2257 why is it an issue? - GoFuckYourself.com

Steen2 · 09-04-2004, 06:12 PM

Why is 2257 an issue for people who...

Example:

Live in Cuba
Host in Cuba
Use a Cuban CC processor

Why does anything like 2257 affect them?
Or does it?

PS: Cuba is just an example country, could be Canada, Kuwait or any other non-American country.

AaronM · 09-04-2004, 06:14 PM

This could be an interesting thread full of ignorance.

sumphatpimp · 09-04-2004, 06:15 PM

good dope heh?

bignasty · 09-04-2004, 06:16 PM

It is of importance to the content producers though. If they are not in compliance they won't get much content sales to US webmasters

Alltopnotch · 09-04-2004, 06:16 PM

its a US law...

EscortBiz · 09-04-2004, 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Steen2
Why is 2257 an issue for people who...

Example:

Live in Cuba
Host in Cuba
Use a Cuban CC processor

Why does anything like 2257 affect them?
Or does it?

PS: Cuba is just an example country, could be Canada, Kuwait or any other non-American country.

you are right people who live, host and bill in cuba should not worry about 2257 at all they should worry about their life and about the billing company who will last a few months

xclusive · 09-04-2004, 06:17 PM

Well you won't have as much of an issue but if the us government finds out they could block your isp and it's range from being accesed by the US market. We will see where this all goes though because I have a bad feeling that this is only the first card up thier sleeve...

AaronM · 09-04-2004, 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bignasty
It is of importance to the content producers though. If they are not in compliance they won't get much content sales to US webmasters

There has not been a major impact from that in the past. What makes you think that things are any different now?

Steen2 · 09-04-2004, 06:21 PM

So:

You won't be able to buy US made content..

and

US ISPs may block your site(s)

Is that correct?

AaronM · 09-04-2004, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Steen2
So:

You won't be able to buy US made content..

and

US ISPs may block your site(s)

Is that correct?

See my first reply to this thread.

William-Xfactor · 09-04-2004, 06:23 PM

I posted this in another thread already but chew on this.

FBI rocks up to your site, the first thing they see is, DOT COM or DOT NET

Your company is out side the USA, Your host is outside the USA.
But your domains are owned by the USA

Regards
No easy solution

Apollo · 09-04-2004, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by xclusive
Well you won't have as much of an issue but if the us government finds out they could block your isp and it's range from being accesed by the US market. We will see where this all goes though because I have a bad feeling that this is only the first card up thier sleeve...

Yeah, they do a great job of that with all the cp and beast sites floating around the net that are hosted outside the US which will always be worse than a site that doesn't have up to date 2257 information w/ available information on where to locate the model.

bignasty · 09-04-2004, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AaronM
There has not been a major impact from that in the past. What makes you think that things are any different now?

I don't know if you misunderstood me, but I was talking about the foriegn producers that say fuck 2257 and won't comply. Any US webmasters serious about their shit aint gonna buy from them. But then again I'm talking serious webmasters, too many aint serious about this business.

AaronM · 09-04-2004, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bignasty
I don't know if you misunderstood me, but I was talking about the foriegn producers that say fuck 2257 and won't comply. Any US webmasters serious about their shit aint gonna buy from them. But then again I'm talking serious webmasters, too many aint serious about this business.

Of course I understood what you were saying. The fact of that matter is that people still buy non-compliant content. More importantly, AVN recently reported that about 95% of adult sites are not compliant.

Are you saying that the serious webmasters represent only a 5% share of the market?

bignasty · 09-04-2004, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AaronM

Are you saying that the serious webmasters represent only a 5% share of the market?

judging by the posts here on gfy I think 5% sounds high.

In all seriousness, if you can't comply with the laws regarding your business, you need to get out.

AaronM · 09-04-2004, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bignasty
judging by the posts here on gfy I think 5% sounds high.

The top 5% of webmasters don't even post to GFY on a regular basis if at all.

Steen2 · 09-04-2004, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by William-Xfactor
I posted this in another thread already but chew on this.

FBI rocks up to your site, the first thing they see is, DOT COM or DOT NET

Your company is out side the USA, Your host is outside the USA.
But your domains are owned by the USA

Regards
No easy solution

Versign controls com/net, PIR controls .org. .ca, .com.mx, those are managed in their respective countries.

bignasty · 09-04-2004, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AaronM
The top 5% of webmasters don't even post to GFY on a regular basis if at all.

I'm sure they don't. Either way people need to get their shit together or get out. I hadn't seen that AVN report, but 95% of sites being non compliant is higher than I thought it would be.

freeadultcontent · 09-04-2004, 06:52 PM

Kimmykim · 09-04-2004, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by EscortBiz
you are right people who live, host and bill in cuba should not worry about 2257 at all they should worry about their life and about the billing company who will last a few months

Motherfucking right. Cubans got a damn lot more to worry about besides why they don't have a bank that can process credit cards right now ;)

tony286 · 09-04-2004, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AaronM
This could be an interesting thread full of ignorance.

Be nice lol

Steen2 · 09-04-2004, 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kimmykim
Motherfucking right. Cubans got a damn lot more to worry about besides why they don't have a bank that can process credit cards right now ;)

Cuba was an (bad) example.

sexeducation · 09-04-2004, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Steen2
Why is 2257 an issue for people who...

Example:

Live in Cuba
Host in Cuba
Use a Cuban CC processor

Why does anything like 2257 affect them?
Or does it?

PS: Cuba is just an example country, could be Canada, Kuwait or any other non-American country.

Except for me ...
I choose to host my domains, I choose to have my server physically located in the country with the TOUGHEST laws regarding CP and the protection of those in the "adult industry".

I have more then enough skills and contacts to move my domains - but I choose not to. I choose to fight.

stev0 · 09-04-2004, 10:28 PM

I'm in Canada so I dont have to worry about the 2257, but seeing as every company I process through, or sponsors are based in the US it could be bad news.

If they go out of business, I get fucked too.

freeadultcontent · 09-04-2004, 10:30 PM

mumble, mumble... naturally of course unless they mention international trafficing.

Paul Markham · 09-04-2004, 10:30 PM

Just my opinion but Ashc rofts changes to USC 2257 were directed at the US not overseas. He will want to start "cleaning up" the US in his crusade and not go around screwing with overseas companies.

Just my opinion, but it will be interesting to see what he does with the revised law in 2-3 weeks time.

Remember he was hauled in front of Congress and asked what DOJ had done to enforce the law and had to tell them NOTHING. His excuse was the law was not right and needed changing. Did not tell us why he had not changed it already.

All overseas paysites/webmasters need to do is stay out of the US or make sure they have a 2257 compliant statement on the front of their site. Other than that the DOJ can do nothing, they have no powers or intention to inspect overseas records.

Content providers need to supply documents with content, but I've been preaching this for over two years.

freeadultcontent · 09-04-2004, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by charly
Just my opinion but Ashc rofts changes to USC 2257 were directed at the US not overseas. He will want to start "cleaning up" the US in his crusade and not go around screwing with overseas companies.

Just my opinion, but it will be interesting to see what he does with the revised law in 2-3 weeks time.

Remember he was hauled in front of Congress and asked what DOJ had done to enforce the law and had to tell them NOTHING. His excuse was the law was not right and needed changing. Did not tell us why he had not changed it already.

All overseas paysites/webmasters need to do is stay out of the US or make sure they have a 2257 compliant statement on the front of their site. Other than that the DOJ can do nothing, they have no powers or intention to inspect overseas records.

Content providers need to supply documents with content, but I've been preaching this for over two years.

True, yet cutting off money to oversea's sites is within their reach until they use the word international trafficing which they will. Same way they made drugs illegal in the US.

studio · 09-04-2004, 11:05 PM

If you own a paysite and host, register, and process outside the us... I don't think you would really need to comply... But if the new 2257 changes go into affect. Requireing secondary producers to comply. Then it would be in the best interest of the out of the US site to comply. Because all their US affiliates will need to comply or strip out all sexually explict photos from their sites. Which might not be the worst thing for the industry...

Just my take on it... and yes most all sites do not comply now!

freeadultcontent · 09-04-2004, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by studio
If you own a paysite and host, register, and process outside the us... I don't think you would really need to comply... But if the new 2257 changes go into affect. Requireing secondary producers to comply. Then it would be in the best interest of the out of the US site to comply. Because all their US affiliates will need to comply or strip out all sexually explict photos from their sites. Which might not be the worst thing for the industry...

Just my take on it... and yes most all sites do not comply now!

Will you be ok using all non US based processor's as well?

czarina · 09-04-2004, 11:14 PM

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE DO NOT VOTE FOR BUSH! And then may be 2257 will not be an issue!

freeadultcontent · 09-04-2004, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by czarina
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE DO NOT VOTE FOR BUSH! And then may be 2257 will not be an issue!

2257 always has been an unenforced issue, yet still an issue.
Funny part is the AG overstepped his boundries and a few other things and thumbed his nose at the 10th circuit with this revision.

fr8 · 09-05-2004, 12:23 AM

If I understand correctly you cant use a PO Box as your address anymore and to me that sucks.

freeadultcontent · 09-05-2004, 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by fr8
If I understand correctly you cant use a PO Box as your address anymore and to me that sucks.

You never really could.

In the revisions though the AG has now dictated that we must be open 365 days a year, and even said from what hour to what hour.

Steen2 · 09-05-2004, 12:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by freeadultcontent
Will you be ok using all non US based processor's as well?

There are some strong processors who are not US based.
Moneris for example is an industry leader (for retail) in Canada and offers adult processing.

I am sure the EU has tonnes of processors as well.

freeadultcontent · 09-05-2004, 12:27 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Steen2
There are some strong processors who are not US based.
Moneris for example is an industry leader (for retail) in Canada and offers adult processing.

I am sure the EU has tonnes of processors as well.

Thats cool then.

Pornweaver · 09-05-2004, 12:32 AM

You all sound so defeated already. GO VOTE FUCKERS! Protect your rights. Fuck the dumb shit, and vote.

freeadultcontent · 09-05-2004, 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pornweaver
You all sound so defeated already. GO VOTE FUCKERS! Protect your rights. Fuck the dumb shit, and vote.

Im cool with old 2257 and ready for revised 2257. I already vote.

sexyelisha · 09-06-2004, 05:05 PM

Quote:

If you own a paysite and host, register, and process outside the us... I don't think you would really need to comply... But if the new 2257 changes go into affect. Requireing secondary producers to comply. Then it would be in the best interest of the out of the US site to comply. Because all their US affiliates will need to comply or strip out all sexually explict photos from their sites. Which might not be the worst thing for the industry...

Define sexually explicit.

LadyMischief · 09-06-2004, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AaronM
This could be an interesting thread full of ignorance.

What he said

Hammer · 09-06-2004, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by freeadultcontent
You never really could.

In the revisions though the AG has now dictated that we must be open 365 days a year, and even said from what hour to what hour.

Where do you people come up with this crap. The law says 'during normal business hours' not 365 days a year.

(1) Inspections shall take place during normal business hours and at such places as specified in § 75.4. For the purpose of this part, ??normal business hours?? are from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., local time, and any other time during which the producer is actually conducting business relating to producing depiction of actual sexually explicit conduct.

In the U.S. Weekends and holidays are not considered normal business hours.

Hammer · 09-06-2004, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sexyelisha
Define sexually explicit.

We don't need to define 'sexually explicit', 2256 does that for us.

sexyelisha · 09-07-2004, 03:35 AM

its still pretty hazy to me from 2256 - I mean does lascviscious (I cant spell!!) behaviour count...

I'm not based in the US, but I like to keep knowledgeable. My site features nudes... my hand is down near my pussy but theres no insertions. Is that sexually explicit? It could be argued that it is i guess.

mardigras · 09-07-2004, 04:30 AM

Sexually explicit is whatever they want it to be when they start bringing cases. Most likely the "community standards" thing will come in. I live near a community that was ordered to cover up the covers of Cosmopolitan and Glamour magazines...

sexyelisha · 09-07-2004, 04:53 AM

omg!! cover up cosmo and glamour!?! what is the world coming to!? I can understand news stands covering up porn mags because anyone can openly see them, but normal womens magazines!? Its just stupid

Doctor Dre · 09-07-2004, 05:10 AM

You will have hard time doing business without any US based program (3rd party billing etc)

FlyingIguana · 09-07-2004, 05:24 AM

if you live in cuba you have bigger problems than 2257

sirrobin · 09-07-2004, 05:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by William-Xfactor
I posted this in another thread already but chew on this.

FBI rocks up to your site, the first thing they see is, DOT COM or DOT NET

Your company is out side the USA, Your host is outside the USA.
But your domains are owned by the USA

Regards
No easy solution

huh ?

oh ok you are australian. nevermind

jimmyf · 09-07-2004, 05:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mardigras
Sexually explicit is whatever they want it to be when they start bringing cases. Most likely the "community standards" thing will come in. I live near a community that was ordered to cover up the covers of Cosmopolitan and Glamour magazines...

don't know if community standards applies any more, as far as the internet goes.

Your home is not a community. You watch porn in your home, you down load porn in your home.

jimmyf · 09-07-2004, 05:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sirrobin
huh ?

oh ok you are australian. nevermind

the USA does control the root DNS servers

all of' em pretty sure

freeadultcontent · 09-07-2004, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Hammer
Where do you people come up with this crap. The law says 'during normal business hours' not 365 days a year.

(1) Inspections shall take place during normal business hours and at such places as specified in § 75.4. For the purpose of this part, ??normal business hours?? are from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., local time, and any other time during which the producer is actually conducting business relating to producing depiction of actual sexually explicit conduct.

In the U.S. Weekends and holidays are not considered normal business hours.

I got it right from where you quoted. It is giving the deffinition of normal business hours in that paragraph.
8am to 6pm local time (no days mentioned so that is 7 days a week), then also ANY TIME a producer is shooting or doing business relating to the production.

In any event assuming that it means five day's a week (which it does not clarify) that still mean's an office that must be open 10 hours a day or 50 hours a week. Literally though since it does not specify the day's it means 70 hours a week plus any off hour production times.

09-04-2004, 06:12 PM	#1
Steen2 Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 7,662	2257 why is it an issue? Why is 2257 an issue for people who... Example: Live in Cuba Host in Cuba Use a Cuban CC processor Why does anything like 2257 affect them? Or does it? PS: Cuba is just an example country, could be Canada, Kuwait or any other non-American country. __________________ ICQ: 2262.73945

09-04-2004, 06:16 PM	#4
bignasty Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: sc Posts: 1,421	It is of importance to the content producers though. If they are not in compliance they won't get much content sales to US webmasters __________________ '

09-04-2004, 06:16 PM	#5
Alltopnotch Confirmed User Join Date: May 2004 Location: Oakland Posts: 2,845	its a US law... __________________ WANT A FREE LAPTOP?

09-04-2004, 06:17 PM	#7
xclusive Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Buffalo, NY Posts: 35,218	Well you won't have as much of an issue but if the us government finds out they could block your isp and it's range from being accesed by the US market. We will see where this all goes though because I have a bad feeling that this is only the first card up thier sleeve... __________________ I support MediumPimpin.com / Shemp's Outlawtgp.com /

09-04-2004, 06:21 PM	#9
Steen2 Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 7,662	So: You won't be able to buy US made content.. and US ISPs may block your site(s) Is that correct? __________________ ICQ: 2262.73945

09-04-2004, 06:14 PM	#2
AaronM Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: ┌∩┐ ◣_◢ ┌∩┐ Posts: 46,909	This could be an interesting thread full of ignorance.

09-04-2004, 06:15 PM	#3
sumphatpimp Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 5,235	good dope heh?

09-04-2004, 06:23 PM	#11
William-Xfactor Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Melbourne Posts: 299	I posted this in another thread already but chew on this. FBI rocks up to your site, the first thing they see is, DOT COM or DOT NET Your company is out side the USA, Your host is outside the USA. But your domains are owned by the USA Regards No easy solution

09-04-2004, 06:52 PM	#19
freeadultcontent Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: "evitcepsrep ruoy egnahc" Posts: 9,976	__________________ Exclusive Ethnic & Microniche Sites

09-04-2004, 10:28 PM	#24
stev0 Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Calgary, Alberta Posts: 6,801	I'm in Canada so I dont have to worry about the 2257, but seeing as every company I process through, or sponsors are based in the US it could be bad news. If they go out of business, I get fucked too.

09-04-2004, 10:30 PM	#25
freeadultcontent Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: "evitcepsrep ruoy egnahc" Posts: 9,976	mumble, mumble... naturally of course unless they mention international trafficing. __________________ Exclusive Ethnic & Microniche Sites

09-04-2004, 10:30 PM	#26
Paul Markham Too old to care Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: On the sofa, watching TV or doing my jigsaws. Posts: 52,943	Just my opinion but Ashc rofts changes to USC 2257 were directed at the US not overseas. He will want to start "cleaning up" the US in his crusade and not go around screwing with overseas companies. Just my opinion, but it will be interesting to see what he does with the revised law in 2-3 weeks time. Remember he was hauled in front of Congress and asked what DOJ had done to enforce the law and had to tell them NOTHING. His excuse was the law was not right and needed changing. Did not tell us why he had not changed it already. All overseas paysites/webmasters need to do is stay out of the US or make sure they have a 2257 compliant statement on the front of their site. Other than that the DOJ can do nothing, they have no powers or intention to inspect overseas records. Content providers need to supply documents with content, but I've been preaching this for over two years. __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

09-04-2004, 11:05 PM	#28
studio Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Oshkosh, WI ICQ #251860879 Posts: 1,095	If you own a paysite and host, register, and process outside the us... I don't think you would really need to comply... But if the new 2257 changes go into affect. Requireing secondary producers to comply. Then it would be in the best interest of the out of the US site to comply. Because all their US affiliates will need to comply or strip out all sexually explict photos from their sites. Which might not be the worst thing for the industry... Just my take on it... and yes most all sites do not comply now! __________________

09-04-2004, 11:14 PM	#30
czarina Webmaster Extraordinaire Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: A beautiful beach... Posts: 10,748	PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE DO NOT VOTE FOR BUSH! And then may be 2257 will not be an issue!

09-05-2004, 12:23 AM	#32
fr8 Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,074	If I understand correctly you cant use a PO Box as your address anymore and to me that sucks. __________________ █ joesmut (a) gmail Dot com █ Full Stack Developer

09-05-2004, 12:32 AM	#36
Pornweaver Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 855	You all sound so defeated already. GO VOTE FUCKERS! Protect your rights. Fuck the dumb shit, and vote.

09-07-2004, 03:35 AM	#42
sexyelisha Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: South UK Posts: 497	its still pretty hazy to me from 2256 - I mean does lascviscious (I cant spell!!) behaviour count... I'm not based in the US, but I like to keep knowledgeable. My site features nudes... my hand is down near my pussy but theres no insertions. Is that sexually explicit? It could be argued that it is i guess.

09-07-2004, 04:30 AM	#43
mardigras Bon temps! Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: down yonder Posts: 14,194	Sexually explicit is whatever they want it to be when they start bringing cases. Most likely the "community standards" thing will come in. I live near a community that was ordered to cover up the covers of Cosmopolitan and Glamour magazines... __________________ .

09-07-2004, 04:53 AM	#44
sexyelisha Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: South UK Posts: 497	omg!! cover up cosmo and glamour!?! what is the world coming to!? I can understand news stands covering up porn mags because anyone can openly see them, but normal womens magazines!? Its just stupid

09-07-2004, 05:24 AM	#46
FlyingIguana aspiring banker Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: toronto Posts: 10,870	if you live in cuba you have bigger problems than 2257