2257 UPDATE*** We're fucked.. - Page 3 - GoFuckYourself.com

woj · 09-07-2004, 11:41 PM

100 2257 updates...

AMADude · 09-07-2004, 11:41 PM

100 IDS

Damn Woj beat me to it.

freeadultcontent · 09-07-2004, 11:42 PM

we fucked yet?
Just checking, going back to the back seat again.

RP Fade · 09-07-2004, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FightThisPatent
Assuming that you do have the rights to be able to sample a DVD and convert to internet mediums, then yes, you do have 2257 documentation issues.

The places that you got your DVD content from could be considered distributors, therefore they wouldn't have to hold or be in possession of any 2257 documents.

If you take the DVD content and use it on your website and the content was sexually explicit, then you would need to get the docs.

Your distributor would most likely blow you off and you would have to technically go to the actual content producer.. and good luck in getting video guys to give you model ID and releases.

At this point, the issue of having model ID is not part of the law. We'll have to see what happens after Sept 24th.. and if this part is rollled into 2257, then expect to see some premptive lawsuits filed to challenge the new changes.

If the proposed changes of having to have model ID in your possession as being a secondary record keeper does stick, then yes, you do have an issue (and most video content will have the same issue) of being 2257 compliant.

Images are easier to deal with since most content producers already have some form of model ID they hand out. Video is more difficult because there are could be multiple people in the video and clips.

-brandon

That's exactly my point. There are TONS of sites out there that have licensed DVD content from a publisher which they got from distributors, not the publishers. The publishers basically allowed these distributors to license or 'broker' their dvds. And since as you said the distributor is not required to hold the 2257 documents, it is up to the site owners to get them from each and every publisher. And as you said, good luck getting those documents from the publisher.

Here is a practical example..

http://onlymovies.net/nopop/main.html

This is our 'archive' movie site. All the content we acquired thru legal licensing agreements which we paid for. But, unless the distributor gets the 2257 documents for us and other customers, sites like this are basically screwed if they can't acquire the documents..

Validus · 09-08-2004, 12:09 AM

The legal text which can be found on http://www.2257.com, is it the one with the recent changes?

freeadultcontent · 09-08-2004, 12:12 AM

I am sure this link is on 2257.com but here it is anyways.
http://my.execpc.com/~xxxlaw/2257Table.htm

It is a side by side comparrison.

Taboo · 09-08-2004, 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MissMiranda
Compliance isnt that hard. The only thing making that way as a girl is Having to put my home address on the internet.

Does anyone know if there are companies out in the world that can act as a custodian of records?

might not be right for you, but I remember hearing on a radio show about http://www.keepmyrecords.com

I'm not affiliated w/ them and do not currently use them, but i am considering it. good luck.

Validus · 09-08-2004, 12:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by freeadultcontent
I am sure this link is on 2257.com but here it is anyways.
http://my.execpc.com/~xxxlaw/2257Table.htm

It is a side by side comparrison.

Very nice, thank you!

DWB · 09-08-2004, 03:01 AM

I sale fake 2257 documents.

http://www.Russian2257Fakes.com

jayeff · 09-08-2004, 04:01 AM

There are a lot of "I'm outside the US so I'm okay" comments...

If you sell to US customers you become subject to US law. And it happens that Canada and several European countries have reciprocal arrangements with the US to help with cross-border prosecutions. I'm not suggesting that the risk of such prosecutions is high: I'm just trying to set the record straight and cut down on some of the misinformation this topic is generating.

And when people talk about what this court or that may one day uphold, they are forgetting that the majority don't have the resources to go that route. If the DOJ decide to go after easy targets - and they will surely go after someone because Congress won't accept the excuse a second time that the laws weren't adequate - it could be a long time before the niceties of the law are put to a serious test.

Until those issues are resolved, even if the odds of any one of us being prosecuted are tiny, those who are prosecuted face some serious expense at best and imprisonment at worst.

That is why my main concern is the unwillingness of many content producers to release uncensored model details. I understand all the reasons for this, and they may even be right that if someone (with sufficient resources) runs with this issue, such records may eventually be considered adequate. But how many webmasters can afford the risk that they will be one of the test cases?

Sarah_Jayne · 09-08-2004, 04:05 AM

You know how I know that I spend too much time on the boards? I'll tell you. I had a dream last night that some webmaster had some guy in China join his site. Now, since he was selling to a guy in China he was now subject to Chinese law even though he was in the US. Subject to Chinese law for selling porn sites he was put to death. Interesting drem.

Sarah_Jayne · 09-08-2004, 04:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by FightThisPatent
Sounds like you got your stuff together.

You still need to be able to identify where you got a specific image.

Do a test on one of your own sites... pretend you are from the DOJ, and pick out any image on your website. Can you find out within a "reasonable period of time" of where that image came from (ie. who is the content producer)? For those reading along, you can play the home version of this game as well.

The issue about blackened ID is a very important and serious issue since it speaks to the privacy and safety of the models involved, IF the proposed 2257 changes of requiring secondary record keepers (webmasters) to have records.

This aspect will surely be challenged by attorneys and most likely will win in getting that part of 2257 changed. But what will still remain is the record keeping requirement of knowing where each specific image came from in case of DOJ inquiry.

-brandon

yeah, I prorbably could tell someone where I bought each pic within about an hour but for me that isn't good enough because I need to make myself the spredsheet but I want to do it with all the information I am going to need. The last thing I want to do is go through this hellish process twice because I did it wrong the first time. I really do doubt I am going to be able to find every site I ever put out there. For one thing, I have been doing galleries and sites since 1998. At the start they were on free hosts, etc. So, that scares me a bit since if by some fluke one of those still is out there I won't have access to it. There is also those programs that helped with tgp submission by making you 100s of copies of your galleries. I mean, I have no clue how many of those are out ther but I will do my best.

I am more worried about some of the content I have from suppliers that have gone out of buisness. I have tracked down other suppliers that sell the same content is most cases so if I have to rebuy some of it afterwards to get the details then I guess I will have to if it is at all important content. However, on that I am going to wait for the final version to have better weight to get what ID I need from the supplier.

I will no doubt use your service at some point because some of the suppliers I have used are on there but there are still a ton that aren't and especially those that have stopped selling.

FightThisPatent · 09-08-2004, 05:58 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sarah_webinc

I will no doubt use your service at some point because some of the suppliers I have used are on there but there are still a ton that aren't and especially those that have stopped selling.

There is a part of the proposed 2257 about only applying to newly published images (after the effective date of the changes going into effect).

This would mean that you wouldn't have to go back to all of your content to get whatever is required for full 2257 compliance.

The issue would be to be able to prove that the content was acquired and "published" to your website prior to the effective date.

An area of debatable interpretation on the date of publishing could be that every page a surfer views is "published", therefore you would have to have documentation for every image.

There are many different legal opinions floating around, so it does get to be confusing and there aren't any hard facts (ie. prosecutions).

The safest approach, as with any law, is to abide by the law by best efforts. Be able to demonstrate that you are trying to comply with the law. Doing nothing will surely get you less sympathy in front of a judge since 2257 Recordkeeping Statue has been on a law for a decade.

And as the saying goes "ignorance of the law is no excuse", especially in a courtroom.

This might mean that webmasters have to make the hard business decision of throwing out content that can't be documented (either by date of license/purchase, whether it has atleast blackened out Model ID, etc).

Content Producers are in the same boat if the Model ID that they got from the model doesn't include a US driver's license or a passport. Some will have to toss out their content and if they are participating in 2257lookup, then we can let the webmaster know which sets need to come down.

-brandon

CHMOD · 09-08-2004, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jdoughs
Are you also gonna host in Canada, use Canadian sponsors, and only target Canadian surfers, Oh and take payments only in Canadian Dollars, not to mention only Canadian Models?

You must understand that what effects the US market place has a direct restult on us. If the US programs and businesses comply you can be damn sure all the Canadian ones will be right behind.

Bullshit.

If you don't have anything interresting to say, why don't you shut up ?

sirrobin · 09-08-2004, 07:39 AM

I host, buy content and process in the EU

Sarah_Jayne · 09-08-2004, 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sirrobin
I host, buy content and process in the EU

sell to only EU webmasters?

tranza · 09-08-2004, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by BB-Rick
Not doubting you, but this thread is useless without a source, or link to a source

Samething here....

RP Fade · 09-08-2004, 03:22 PM

Just wanted to thank Brandon, Sarah and everyone else who provided some good input and insight..

GatorB · 09-08-2004, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bdld
just comply and you've got nothing to worry about.

You sound like the Borg.

GatorB · 09-08-2004, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sirrobin
I host, buy content and process in the EU

Are YOU American? Do you LIVE in Alerica? Do you have your porn money in an AMERICAN bank account?

Sarah_Jayne · 09-08-2004, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by GatorB
Do you LIVE in Alerica?

where?

dready · 09-08-2004, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 4Pics
Looks like the 2257 will go in effect as it was outlined in 2 weeks.

You heard this where? lol

martyVP · 09-08-2004, 06:00 PM

I still can't understand when the Government is going to require what exactly!!

BigPinPin · 09-08-2004, 06:02 PM

Quote:

There are a lot of "I'm outside the US so I'm okay" comments...

If you sell to US customers you become subject to US law. And it happens that Canada and several European countries have reciprocal arrangements with the US to help with cross-border prosecutions

Aha, and if a norwegian surfer signs up i must arrange with their law ??
And..if a chinese surfer signs up, i spend my life in prison ?
And if a Swiss Surfer Signs up on my bondage Page, i must arrange with swiss law ???

Sorry, but i can´t believe this shit........that i have to take care what i sell how to US Surfers, because they have other laws now....It´s called INTERnet and not USnet

Imageauction · 09-08-2004, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Validus
The legal text which can be found on http://www.2257.com is it the one with the recent changes?

It has not been updated to reflect the Protect Act changes but it does have a link so you can read what those changes are.

Be sure to take the survey at http://www.2257.com/survey while you're there.

GatorB · 09-08-2004, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by martyVP
I still can't understand when the Government is going to require what exactly!!

If you have hardcore pics actually even showing pink is considered ahrdcore. You must have both on your webpage and in PHYSICAL form the info of the models in your pics, that includes things like banners that have hardcore images. You need to have their real name, age address, SS etc to prove to the government that they are indeed 18 or older. You also must show EVERY url that model is on. You also must make you record available for government inspect ANYTIME between 8 AM and 6 PM EVERY day of the year.

yes I know there is more detail. I'm just giving the Cliff Notes version of it.

Anna_O · 09-08-2004, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FightThisPatent
The hosting provider is not responsible or liable for 2257 violations.

Where hosting does matter (and not size) goes towards the issue of jurisdiction.

If the website is hosted with a provider within the US, the DOJ can make the hosting provider shutdown your website if they are not able to track you down to answer their 2257 inquiries.

-brandon

Thanks brandon, that's what I suspected... Sounds like it's time to move all our sites to Europe then

GatorB · 09-08-2004, 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FightThisPatent
Current 2257 requirements to keep records are not terribly burdensome if you keep good records and make a point to document each time you add new content.

but the problem is human nature, to slack on documentation or complete ignorance of the what to do.

2257 statue has been a law for almost a decade and the requirements to be able to track and document your images is already in place.

The proposed 2257 changes made things harder, but the current 2257 statue is still very much applicable, despite the new changes.

-brandon

Please this law is for one thign and one thing only. TO SHUT PORN DOWN. No it won't do that but tellthat to the DOJ. If this was really for the models own safety, then how come when asked about the fact this law could be used by a stalker as a way to obtain info on a model and there she could be raped or killed a representative of the DOJ said "We don't care!"

Sarah_Jayne · 09-09-2004, 03:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by GatorB
Please this law is for one thign and one thing only. TO SHUT PORN DOWN. No it won't do that but tellthat to the DOJ. If this was really for the models own safety, then how come when asked about the fact this law could be used by a stalker as a way to obtain info on a model and there she could be raped or killed a representative of the DOJ said "We don't care!"

isn't Brandon the one that passed on that comment in the first place? I am loving the way things become myth and legends with this so fast.

Anyway, I did talk to a UK lawyer a few weeks ago but I need to talk to a US based one with more specific knowledge on the issue. I've never hired a US lawyer..what costs am I looking at for one of the adult law folks i've seen around?

pradaboy · 09-09-2004, 03:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jayeff
There are a lot of "I'm outside the US so I'm okay" comments...

If you sell to US customers you become subject to US law. And it happens that Canada and several European countries have reciprocal arrangements with the US to help with cross-border prosecutions. I'm not suggesting that the risk of such prosecutions is high: I'm just trying to set the record straight and cut down on some of the misinformation this topic is generating.

And when people talk about what this court or that may one day uphold, they are forgetting that the majority don't have the resources to go that route. If the DOJ decide to go after easy targets - and they will surely go after someone because Congress won't accept the excuse a second time that the laws weren't adequate - it could be a long time before the niceties of the law are put to a serious test.

Until those issues are resolved, even if the odds of any one of us being prosecuted are tiny, those who are prosecuted face some serious expense at best and imprisonment at worst.

That is why my main concern is the unwillingness of many content producers to release uncensored model details. I understand all the reasons for this, and they may even be right that if someone (with sufficient resources) runs with this issue, such records may eventually be considered adequate. But how many webmasters can afford the risk that they will be one of the test cases?

Doesn't anyone find it funny that the 2257 reg is actually in contrary to EU laws? That I (as EU webmaster) keeping such 2257 records could actually get arrested for it because it's against EU laws?

Now isn't that confusing?

pradaboy · 09-09-2004, 03:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sarah_webinc
sell to only EU webmasters?

see above post...

goBigtime · 09-09-2004, 03:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by PiksalDesign
Why all the hype about 2257.

I must have missed something.

(like missing a train while standing ON the track, yes)

Well... it just basically means that since you're in this industry, in the states, and haven't heard about the new 2257 regs until now -- that you are probably going to do a little time.

I swear 2005 is going to be pure insanity on so many fronts.

goBigtime · 09-09-2004, 04:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jimmyf

do you people really think they want 2 put some little piss' e assed porn peddler in jail.

All of "they" ? ... hmm probably no. I'm sure a lot of them like their porn as much as the next guy.

This guy?....

Umm.. yeah.

09-07-2004, 11:41 PM	#101
woj <&(©¿©)&> Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Chicago Posts: 47,882	100 2257 updates... __________________ Custom Software Development, email: woj#at#wojfun#.#com to discuss details or skype: wojl2000 or gchat: wojfun or telegram: wojl2000 Affiliate program tools: Hosted Galleries Manager Banner Manager Video Manager Wordpress Affiliate Plugin Pic/Movie of the Day Fansign Generator Zip Manager

09-07-2004, 11:41 PM	#102
AMADude Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 3,875	100 IDS Damn Woj beat me to it. __________________ No sig, just here to fuck around. Last edited by AMADude; 09-07-2004 at 11:44 PM..

09-07-2004, 11:42 PM	#103
freeadultcontent Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: "evitcepsrep ruoy egnahc" Posts: 9,976	we fucked yet? Just checking, going back to the back seat again. __________________ Exclusive Ethnic & Microniche Sites

09-08-2004, 12:12 AM	#106
freeadultcontent Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: "evitcepsrep ruoy egnahc" Posts: 9,976	I am sure this link is on 2257.com but here it is anyways. http://my.execpc.com/~xxxlaw/2257Table.htm It is a side by side comparrison. __________________ Exclusive Ethnic & Microniche Sites

09-08-2004, 03:22 PM	#118
RP Fade Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 3,343	Just wanted to thank Brandon, Sarah and everyone else who provided some good input and insight.. __________________ HomemadeCash.com - Homemade & GF sites powered by NScash.com HomemadeVideoPass.com - The only all homemade mega site OurHomemadePorno.com - Real couples fucking on camera Contact ICQ: 400-786-531 Email: fade AT nscash.com

09-08-2004, 12:09 AM	#105
Validus Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Calgary, Canada Posts: 4,012	The legal text which can be found on http://www.2257.com, is it the one with the recent changes?

09-08-2004, 03:01 AM	#109
DWB Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Encrypted. Access denied. Posts: 31,779	I sale fake 2257 documents. http://www.Russian2257Fakes.com

09-08-2004, 04:01 AM	#110
jayeff Confirmed User Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 2,944	There are a lot of "I'm outside the US so I'm okay" comments... If you sell to US customers you become subject to US law. And it happens that Canada and several European countries have reciprocal arrangements with the US to help with cross-border prosecutions. I'm not suggesting that the risk of such prosecutions is high: I'm just trying to set the record straight and cut down on some of the misinformation this topic is generating. And when people talk about what this court or that may one day uphold, they are forgetting that the majority don't have the resources to go that route. If the DOJ decide to go after easy targets - and they will surely go after someone because Congress won't accept the excuse a second time that the laws weren't adequate - it could be a long time before the niceties of the law are put to a serious test. Until those issues are resolved, even if the odds of any one of us being prosecuted are tiny, those who are prosecuted face some serious expense at best and imprisonment at worst. That is why my main concern is the unwillingness of many content producers to release uncensored model details. I understand all the reasons for this, and they may even be right that if someone (with sufficient resources) runs with this issue, such records may eventually be considered adequate. But how many webmasters can afford the risk that they will be one of the test cases?

09-08-2004, 04:05 AM	#111
Sarah_Jayne Now with more Jayne Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 40,077	You know how I know that I spend too much time on the boards? I'll tell you. I had a dream last night that some webmaster had some guy in China join his site. Now, since he was selling to a guy in China he was now subject to Chinese law even though he was in the US. Subject to Chinese law for selling porn sites he was put to death. Interesting drem.

09-08-2004, 07:39 AM	#115
sirrobin Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 453	I host, buy content and process in the EU

09-08-2004, 06:00 PM	#123
martyVP Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 1,917	I still can't understand when the Government is going to require what exactly!!