which content provider has all the info needed to comply with the new 2257 laws, anyone complelty ready??
-
-
I guess everyone is ready LOLOLOL -
i serously doubt any of them are ready for the demand that the buyers are going to be placing on themComment
-
Wanna bet?Originally posted by JaceXXX
i serously doubt any of them are ready for the demand that the buyers are going to be placing on them
Comment
-
The law has to be published so we know what it is before we can be ready. Right now it is only recomendations and they are vague at that.ICQ: 91139591Comment
-
ZipContent.com sends you all the records you need with each order
Comment
-
who's ready then, why are they not posting back to let us know.Originally posted by AaronM
Wanna bet?
what about the over seas ones?
the laws not in place to be able to prepare for it.
and when it's in place, it's to late to comply, meaning it takes
time to do the work, of secondary producers, and figure out
what pic is were and so onComment
-
if anyone ever does get inspected i would like to read all about it here on the board.
what did they ask for?
what questions did they ask?
how many were there ( 1 or 2 agents or maybe half a dozen)
guns? dogs? air cover?
if possible kick on a hidden video camera and tape it, that would be cool.
and did they make you take your shoes off looking for a shoe bomb?
and what ever else.
Comment
-
all those records have the model info blacked out.Originally posted by TechNtentions
ZipContent.com sends you all the records you need with each order
this won't work with the new 2257 proposals if they go thruComment
-
I am fully prepared to be compliant with the proposed regs and if they are not made final as is, I will simply tweak my system to their requirements.Originally posted by turbomax
who's ready then, why are they not posting back to let us know.
what about the over seas ones?
the laws not in place to be able to prepare for it.
and when it's in place, it's to late to comply, meaning it takes
time to do the work, of secondary producers, and figure out
what pic is were and so on
As far as your comment about "and when it's in place, it's to late to comply...."
You are either full of shit and using scare tactics like Charly does or you are simply ignorant to the law.
Go read 5 U.S.C. 553 paragraph D and you will see that any new regulation gives us a 30 day window from the date of the final publication to become compliant.
If you had an attorney who knew his shit then you would already be aware of this.Comment
-
And about this part....Because you are not a client of mine that would need to be concerned with it.Originally posted by turbomax
who's ready then, why are they not posting back to let us know.Comment
-
I am aware but if seems that it's a monster task at hand,Originally posted by AaronM
I am fully prepared to be compliant with the proposed regs and if they are not made final as is, I will simply tweak my system to their requirements.
As far as your comment about "and when it's in place, it's to late to comply...."
You are either full of shit and using scare tactics like Charly does or you are simply ignorant to the law.
Go read 5 U.S.C. 553 paragraph D and you will see that any new regulation gives us a 30 day window from the date of the final publication to become compliant.
If you had an attorney who knew his shit then you would already be aware of this.
depending what it is we may have to do. (secondary producers)
and things are not clear at the monemt
and who's charleyComment
-
There is 30 days after the law is published to comply.
Personally I think it will be virtually impossible for any content provider to be 100% the way things look unless it is leased content with DRM. Why? What kind of system is in place that lets you know every single URL where every single one of your pics ends up?
Also, privacy issues. I personally don't want to be the one responsible for a girl getting hurt by some freak because I gave him her home address etc. NOW do you want us to be fully compliant with what you ASSUME will become law? We need to all chill out and wait till this thing is actually published.ICQ: 91139591Comment
-
How can you say that things are not clear? They are almost 100% crystal clear and the things that are not should simply fall into the C.Y.A. category.Originally posted by turbomax
I am aware but if seems that it's a monster task at hand,
depending what it is we may have to do. (secondary producers)
and things are not clear at the monemt
and who's charley
We know they are going to crack down and we have a list of proposed regulations to go off of. Why fuck around? Get busy now and if they change anything...tweak it later instead of building your new system from the ground up at the last minute with only a 30 day window.
It does nto take a rocket scientist to figure this shit out and comply with it.Comment
-
I agree with what you are saying.Originally posted by dready
There is 30 days after the law is published to comply.
Personally I think it will be virtually impossible for any content provider to be 100% the way things look unless it is leased content with DRM. Why? What kind of system is in place that lets you know every single URL where every single one of your pics ends up?
Also, privacy issues. I personally don't want to be the one responsible for a girl getting hurt by some freak because I gave him her home address etc. NOW do you want us to be fully compliant with what you ASSUME will become law? We need to all chill out and wait till this thing is actually published.
who knows were a pic ends up? to cross referrance & all the rest of it.
chill is rite. I just wanted some thoughts on the issueComment
-
Originally posted by dready
There is 30 days after the law is published to comply.
Personally I think it will be virtually impossible for any content provider to be 100% the way things look unless it is leased content with DRM. Why? What kind of system is in place that lets you know every single URL where every single one of your pics ends up?
Also, privacy issues. I personally don't want to be the one responsible for a girl getting hurt by some freak because I gave him her home address etc. NOW do you want us to be fully compliant with what you ASSUME will become law? We need to all chill out and wait till this thing is actually published.
Jesus Christ....I give up again.
Not only a herd of sheep but mute sheep at that.Comment
-
your rite man, I agree, the some things are a little off the wallOriginally posted by AaronM
How can you say that things are not clear? They are almost 100% crystal clear and the things that are not should simply fall into the C.Y.A. category.
We know they are going to crack down and we have a list of proposed regulations to go off of. Why fuck around? Get busy now and if they change anything...tweak it later instead of building your new system from the ground up at the last minute with only a 30 day window.
It does nto take a rocket scientist to figure this shit out and comply with it.
maiden name, cross ref to each alias, identifying # of book mag etc... what url the pics are on and so on and on and onComment
-
The only thing I find difficult or off the wall about those is the URL thing but it is entirely possible to be compliant with that if needed.Originally posted by turbomax
your rite man, I agree, the some things are a little off the wall
maiden name, cross ref to each alias, identifying # of book mag etc... what url the pics are on and so on and on and on
Anyway....I have to get to a funeral now.
Have fun.Comment
-
The way I read it is that the content producer sells to a secondary and sends the docs along, then the secondary has to track what they do with the content, where it came from and where it is posted.
Comment
-
see ya aaron, sorry to hear about the funeralOriginally posted by AaronM
The only thing I find difficult or off the wall about those is the URL thing but it is entirely possible to be compliant with that if needed.
Anyway....I have to get to a funeral now.
Have fun.Comment
-
We are ready either way. We just have to have something set in stone and not this jumping around deal. Until I read an "OFFICIAL REPORT" and something more solid we wont know how to be within the new laws. But yes we will be ready.SIG TOO BIG! Maximum 120x60 button and no more than 3 text lines of DEFAULT SIZE and COLOR. Unless your sig is for a GFY top banner sponsor, you may use a 624x80 instead of a 120x60. Let me repeat... A 120 x 60 button and no more that 3 lines of DEFAULT SIZE AND COLOR text.Comment
-
i really dont like the idea of giving out my model's address & shit to people who buy from me. no offense but some of these 'webmasters' are just perverts and this new law is asking for trouble.
wonder how many models will have to get raped or even killed before the law gets struck down?the revolution is coming.Comment
-
If you are a content producer, please check out http://www.2257lookup.com to participate.
It's doesn't cost you anything to join.
Participating in the program means helping out your customers be 2257 compliant.
After signing the agreement, I would send out an external HD for you to copy your images onto, or you could send CD/DVD or FTP the files.
After processing the images into the database, i discard the photos.
THe images in the database are the "masters". Webmasters then subscribe to the 2257lookup service to have ther website spidered (inside members area), to download all images.
Each image is run through ImageDiff Engine (tm) that can match same images of different sizes/resolutions.
For each match found, an entry into a report is created that identifies the website's filename to the original filename, the set name, (the model), and the content producer.
webmasters would receive this report via email for their records.
By having as many content producers in the system as i can, i can give a more complete report.
The 2257lookup report helps webmasters idenitify where each image on their website is from.. which is one of the current 2257 regulation requirements that most fail on.
The service will be a valuable tool to your customers in helping to get their records straight, and all content producers are welcomed to participate in this no-cost service to you.
Current participating content producers: Matric Content, Falcon Foto, Paul Markham, Focus Adult, Ounique, Max Pixels, Medium Pimpin, Zmaster, Titan Media, and several more in closing stages.
-brandon
http://www.t3report.com (where's the traffic?) v5.0 is out! |
http://www.FightThePatent.com | ICQ 52741957Comment
-
We have always given out 2257 documentation, so our clients have already got it. In the future we will continue to give them out.
As for removing the models contact details that will continue as the law does not state they are required. It does state the documents should not be tampered with though.
Don't see anyone giving out models addresses and I don't see Ashc roft prosecuting anyone for not giving out the addresses, this is about winning votes not losing them.
However if it is that way forget about this business staying the same, becasue it would mean every webmaster would know the contact details of every model he published.
You can vet your clients to see they are straight, but can you vet his webmasters?Comment
-
I've read and reread the laws and regulations. I can't find this anywhere. Can you point to the specific section where it says this?Originally posted by charly
It does state the documents should not be tampered with though.SIG TOO BIG! Maximum 120x60 button and no more than 3 text lines of DEFAULT SIZE and COLOR. Unless your sig is for a GFY top banner sponsor, then you may use a 624x80 instead of a 120x60.Comment
-
\Originally posted by JaceXXX
i serously doubt any of them are ready for the demand that the buyers are going to be placing on them
Ive always been compliant. but Im digitizing all my stes by scene # to be readyComment
-
Hey manOriginally posted by charly
We have always given out 2257 documentation, so our clients have already got it. In the future we will continue to give them out.
As for removing the models contact details that will continue as the law does not state they are required. It does state the documents should not be tampered with though.
Don't see anyone giving out models addresses and I don't see Ashc roft prosecuting anyone for not giving out the addresses, this is about winning votes not losing them.
However if it is that way forget about this business staying the same, becasue it would mean every webmaster would know the contact details of every model he published.
You can vet your clients to see they are straight, but can you vet his webmasters?
I haven't posted about new 2257 too much till now as its still not clear enought but there is 1 fact you are probably missing.
You are located here in Czech and I am sure your lawyer informed you that giving out the IDs is a crime and you are breaking the Czech law(for a quite a long time).We have "zakon na ochranu osobnich udaju" here (law for protection of personal informations) which is seriouse crime here in Czech.So its not so easy.
The only way out of this conflict is to have signed special agreement form from each model saying "yes I agree with displaying of my personal data on internet".EVEN DATE OF BIRTH is considered as personal data.
So we are working on contacting all models that we are able to contact to get this agreement signed (not so easy).Then we will provide with full IDs for the photosets and videos that we have this agreement signed for.The rest will be given out of our site or just for Euro webmasters who doesn't need (or think they don't need) it.
my
Comment
-
Keep in mind that any techie will tell you that there are many variations on any given URL. For instance, http://www.domain.com/members/pic1.jpg could also be expressed as:The only thing I find difficult or off the wall about those is the URL thing but it is entirely possible to be compliant with that if needed.
- http://domain.com/members/pic1.jpg
- http://www.domain.com/members/../members/pic1.jpg
- http://www.domain.com/members/pic%31.jpg
- http://www.domain.com/members/%70%69%63%31%2e%6a%70%67
...and so on. Now, I'm not saying that anyone's likely to be busted for not listing every equivelant URL, just that it is *impossible* to comply with the letter of the proposed regulations. Show me your list of URL's that a file appears at, and I will show you a URL that you've missed.
Would that kind of trickery hold up in court? Hopefully not. But it's a bad law when you can't possibly be in compliance and have to hope that the courts will accept a good faith effort.
Cheers
-bICQ: 12005327Comment
Comment