I don't like ratting anyone out, but this is a serious issue. People...friends of mine...could potentially get into trouble if I remain silent, so I feel I have a responsibility to publicize this.
A couple of days ago, I posted a thread, without naming any names, that I discovered an underaged model among several sets I purchased. The set in question was fully clothed and the model was 17, so I didn't feel it was serious enough to point any fingers...and the general response seemed to support this unnecessity. Since then, I've discovered 3 more models who were underaged and did indeed appear nude in the sets I purchased. One of them was only 15, while the others were 17. (There was a 5th model I discovered from the included docs, but I don't have any sets of her, so I can't really comment on that.)
I talked with Mark of DoMyPhoto.com via icq and his initial response was "Hi Logan, but she have over 18 when I sent it. What problem?" Suggesting it didn't matter how old she was in the photo...just how old she is now. I hope most people understand how wrong that thinking is.
Now, in all fairness, I should point out that what I base these claims on is (1) the birthdate on the model's ID and (2) the date she wrote on the release when she signed them. I cannot be sure when the set was actually shot, but who get's a model to sign a release 3 years before they actually shoot her?!? Besides, these documents are the only things a prosecuting body will have to go on as well. The girls could indeed be legal in the photos I have, but the only documentation I have support otherwise.
If anyone has any comments or suggestions, I would love to hear them.
A couple of days ago, I posted a thread, without naming any names, that I discovered an underaged model among several sets I purchased. The set in question was fully clothed and the model was 17, so I didn't feel it was serious enough to point any fingers...and the general response seemed to support this unnecessity. Since then, I've discovered 3 more models who were underaged and did indeed appear nude in the sets I purchased. One of them was only 15, while the others were 17. (There was a 5th model I discovered from the included docs, but I don't have any sets of her, so I can't really comment on that.)
I talked with Mark of DoMyPhoto.com via icq and his initial response was "Hi Logan, but she have over 18 when I sent it. What problem?" Suggesting it didn't matter how old she was in the photo...just how old she is now. I hope most people understand how wrong that thinking is.
Now, in all fairness, I should point out that what I base these claims on is (1) the birthdate on the model's ID and (2) the date she wrote on the release when she signed them. I cannot be sure when the set was actually shot, but who get's a model to sign a release 3 years before they actually shoot her?!? Besides, these documents are the only things a prosecuting body will have to go on as well. The girls could indeed be legal in the photos I have, but the only documentation I have support otherwise.
If anyone has any comments or suggestions, I would love to hear them.
)
Comment