or not and you have nothing better to do than attack the people trying to solve that question.
You are an US content producer so 2257 applies to you. It's simple for you. I think you are just pissed that you have to do all the work while others that are foreign just are exempt. So you tell everyone that you are the great compliant content producer and buying from others will put the average webmaster in jail.

This is pure bullshit

This entire thread is bullshit and has NOTHING to do with what the title suggests. That is the problem I have with it. I never implied such things as you are stating.

Why I even bother replying to you is beyond me.

[AaronM]

Originally posted by XXXManager
AaronM..
Mate..
Bro...

SHUT THE FUCK UP!

The dude just asked a valid and interesting legal question.
Where there is no law, court has to "improvize". He is asking what people with legal perception think.
As far as I know you do good photography, but ain't a lawyer last I checked

As to his example, I understand he is talking about a non-US producer and a US client - unlike you stated. (doesn't matter which of us is wrong though)

I think its an interesting thread/question (from a legal point of view) and I wish boards would have more of those and less "I got to 10000 posts (after spamming the board like hell and having every post saying "I fucked her/show me your tits")

What do you think?

I don't fucing know what is between you two. Maybe you have a "history" together there. But maybe you should keep the bashing for ICQ or Email?

PS.
UnseenWorld: I don't know about the law.
I wonder though what one would gain EVEN if such a loophole exists? Cheaper prices? After all - the same content (even foreign content) can be found by local producer. I heard There is a guy called Aaron from AMP who is producing legal content LOL

Damn straight there is some bad blood between Unseenworld and myself. This is GFY...GoFuckYourself if you do not like what I have to say.

The ACTUAL topic of this thread may be valid but the TITLE of it is not.

[AaronM]

Originally posted by LadyMischief


Apparently, everyone in the thread but myself missed the fact that this has just been cleared up by an attorney. Thank you very much for your information

No, it has not been cleared up and that is my very point. His questin has nothiong to do with US laws but because the title and some of his comments suggest it does, It is easily misunderstood.

[MichaelAncher]

Originally posted by UnseenWorld
Suppose you are a webmaster (secondary producer) who has no legal requirement to maintain 2257 documents on models/actors and you buy from an offshore supplier (primary producer) not subject to US law (and who therefor also has no legal requirement to maintain 2257 documents), and if the law does not, as I think it does not REQUIRE anyone to buy only from US sources which are subject to 2257, is there then a body of content out there which is immune to 2257? Before you run out and buy a shitload of Russian content, remember: it'd still be nice to have age documents for plenty of other reasons. A lot of those Russian girls look awfully young for supposedly being 18 or older. Having access to proof that doesn't look immediately suspicious would be nice, wouldn't it?

I just think there might ba kind of loophole in the law here.

The best thing you can do, no matter where you live and no matter whom you buy content from. Deal with people that can provide modelreleases and ID's, confirming that the model was over 18 when the shooting was done. Then you are home free, no matter what happens.
It's not just a matter of age verification, it's also a proof that the person selling the content are the rightfully owner...

[XXXManager]

Originally posted by AaronM
1. Damn straight there is some bad blood between Unseenworld and myself.
2. This is GFY...GoFuckYourself if you do not like what I have to say.
3. The ACTUAL topic of this thread may be valid but the TITLE of it is not.

1. Now THAT'S interesting. Do spill it out. Time to heal (or time to kill)
2. This is GFY. if you don't like me not liking what you have to say.
3. OMG. I just saw it. HOW DARE HE!?!? BURN THE WITCH!