Question about 2257

[Flu]

Does it have to be on every page of your website? What are the laws about it being required?

Does it only need to be on pages that models are on?
What the specifics and this is for a pay site.

[Flu]

wow this got pushed down fast....anyone willing to answer this?

[Rjames]

Check it out here:

http://www.regulations.gov/freddocs/04-13792.htm

A few people I've chated with are screaming "Big Brother" over the proposed changes and planned enforcement.

[Flu]

cool thank you.

and yes. having to have model releases in Stage name and Real name in triplicate is a bit excessive. coming down on the industry from that angle is retarded. they couldnt get us through obscenity and now they're trying through paper work. funny.

[doober]

just move hehehe

porn may have been born in the USA but it sure as hell wont die there

[Flu]

Originally posted by doober
just move hehehe

porn may have been born in the USA but it sure as hell wont die there

hah.

I'm willing to bet that either Ashhahahahaha has the biggest child scat porn collection on the planet or he's impotent and gay.

It's one or the other or both for sure.

[Bansheelinks]

Originally posted by Flu
hah.

I'm willing to bet that either Ashhahahahaha has the biggest child scat porn collection on the planet or he's impotent and gay.

It's one or the other or both for sure.

I heard that

Asshead is going to be unemployed come November. Count on it!

And then we'll meet up at GFY for an online party.

[pornguy]

Dont think for one second that the president change will be the end of the problems for the adult online community.

If for one second Kerry thinks it will keep him in office longer, then he will go after us as well.

Forget the idea of cem or rep. They are politicans and they are the scum of the earth.

[tony286]

Originally posted by pornguy
Dont think for one second that the president change will be the end of the problems for the adult online community.

If for one second Kerry thinks it will keep him in office longer, then he will go after us as well.

Forget the idea of cem or rep. They are politicans and they are the scum of the earth.

If a Democrat gets in the chances are its not a priority . They are not pro porn but they have better things to do with their time. The bulk of porn convictions happened during Republican admins. The Reagan years were a nightmare for porn.

[AaronM]

Originally posted by Flu
cool thank you.

and yes. having to have model releases in Stage name and Real name in triplicate is a bit excessive. coming down on the industry from that angle is retarded. they couldnt get us through obscenity and now they're trying through paper work. funny.

First off....Rjames did not answer your question...In fact, he linked you to some regulations that are not even law at this point in time.

Secondly...The thing with multiple names has been a requirement since day one of 2257 and your reply indicates that you think this is a new way for them to come after us.

My advice to you...Get to an Adult Internet attorney ASAP and quit getting your info from these boards or wherever you have been looking because it clearly is doing you no good.

[Flu]

Having to have all model info in triplecate has been standard for 2257 since day 1? That's news to me.

We have a lawyer. I'm checking on what measures a website has to take when it comes to displaying 2257 on its website. Something I figured this place would know, and I figured it would be easier, so we wouldn't have to call or email him about it.

[AaronM]

Originally posted by Flu
Having to have all model info in triplecate has been standard for 2257 since day 1? That's news to me.

We have a lawyer. I'm checking on what measures a website has to take when it comes to displaying 2257 on its website. Something I figured this place would know, and I figured it would be easier, so we wouldn't have to call or email him about it.

If what have been the standards of record keeping for the last 14 years is news to you then perhaps you should not bother calling your attorney at all since they have clearly not done their job very well. Maybe an attorney who is a member of the First Amendment Lawyers Association would be of better assistance to you and your company.

On another note....There is neither current law nor proposed regulation that says anything about triplicate forms of model info. Where in the hell are you getting your information from anyway?

Stop running blind and scared. Contact an attorney who knows their shit. J.D. Obenberger of xxxlaw.net comes to mind.

Now?To answer your initial question?..

The new regulations are quite specific yet vague at the same time. The Government clearly knows what a URL is but they do not specifically address where the declaration should be located other than to say the following:

?Any producer of any book, magazine, periodical, film, videotape, computer-generated image, digital image, picture, or other matter that contains one or more visual depictions of actual sexually explicit conduct made after November 1, 1990, and produced, manufactured, published, duplicated, reproduced, or reissued on or after May 26, 1992, 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, computer-generated image, digital image, picture, or other matter to affix the statement.?

[Disclaimer} I have not received any of the following blue colored information from any of my attorneys, it is simply how the proposed regulations read to me.[/Disclaimer]

As you can see by the bold area above?..It is very vague. Going strictly by how it is written, it appears that each and every image or video would need its own declaration attached.

In the past?The law was written as follows:

?Any other film or videotape shall contain the required statement within one minute from the start of the film or videotape, and before the opening scene, and shall display the statement for a sufficient duration to be read by the average viewer. For all other categories not otherwise mentioned in this section(That would be the Internet since it did not exist when this law was written), the statement is to be prominently displayed consistent with the manner of display required for the aforementioned categories.?

That reads as though the declaration should be prominently displayed on the homepage itself, outside of any members area and available for viewing by the average surfer??Keeping in mind that the ?average surfer? will not even join the site?.That is why it can not be exclusively behind a members area.

Soooo?The short answer to your question is that you?re fucked.

Currently these proposed regulations are in the comment phase. I highly suggest that people start taking an active interest in this issue and submit your professionally stated comments to the provided contact.

Written comments must be received on or before August 24, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be submitted to:
Andrew Oosterbaan
Chief, Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section
Criminal Division
Attn: Docket No. CRM 103
United States Department of Justice
Washington, DC 20530

Comments may be submitted electronically to: [email protected]
or to http://www.regulations.gov by using the electronic comment form provided on that site. Comments submitted electronically must include Docket No. CRM 103 in the subject box. You may also view an electronic version of this rule at the http://www.regulations.gov site.

Facsimile comments may be submitted to: (202) 514-1793. Comments submitted by facsimile must include Docket No. CRM 103 on the cover sheet.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Oosterbaan (202) 514-5780.

[pussyluver]

Well let's give Brandon from FightThePatent a plug.
http://www.2257lookup.com/2257ForWebmasters.html
He has an interesting way to automate the process with minimal effort on your part. Plus he is keeping up on all the legal issues. Worth a look, esp as the new 2257 falls into place.

[tony286]

Originally posted by pussyluver
Well let's give Brandon from FightThePatent a plug.
http://www.2257lookup.com/2257ForWebmasters.html
He has an interesting way to automate the process with minimal effort on your part. Plus he is keeping up on all the legal issues. Worth a look, esp as the new 2257 falls into place.

From what I heard on the radio show today, his thing prepared you for old 2257 not new 2257 . The secondary producer saying these people shot that pic isnt going to work anymore. The secondary producer must have the model releases and id's.

[Flu]

I'm only asking because I was assigned to get the 2257 on the pages we needed to have 2257 on. Not because I run the company. so I wanted to know specifically where they wanted it.