Do you need to comply with the 2257 for a nn site? - GoFuckYourself.com

Oracle Porn · 07-30-2004, 08:05 PM

Lycanthrope · 07-30-2004, 11:10 PM

Bumpity

My opinion, which means shit, is this:

If the site / models are truly non nude, I'm talking no see through bras or anything, there are no 2257 issues. Therefore, there is nothing for you to comply with.

I still feel one should have an exemption statement however.

Jace · 07-30-2004, 11:15 PM

i would have to agree with Lycanthrope, there is nothing on a non nude site that falls into the 2257 category

Theo · 07-30-2004, 11:15 PM

no nude
no sex
= you dont have

a1ka1ine · 07-31-2004, 04:02 AM

hmm i thought you would do as although they are nonnude the sites are clearly sexual in nature, and a girl spreading her legs with the camera zoomed in on her underwear would probably require 2257. i hope it would, because otherwise that would make it totally legal for a site of someone underage to exist that was nonnude - so, surely 2257 applies

pxxx · 07-31-2004, 04:09 AM

This 2275 stuff have really become a pain, but we can do nothing but find ways to comply.

Mutt · 07-31-2004, 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by a1ka1ine
hmm i thought you would do as although they are nonnude the sites are clearly sexual in nature, and a girl spreading her legs with the camera zoomed in on her underwear would probably require 2257. i hope it would, because otherwise that would make it totally legal for a site of someone underage to exist that was nonnude - so, surely 2257 applies

interesting - i was just telling somebody yesterday that many of the shots on nn sites are far more nasty than a softcore totally nude glamour shoot - funny how a little piece of white cotton fabric changes things for alot of people. reminds me of the teenage girls these days i read about who are engaging in anal sex and still consider themselves 'virgins' .

Sexual in nature isn't a term in the 2257 law. 'Sexually explicit' is what it says. I really don't think most nn sites fall under 2257 - if there is simulated or real masturbation, yes, if her hand is down her panties and she appears to be playing with herself then that definitely falls under 2257 requirements, panties or no panties.

TheWildcard · 07-31-2004, 04:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Soul_Rebel
no nude
no sex
= you dont have

What he said.

Living For Today · 07-31-2004, 05:41 AM

Some nn sites are very explicit in nature so I would have to say it does apply.

Dirty F · 07-31-2004, 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mutt
interesting - i was just telling somebody yesterday that many of the shots on nn sites are far more nasty than a softcore totally nude glamour shoot - funny how a little piece of white cotton fabric changes things for alot of people. reminds me of the teenage girls these days i read about who are engaging in anal sex and still consider themselves 'virgins' .

Virgin anal teens - that turns me on for a reason.

dready · 07-31-2004, 07:03 AM

You still have to make a 2257 exemption statement.

HairToStay · 07-31-2004, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mutt

Sexual in nature isn't a term in the 2257 law. 'Sexually explicit' is what it says. I really don't think most nn sites fall under 2257 - if there is simulated or real masturbation, yes, if her hand is down her panties and she appears to be playing with herself then that definitely falls under 2257 requirements, panties or no panties.

If she's not showing any pubes, you're ok.

Under 18 USC 2256 ....

(2)

''sexually explicit conduct'' means actual or simulated -

(A)

sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex;

(B)

bestiality;

(C)

masturbation;

(D)

sadistic or masochistic abuse; or

(E)

lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person;

CJswe · 07-31-2004, 09:50 AM

The new rules are a beauty for us outside the US, all persons I have discussed this with(I study commercial law) claim that since hosts can't be blamed, we can still host over there but not worry about at thing. its all about nationality. maybe time will prove us wrong, and by then we'll move. either way I feel sorry for you right now.

07-30-2004, 08:05 PM	#1
Oracle Porn Affiliate Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Icq: 94-399-723 Posts: 24,433	Do you need to comply with the 2257 for a nn site? for a site like www.tiffanyteen.com? __________________

07-30-2004, 11:10 PM	#2
Lycanthrope Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 4,517	Bumpity My opinion, which means shit, is this: If the site / models are truly non nude, I'm talking no see through bras or anything, there are no 2257 issues. Therefore, there is nothing for you to comply with. I still feel one should have an exemption statement however. __________________

07-31-2004, 07:03 AM	#11
dready Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Toronto, ON Posts: 5,247	You still have to make a 2257 exemption statement. __________________ ICQ: 91139591

07-31-2004, 09:50 AM	#13
CJswe Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 129	The new rules are a beauty for us outside the US, all persons I have discussed this with(I study commercial law) claim that since hosts can't be blamed, we can still host over there but not worry about at thing. its all about nationality. maybe time will prove us wrong, and by then we'll move. either way I feel sorry for you right now. __________________ Erotikpalatset.com - Swedes do it better Street69.com - Where did your wife go last night? Sexyvidz.com - Coming soon to a computer near YOU

07-30-2004, 11:15 PM	#3
Jace FBOP Class Of 2013 Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: bumfuck, ky Posts: 35,562	i would have to agree with Lycanthrope, there is nothing on a non nude site that falls into the 2257 category

07-30-2004, 11:15 PM	#4
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,515	no nude no sex = you dont have

07-31-2004, 04:02 AM	#5
a1ka1ine Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 3,387	hmm i thought you would do as although they are nonnude the sites are clearly sexual in nature, and a girl spreading her legs with the camera zoomed in on her underwear would probably require 2257. i hope it would, because otherwise that would make it totally legal for a site of someone underage to exist that was nonnude - so, surely 2257 applies

07-31-2004, 04:09 AM	#6
pxxx First African GFY Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: New Jersey Posts: 12,114	This 2275 stuff have really become a pain, but we can do nothing but find ways to comply.

07-31-2004, 05:41 AM	#9
Living For Today Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 3,970	Some nn sites are very explicit in nature so I would have to say it does apply.