Paris Hilton sues over video... (when not if) - GoFuckYourself.com

ibuydomains · 02-28-2004, 07:24 PM

When it happens, could XPAYS affiliates be partially liable for advertising it? Included in the lawsuit?

Also XPAYS themselves dont have the 2257 records...

"In fulfilling its obligations under 18 U.S.C. § 2257, XPays Inc. relies on the plain language of the statute and on the well-reasoned decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in Sundance Associates, Inc. v. Reno, 139 F.3d 804, 808 (10th Cir 1998), which held that entities which have no role in the "hiring, contracting for, managing, or otherwise arranging for the participation" of the models or performers, are exempt from the record-keeping requirements of 18 U.S.C. § 2257.

Therefore, 18 U.S.C. § 2257 information is available from:

Richard Salomon, Custodian of Records"

tbabe · 02-28-2004, 07:26 PM

well, theres no doubt she's 19 in the video. but theres also no model release which i find interesting

IPK · 02-28-2004, 07:26 PM

There are going to be so many webmasters advertising that I'm sure they won't go after them. They'll probably just go after XPAYS and send individual webmasters cease and desists.

swoop · 02-28-2004, 07:31 PM

I agree, webmasters will get a stop now or else. If they keep advertising it, that's when they could get in trouble.

arg · 02-28-2004, 07:41 PM

One thing I noticed is that neither trustfundgirls.com nor xpays' banners for the video ever mention Paris Hilton by name. They mention Rick by name, and "hotel heiress" and "trust fund girl," but I think they're trying to avoid a potential misappropriation of publicity or trademark infringement issue if they used her name.

flashfire · 02-28-2004, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by swoop
I agree, webmasters will get a stop now or else. If they keep advertising it, that's when they could get in trouble.

thats what will happen I think

Nysus · 02-28-2004, 08:20 PM

Not sure 2257 documentation would be required. It's amateur video and not actors, so I'm not sure how it'd be applied or if it can. Interesting to know though.

Cheers,
Matt

freeadultcontent · 02-28-2004, 08:28 PM

I love the words RICO.

Morgan · 02-28-2004, 08:30 PM

I heard she was still 17, almost 18 when she made that tape.

tbabe · 02-28-2004, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ganjasaurus
I heard she was still 17, almost 18 when she made that tape.

she was 19, its actually mentioned in the tape cause she's drinking a bottle of wine

D-Money · 02-28-2004, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ibuydomains
When it happens, could XPAYS affiliates be partially liable for advertising it? Included in the lawsuit?

Also XPAYS themselves dont have the 2257 records...

"In fulfilling its obligations under 18 U.S.C. § 2257, XPays Inc. relies on the plain language of the statute and on the well-reasoned decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in Sundance Associates, Inc. v. Reno, 139 F.3d 804, 808 (10th Cir 1998), which held that entities which have no role in the "hiring, contracting for, managing, or otherwise arranging for the participation" of the models or performers, are exempt from the record-keeping requirements of 18 U.S.C. § 2257.

Therefore, 18 U.S.C. § 2257 information is available from:

Richard Salomon, Custodian of Records"

After reading that, how could the affiliate possibly be held responsible?

GoodGuy · 02-28-2004, 09:11 PM

Im tired of Paris Hilton.

RawAlex · 02-28-2004, 09:12 PM

FOlks, that isn't a "pass it to the affiliates" language, that is "pass it to the film maker / distributor. Read 2257 closely, you have to have records if you have the primary creator / distributor of the material. It is not required that each person selling advertising for this thing have the documents.

HOWEVER, if you knowingly promote CP or other, like any other offence in the books... your ass is toast.

Alex

D-Money · 02-28-2004, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RawAlex
FOlks, that isn't a "pass it to the affiliates" language, that is "pass it to the film maker / distributor. Read 2257 closely, you have to have records if you have the primary creator / distributor of the material. It is not required that each person selling advertising for this thing have the documents.

HOWEVER, if you knowingly promote CP or other, like any other offence in the books... your ass is toast.

Alex

I knew someone smart was reading this thread somewhere.

whew!

Trippekdick · 03-01-2004, 02:19 AM

hoe_vender · 03-01-2004, 02:31 AM

bitch she has enough monry

Rich · 03-01-2004, 02:47 AM

If he filmed the video with her consent, and they're not using her name at all, what can they sue over? 2257? lol

I guess the Hilton lawyers could bankrupt even most millionaires with legal bills even if they don't have a case.

I suppose the lawsuit = more publicity for Paris once the scandal gets boring.

02-28-2004, 07:24 PM	#1
ibuydomains Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 710	Paris Hilton sues over video... (when not if) When it happens, could XPAYS affiliates be partially liable for advertising it? Included in the lawsuit? Also XPAYS themselves dont have the 2257 records... "In fulfilling its obligations under 18 U.S.C. § 2257, XPays Inc. relies on the plain language of the statute and on the well-reasoned decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in Sundance Associates, Inc. v. Reno, 139 F.3d 804, 808 (10th Cir 1998), which held that entities which have no role in the "hiring, contracting for, managing, or otherwise arranging for the participation" of the models or performers, are exempt from the record-keeping requirements of 18 U.S.C. § 2257. Therefore, 18 U.S.C. § 2257 information is available from: Richard Salomon, Custodian of Records"

02-28-2004, 07:26 PM	#2
tbabe Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 2,494	well, theres no doubt she's 19 in the video. but theres also no model release which i find interesting __________________ Still one of the best programs on the net. According to their banner, you can get rich.

02-28-2004, 07:26 PM	#3
IPK Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 4,209	There are going to be so many webmasters advertising that I'm sure they won't go after them. They'll probably just go after XPAYS and send individual webmasters cease and desists. __________________ DomainerResource.com strategies for monetizing and investing in domain names...

02-28-2004, 07:31 PM	#4
swoop Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 3,903	I agree, webmasters will get a stop now or else. If they keep advertising it, that's when they could get in trouble. __________________ Earn 50 % Per Sale - Weekly Payments by check, wire, PayPal, or ePassporte

02-28-2004, 08:20 PM	#7
Nysus Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 7,817	Not sure 2257 documentation would be required. It's amateur video and not actors, so I'm not sure how it'd be applied or if it can. Interesting to know though. Cheers, Matt __________________ What name is pr0 / Untouched Markets using these days? Untouched Markets - pr0 - Refund My Money Now Someone owes me $2,000 because they didn't do any work that was paid for pointing at pr0 / William / UntouchedMarkets See https://gfy.com/fucking-around-and-business-discussion/948258-untouchedmarkets-pr0-refund-money-post16744521.html and for more detailed see https://gfy.com/fucking-around-and-business-discussion/948645-re-recent-bullshit-drama-explained-detail-pr0-untouched-markets.html

02-28-2004, 07:41 PM	#5
arg Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 1,164	One thing I noticed is that neither trustfundgirls.com nor xpays' banners for the video ever mention Paris Hilton by name. They mention Rick by name, and "hotel heiress" and "trust fund girl," but I think they're trying to avoid a potential misappropriation of publicity or trademark infringement issue if they used her name.

02-28-2004, 08:28 PM	#8
freeadultcontent Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: "evitcepsrep ruoy egnahc" Posts: 9,976	I love the words RICO. __________________ Exclusive Ethnic & Microniche Sites

02-28-2004, 08:30 PM	#9
Morgan Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: May 2002 Location: Corona Del Mar, CA Posts: 10,520	I heard she was still 17, almost 18 when she made that tape. __________________ PornstarPlatinum.com \| TransErotica.com

02-28-2004, 09:11 PM	#12
GoodGuy So Fucking Banned Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 881	Im tired of Paris Hilton.

02-28-2004, 09:12 PM	#13
RawAlex So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In a house. Posts: 9,465	FOlks, that isn't a "pass it to the affiliates" language, that is "pass it to the film maker / distributor. Read 2257 closely, you have to have records if you have the primary creator / distributor of the material. It is not required that each person selling advertising for this thing have the documents. HOWEVER, if you knowingly promote CP or other, like any other offence in the books... your ass is toast. Alex

03-01-2004, 02:19 AM	#15
Trippekdick Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Sweden Posts: 1,756	nice

03-01-2004, 02:31 AM	#16
hoe_vender Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Lincoln, NE Posts: 2,018	bitch she has enough monry __________________ ICQ #286508534

03-01-2004, 02:47 AM	#17
Rich So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 11,486	If he filmed the video with her consent, and they're not using her name at all, what can they sue over? 2257? lol I guess the Hilton lawyers could bankrupt even most millionaires with legal bills even if they don't have a case. I suppose the lawsuit = more publicity for Paris once the scandal gets boring.