How many times have you been called on 2257? - GoFuckYourself.com

Mako · 05-19-2005, 11:58 PM

With all the talk about the new regs, I'm curious who actually has had a call or an email or some other form of communication demanding they produce some sort of 2257-related material.

I never have, but that's expected being that I've typically focused on the pill/meds sponsors via SEO sites. How common is it for those of you doing pics/movies?

theking · 05-20-2005, 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mako

With all the talk about the new regs, I'm curious who actually has had a call or an email or some other form of communication demanding they produce some sort of 2257-related material.

I never have, but that's expected being that I've typically focused on the pill/meds sponsors via SEO sites. How common is it for those of you doing pics/movies?

Good question...but don't expect many responses.

Doctor Dre · 05-20-2005, 12:08 AM

Very uncommon ... but the point of the new regs is probably to enforce them ...

Donny · 05-20-2005, 12:12 AM

once. the local pd showed up wanting to see the docs for a young looking model on my site. they admitted they'd had to call the fbi to see what to do because they'd never had experience with adult sites before. i showed them the docs, they thanked me, asked if i'd report any requests for cp if i received them, and left.

ravo · 05-20-2005, 06:46 AM

We've never been called on 2257 (as we are in Canada), but like DonovanPhillips, we had 2 local detectives show up about 4 years ago investigating a matter on one of our free hosts (the original complaint was in Florida). We showed them paperwork, gave them a quick lesson on the Internet, and matter was resolved.

In fact, I've had one of the detectives call me a few times to informally ask my advice about other Internet issues that he was investigating.

Redrob · 05-20-2005, 07:47 AM

We have made the effort at the FSC to get the new regs; but, they haven't been made public yet and wouldn't give us a copy. I expect the regs to be published today.

An observation has been made that the press release prior to regs being published is unprecedented and that a power struggle may be going on in the DOJ over whether or not to publish the new regs. The Radical Right and Gonzalez is pushing for the new regs and the people who know "what the fuck is going on" know they are probably unconstitutional.

Boss Traffic Jim · 05-20-2005, 08:12 AM

It's only just begun. You will start seeing many many sites getting nailed very shortly. The Govt is going to go on a rampage just to make themselves look like they new what they were doing with the 2257 nonesense. Just watch a bunch of gfyers start getting nailed very soon..... This is only my

and nothing elses but my

take on the whole thing.

billywatson · 05-20-2005, 09:16 AM

Hey guys...remember when Ashcroft himself admitted there's never been a 2257 check done by the Attorney General's office? And if I'm not mistaken, they're the only ones that have the right to ask for 2257 in the first place...I mean I'm not advocating to tell the cops to fuck off...

ChefJeff · 05-20-2005, 10:22 AM

2257 will be just another tool for the promotion of the neo-con ideology. They don't care who you are, if it's porn, you are the enemy. They will put you out of business with any means at their disposal (I recommend picking up a copy of the book "The Government vs. Erotic" by Phil Harvey). Gonzales knows that it's going to near impossible for even the most competant webmasters to comply with the new regs.

It's sad that our own Justice Dept. cares so little about the rights of its citizens. They only care about the advancement of their own personal beliefs, at any cost.

Mako · 05-20-2005, 12:35 PM

I'm surprised that more content providers haven't piped up (thx Donovan, good feedback). You'd think that the older ones would have been dinged a few times at least, but it's apparant that isn't the case. Maybe this does signal a renewed vigor by the DOJ, who knows.

V_RocKs · 05-20-2005, 02:12 PM

It will be weeks to a few months before you see anyone on 2257 charges... Before you can use it there has to be an investigation, 2 to 6 weeks, then you might have the local Sheriff confiscate all your documentation, a possible grand jury to see if you can be indited on the evidence, 1 to 4 weeks and then finally you will be either arrested or questioned further.

RisqueWritings · 05-20-2005, 02:21 PM

This will be very interesting to see how it plays out. In theory, if you are legit and have all your ducks in a row, all should be good. Let's keep our fingers crossed!

born · 05-20-2005, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doctor Dre

Very uncommon ... but the point of the new regs is probably to enforce them ...

I agree!

Bill8 · 05-20-2005, 02:52 PM

I got an email about 3 years ago, about a young looking model on a freesite.

It was commercial content, I mailed back and pointed out where the content was available and where the 2257 records were. That was the end of that matter.

xenigo · 05-20-2005, 02:55 PM

I've never been checked either. But I suppose the police officer that had to go check on the "homo porn" docs would be rather unpopular back at the office. So I guess that works in my favor.

Mutt · 05-20-2005, 03:03 PM

i have never heard of even ONE 2257 inspection in this industry or the hardcore video porn biz. Donovan's case and the others people have encountered were in conjunction with specific investigations concerning a particular model - they have never done these routine investigations just to check for compliant record keeping. if they are serious this time and they have a plan to start sending agents across the country with a list of addresses to visit - gonna be alot of webmasters in jail because I don't think more than 10% of webmasters will pass inspection - hell i think it might even be 1%.

this is going to get tied up in the courts fast- so i don't think anybody should panic.

Scootermuze · 05-20-2005, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billywatson

Hey guys...remember when Ashcroft himself admitted there's never been a 2257 check done by the Attorney General's office? And if I'm not mistaken, they're the only ones that have the right to ask for 2257 in the first place...I mean I'm not advocating to tell the cops to fuck off...

It's just like the 1040 form for filing taxes... A little research within the codes will show that the 1040 form is NOT the proper form, nor is it for U.S. citizens working in the U.S.

Same with 2257... You have to do a little research to see who has jurisdiction and authority for action pertinent to 2257...

After I've had a few more drinks I may shake the tree of authority and see what falls..

davecummings · 05-20-2005, 03:54 PM

Twice ( including just today) I've been called by attorney's for people being charged with child porn for having Melissa Ashley's photos from a shoot I did with her in 1999 when she was 20 years old. The first case was in Hawaii a couple of years ago, and Melissa actually was a witness there to confirm her age --I had to fax copies of the Model Release and Proof of Age for filing as Court documents. The guy was found innocent.

Today's case concern's the same photo, this time for a defendant in the U.K.

So, although I've needed to provide documents (or get ordered by a court to to so), it was from lawyers, NOT the aauthorities.

The photo in question is the 3d one from the left at the bottom of her large fully-clothed photo on the 6th page of the Guest's Section at my www.davecummings.com---the one with her hand wrapped around my oldfart penis.

Dave

05-19-2005, 11:58 PM	#1
Mako Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: The OC baby! Posts: 1,986	How many times have you been called on 2257? With all the talk about the new regs, I'm curious who actually has had a call or an email or some other form of communication demanding they produce some sort of 2257-related material. I never have, but that's expected being that I've typically focused on the pill/meds sponsors via SEO sites. How common is it for those of you doing pics/movies?

05-20-2005, 06:46 AM	#5
ravo Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Skype: ravo.fpctraffic Posts: 5,447	We've never been called on 2257 (as we are in Canada), but like DonovanPhillips, we had 2 local detectives show up about 4 years ago investigating a matter on one of our free hosts (the original complaint was in Florida). We showed them paperwork, gave them a quick lesson on the Internet, and matter was resolved. In fact, I've had one of the detectives call me a few times to informally ask my advice about other Internet issues that he was investigating. __________________ AdultAdBroker - Buy and Sell Your Flat Rate Banners, Links, Tabs, Pops, Email Clicks and Members' Area Traffic - updated November 2025

05-20-2005, 09:16 AM	#8
billywatson Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: The Valley o' Smut. Posts: 3,281	Hey guys...remember when Ashcroft himself admitted there's never been a 2257 check done by the Attorney General's office? And if I'm not mistaken, they're the only ones that have the right to ask for 2257 in the first place...I mean I'm not advocating to tell the cops to fuck off... __________________ We're Fabulous! PROTECT YOUR CONTENT on Twitter I Shoot Porn.

05-20-2005, 02:21 PM	#12
RisqueWritings Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Huntington Beach, CA Posts: 628	This will be very interesting to see how it plays out. In theory, if you are legit and have all your ducks in a row, all should be good. Let's keep our fingers crossed! __________________ -Risque aka Kris

05-20-2005, 03:03 PM	#16
Mutt Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 34,431	i have never heard of even ONE 2257 inspection in this industry or the hardcore video porn biz. Donovan's case and the others people have encountered were in conjunction with specific investigations concerning a particular model - they have never done these routine investigations just to check for compliant record keeping. if they are serious this time and they have a plan to start sending agents across the country with a list of addresses to visit - gonna be alot of webmasters in jail because I don't think more than 10% of webmasters will pass inspection - hell i think it might even be 1%. this is going to get tied up in the courts fast- so i don't think anybody should panic. __________________ I moved my sites to Vacares Hosting. I've saved money, my hair is thicker, lost some weight too! Thanks Sly!

05-20-2005, 12:12 AM	#4
Donny As you wish... Industry Role: Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 13,754	once. the local pd showed up wanting to see the docs for a young looking model on my site. they admitted they'd had to call the fbi to see what to do because they'd never had experience with adult sites before. i showed them the docs, they thanked me, asked if i'd report any requests for cp if i received them, and left.

05-20-2005, 07:47 AM	#6
Redrob Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: In a refrigerator box by the tracks. Posts: 4,791	We have made the effort at the FSC to get the new regs; but, they haven't been made public yet and wouldn't give us a copy. I expect the regs to be published today. An observation has been made that the press release prior to regs being published is unprecedented and that a power struggle may be going on in the DOJ over whether or not to publish the new regs. The Radical Right and Gonzalez is pushing for the new regs and the people who know "what the fuck is going on" know they are probably unconstitutional.

05-20-2005, 08:12 AM	#7
Boss Traffic Jim Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: USA Posts: 1,150	It's only just begun. You will start seeing many many sites getting nailed very shortly. The Govt is going to go on a rampage just to make themselves look like they new what they were doing with the 2257 nonesense. Just watch a bunch of gfyers start getting nailed very soon..... This is only my and nothing elses but my take on the whole thing.

05-20-2005, 10:22 AM	#9
ChefJeff Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,499	2257 will be just another tool for the promotion of the neo-con ideology. They don't care who you are, if it's porn, you are the enemy. They will put you out of business with any means at their disposal (I recommend picking up a copy of the book "The Government vs. Erotic" by Phil Harvey). Gonzales knows that it's going to near impossible for even the most competant webmasters to comply with the new regs. It's sad that our own Justice Dept. cares so little about the rights of its citizens. They only care about the advancement of their own personal beliefs, at any cost.

05-20-2005, 12:35 PM	#10
Mako Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: The OC baby! Posts: 1,986	I'm surprised that more content providers haven't piped up (thx Donovan, good feedback). You'd think that the older ones would have been dinged a few times at least, but it's apparant that isn't the case. Maybe this does signal a renewed vigor by the DOJ, who knows.

05-20-2005, 02:12 PM	#11
V_RocKs Damn Right I Kiss Ass! Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Cowtown, USA Posts: 32,422	It will be weeks to a few months before you see anyone on 2257 charges... Before you can use it there has to be an investigation, 2 to 6 weeks, then you might have the local Sheriff confiscate all your documentation, a possible grand jury to see if you can be indited on the evidence, 1 to 4 weeks and then finally you will be either arrested or questioned further.

05-20-2005, 02:52 PM	#14
Bill8 Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2001 Posts: 1,901	I got an email about 3 years ago, about a young looking model on a freesite. It was commercial content, I mailed back and pointed out where the content was available and where the 2257 records were. That was the end of that matter.

05-20-2005, 02:55 PM	#15
xenigo Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Oakland, CA Posts: 8,067	I've never been checked either. But I suppose the police officer that had to go check on the "homo porn" docs would be rather unpopular back at the office. So I guess that works in my favor.

05-20-2005, 03:54 PM	#18
davecummings Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: San Diego Posts: 2,922	Twice, but..... Twice ( including just today) I've been called by attorney's for people being charged with child porn for having Melissa Ashley's photos from a shoot I did with her in 1999 when she was 20 years old. The first case was in Hawaii a couple of years ago, and Melissa actually was a witness there to confirm her age --I had to fax copies of the Model Release and Proof of Age for filing as Court documents. The guy was found innocent. Today's case concern's the same photo, this time for a defendant in the U.K. So, although I've needed to provide documents (or get ordered by a court to to so), it was from lawyers, NOT the aauthorities. The photo in question is the 3d one from the left at the bottom of her large fully-clothed photo on the 6th page of the Guest's Section at my www.davecummings.com---the one with her hand wrapped around my oldfart penis. Dave