Exactly my point. So....
































affiliates could turn into a thing of the past..........................

scary, but think about it.

I guess that would mean I could start competing with other program owners for listings everywhere then (cybercat stuff, gts stuff), and I would assume the price could drop.

And if programs are getting all the listings, the profit margin is bigger (i.e. no payments to affiliates).....

That wouldn't make sense as you would be cutting off a huge traffic pool.

Since foreign webmasters aren't subject to 2257 regulations they'll just send it to non-US based sponsors.

You'll come back full circle to not being competitive in the market and falling by the wayside.

A) Would Canadian webmasters with servers in Canada be affected?
B) Would Canadian webmasters with servers in the US be affected?

I think it goes like this, but the US laws are sometimes backwards!
A = no
B = yes

You keep looking at this as if everybody is affected by 2257 regulations, but this is simply not the case.

Programs not requiring affiliate compliance will get a huge boost and some US sponsors will move operations out of the country in order to get a slice of this newly-formed pie.

I don't need to think about that at all. I don't market free sites and never will.

Worst-case scenario you just have to move your server and you may lose your ability to travel to the US.

US laws are not applicable to Canadians.

lol

Are you serious? C'mon bud, think about it.

Traffic would go up. If I dont have to cut checks for 60% to affiliates EVERY week, then I got a shitload of cash to blow on the best listings available. It's a wet dream. My traffic could double overnight.

Chargeback ratios were much higher before the concept of "free sponsor content" took off.

As long as surfers aren't being tricked into thinking that the content they are seeing is what's inside the site, you won't have a problem.

Look at a site like the old Sleazy Dream, he used his own content to promote AFF - I doubt they had a problem with chargebacks, because he made it clear that they were not getting that content if they signed up for his sponsor.

This coming from a canadian.

(not an insult or meant to be mean, don't take it that way)

US companies, and there are a shitload of them, some of the BEST at that in my opinion. The laws will affect EVERYONE. It is ignorant to think otherwise.

Good discussion by the way Nate, keep this going, you are giving me new ideas by the minute and I appreciate it. :) :thumbsup

I am pretty sure he means that the traffic pool would remain, just the affiliates would reduce. The traffic is still there for the taking with or without the affiliates. It is not like the traffic is loyal to any affiliate, they go where the content is.

As for foreign webmasters not being subject to regulations. The US sponsors would be, so they would need to comply or not be an affiliate. Unless foreign webmasters only sold to foreign sponsors and kept everything foreign based, from hosting to transactions.

Great point there. Hitting the nail on the head.

Yes I'm serious.. I'm just hoping you aren't.

If this is such brilliant plan why not just close down your affiliate program now?

Where does 2257 even come into play with this? You seem to think you'd make more money without affiliates so why even cater to them in the current market?

I'm sure you can come up with a better example than that.

Sleazy's AFF galleries were story based with pics to support the stories. The stories were about hooking up with people on AFF. Those galleries were never intended to sell the surfer on photo or video content. Most galleries are.

There is nothing keeping these 'great US companies' from setting up either entirely out of the US or starting a mirrored affiliate program outside of the US catering to non-US affiliates.

Look at the online gaming industry.

iBanker: This may be a stupid question, but going back to your original scenario (in Brazil), how can you meet this requirement of the (as proposed) regs?;

"Picture identification card means a document issued by the United States, a State government or a political subdivision thereof, or a United States territory that bears the photograph and the name of the individual identified, ..."

How many Brazilians have US ID? I haven't seen this issue brought up anywhere yet.

And look at the casino guy who was arrested when he returned to the US.

Becasue we have some really great affiliates that are honest, and we like working with them. I'm not knocking affiliates, I never would....

except that one son of a bitch that put in a bunch of fake checks this week and wondered why he wasn't getting paid...lol

....Im making a point, dont twist my words into something I didn't say. That shit pisses me off. I never said we would be better off without affiliates, I said was saying we could manage, we would find a way. Not to pat myself on the back, but our sites kick ass, and affiliates that are worth that salt tend to agree. We will figure out a way to work with them, US based or not.

I keep hearing the cries of how affiliates are such a burden on program owners but have yet to see the great migration of owners shutting down their programs...

Why is this? Less headaches and (apparently) more profitable to the program owners.

Why even keep the programs active?

Very true.
There is nothing in the regulations (from the last time I read them carefully) that require a paper copy of the id; electronic form was totally fine. Nor does the law specifically state that the ids cant have the address etc blacked out on them.

2257 is not going to substantially change the affiliate model, what it will do is create one hell of a headache for the primary producers and one hell of a headache for anyone who has had sites for a long time and bought the content from multiple producers over the years.

You said a world without affiliates would be 'a wet dream' and your traffic would 'double overnight'

I'm not trying to twist your words around...

"Traffic would go up. If I dont have to cut checks for 60% to affiliates EVERY week, then I got a shitload of cash to blow on the best listings available. It's a wet dream. My traffic could double overnight."

If the money comes back to an individual in the US, then you are liable. I, and many others won't move. In addition, we won't move and never come back.

And I'll take living in the US as opposed to Canada any day of the year.

Again, most of the people have not read of do not understand the regs. it has to be a GOVERNMANET issued ID not a US ID. Answer your question?

That is just ONE example that made the news.

IF that happened, it would be. THAT is what I said. BUT it only works if OTHER programs cant use the affiliates either. Now I am starting to think you are just trying to be a pain in the ass.

... and right back to staying competitive in the market.

If this shit storm does hit as the doom-and-gloomers suggest, some affiliate programs will move. I don't doubt it for a second.

Processors will step-up to cater to them and they will be in a good position to start cutting in on market share.

i like this idea

damn im just so glad we are moving our ass out of the US. With all this shit going down --- where the fuck is it gonna end. You got to face it their is a MASSIVE clamp down coming in the US for porn - this is just 1 way they are starting to turn the screw. And when they start they wont stop.

I'm not trying to be a pain in the ass.

I just don't understand how a scenario would come about where other programs can't use affiliates either.

Look at the textile industry... US-based companies that can't make use of child labour still have to compete with the companies that do, even in their own domestic markets.

The same thing would happen in adult. You would have to compete with non-US programs that just took on all your affiliates.

Thanks Kimmy I thought my post was invisible. The older sites are nicely grandfathered as was pointed out by Aaronm yesterday. If done in a professional manner and an emphasis on compliance this could insulate the program from liability which is what the program owners are seeking. The US affiliates could easily comply and foreigners could do what they want. Anyone want to comment on the idea to see if it has holes?

The reg wants a database so they can find the info quickly to determine if the model is underage. There is a point to this. If we solve the issue of how they can determine that, we will be ok.

In a perfect world it may work.

The problem is the timeline required for record keeping and that the onus falls back on the affiliate that 'published' the images on his own site.

If the sponsor closes up shop there is nobody to fulfill the requirements of having to keep the records for 'x' amount of years beyond that point.

Many people have trouble trusting their sponsor to even make payroll the next month, trusting the sponsor to keep you out of jail may be too big of a stretch for some.

2257 gives non-Americans a good reason to stop sending traffic to American affiliate programs and to stop hosting in America.

Non-US affiliate programs and non-US hosting providers could benefit from 2257

Read my post above re: sponsors closing up shop

The other thing to consider would be US-based affiliates sending traffic to non-US based sponsor programs.

They would have little need to comply with 2257 laws as it becomes quite easy to cloud the ownership of sites & traffic sources if you have a sponsor program outside of the DOJ's jurisdiction cutting your cheques.

The affiliate would still be at risk but it would be a much lower risk than if he was sending his traffic to a US-based sponsor who could be bullied into giving up his information to the US government.

I remember back when I first got started in the industry and Gamma actually used the fact that they don't report to the US government or IRS as a selling point of their click-thru program.

We could easily see a return to those days.

Actually, I *have* read the proposed regs, and I'm trying to understand them. That's why I asked the question. The regs I read make reference specifically to US issued identification or "a passport issued by ... a foreign country". So the only acceptable ID outside the US is a passport. Ok, so there, I answered my own question.

I think the best thing a person can do right now is wait and see while at the same time working on becoming compliant at least to the old regs. A lot of people are getting worked up and bent out of shape over something that does not exist yet and is not enforceable. Once you have seen the new regs and they have been tested in court then you will know where you stand. As soon as they are published they will be challenged. Once that court decision is handed down it will be appealed. This cycle could go on for years. Laws are made by Congress. These new regulations (laws) were not so more than likely they will be shot down in court but don't count on it as anything can happen.

I think one of the reasons that these more stringent regs are coming to light is because of the proliferation of thumb preview TGPs. It seems like everyone has one. Is the thumb preview TGP dead? No, they will switch to face shots only with a lot more timid content. As for text link TGPs being affected I can't see how they can be required to have copies of the 2257 docs. Tamer banners on them - sure. However, to hold them to 2257 regs would require you to hold Yahoo, Google, MSN, AltaVista, Ask Jeeves, etc. to these regs also.

The government may want to limit accesibilty to porn but once they pull in companies like Yahoo and Google into the fray there will be some serious cash thrown around in defending their position. :2 cents:

The government won't go after Yahoo or Google, so it's a non-issue.

And "they didn't prosecute them" isn't a defense in court.

This is really an excellent discussion. I disagree that the government wont go after yahoo or google. I know we like to asume that this will happen. But I see them eing way to public, and the liberal media would have a field day. Just my :2 cents: