GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   2257 & the BIG guys it "may effect". (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=469967)

CDSmith 05-20-2005 02:29 PM

I intend to find the 2257 pages of each of my sponsors, and put a link to THOSE pages up on my galleries. If an inspector wants that information he/she can click on that link, go to the page with the information on it, and be happy about it.

That's what I intend to do. End of story.

They then have access to the 2257 records right from the content owner, there should be no complaining about it.

The Other Steve 05-20-2005 02:31 PM

Quote:

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

I could tell - there are so many who think just like you - that the world begins and ends with TGP - and that's ok because there are a lot of people who can think beyond the end of their nose and are still making money from free sites.

It's still quite profitable and free sites go on making sale long after TGP galleries have faded into oblivion.

If you work them right you can even get better SE placements than some of the paysites that you're promoting.

After Shock Media 05-20-2005 02:32 PM

Since this thread is also a lot about affiliates & sponsors and their future together. Why is it so hard to comprehend that the affiliate model could very well perish?
I know if someone is just an affiliate they may wish to fight it tooth and nail with round about arguments, or saying why has it not already been done. Though I have felt that the open affiliate model was getting closer to its death bed even before the proposed regulations where published. Assuming the proposed ones go through it just would give another reason to add to the pile that many have been talking about for a few years.
I know several programs that have been doing more and more stuff in house or with outsourced workers. I have seen numerous reports and heard many people speaking about the costs of affiliates besides their payouts and the percentage of fraud that is generated by them. We all have also witnessed the wide spread use and acceptance of sponsor hosted galleries, which in effect began to cut out one of the middle men already. This does not even include various programs that have switched to either invite only, closed affiliate programs, or no affiliates at all.
So again I ask the question, why does this seem so alien to some?

psili 05-20-2005 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDSmith
I intend to find the 2257 pages of each of my sponsors, and put a link to THOSE pages up on my galleries. If an inspector wants that information he/she can click on that link, go to the page with the information on it, and be happy about it.

That's what I intend to do. End of story.

They then have access to the 2257 records right from the content owner, there should be no complaining about it.

If this is all that had to be done, that'd be fucking fantastic. However, I don't think that'll cut it considering some of the legal jargon that's been thrown around. Yet, I'm currently clueless on the issue so seeking professional advice makes all the more sense to me.

Nate-MM2 05-20-2005 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord of the fungi
Since this thread is also a lot about affiliates & sponsors and their future together. Why is it so hard to comprehend that the affiliate model could very well perish?
I know if someone is just an affiliate they may wish to fight it tooth and nail with round about arguments, or saying why has it not already been done. Though I have felt that the open affiliate model was getting closer to its death bed even before the proposed regulations where published. Assuming the proposed ones go through it just would give another reason to add to the pile that many have been talking about for a few years.
I know several programs that have been doing more and more stuff in house or with outsourced workers. I have seen numerous reports and heard many people speaking about the costs of affiliates besides their payouts and the percentage of fraud that is generated by them. We all have also witnessed the wide spread use and acceptance of sponsor hosted galleries, which in effect began to cut out one of the middle men already. This does not even include various programs that have switched to either invite only, closed affiliate programs, or no affiliates at all.
So again I ask the question, why does this seem so alien to some?

The majority of affiliates will have to go somewhere, restrictions will just get tighter.

If affiliate programs start to stop taking on new affiliates the market will slowly swing the power over to affiliate program owners and they will begin to realize that the market no longer requires the handholding of FHG's, custom tours & gigs of free content and custom advertising options.

If the remaining affiliate programs cut down on some of the extras that were needed before to stay competitive with the (now closed) other affiliate programs they can increase their profit margins and market share at the same time. That's too big of a bone for this dog to give up, and I know there are hundreds of others thinking along the same lines that I am.

The affiliate model will not die. It will just evolve.

CDSmith 05-20-2005 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psili
If this is all that had to be done, that'd be fucking fantastic. However, I don't think that'll cut it considering some of the legal jargon that's been thrown around. Yet, I'm currently clueless on the issue so seeking professional advice makes all the more sense to me.

I simply don't care what else there is to it. And I'm not saying that because I'm in Canada, I'm saying it because their primary intent is to "have readily-available access to 2257 records and custodial information", and by me providing a direct link to that information I have fulfilled my obligation.

Fact is, me as an affiliate should not even have to do that for them, but the fact is obvious that either they (the US government) aren't smart enough to figure out who or what program owns what materials, or they are just trying to give guys like me one more little pain in the ass. I suspect the former, but I could be wrong.

So I suppose I will have to help them. If I'm using pics from "Proggie A Cash", then I will place a link to the 2257 information page for "Proggie A Cash" and that will be that. I will not be bothering my sponsors to provide me all their records.

You guys of course can do what you want.

iBanker 05-20-2005 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nate-MM2
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.

We agree on something :)

iBanker 05-20-2005 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BusterPorn
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:

That is brilliant. Great post.

V_RocKs 05-20-2005 02:59 PM

Is Kazaa still online? Is bit torrent doing just fine? Is Gnutzilla doing OK after 7 years? And do people STILL buy music and DVD's?

I really doubt the government is going to charge 10,000 affiliates... I just so highly doubt that. I think 2257 was done in order to get the producers in the groove of obtaining PROPER identification. I highly doubt it will be used to persecute thousands of people. The backlash would be to great for that to happen.

iBanker 05-20-2005 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by V_RocKs
Is Kazaa still online? Is bit torrent doing just fine? Is Gnutzilla doing OK after 7 years? And do people STILL buy music and DVD's?

I really doubt the government is going to charge 10,000 affiliates... I just so highly doubt that. I think 2257 was done in order to get the producers in the groove of obtaining PROPER identification. I highly doubt it will be used to persecute thousands of people. The backlash would be to great for that to happen.

I agree with you 99%. My problem is I would hate to be that 1% that they went against. Know what I mean?

Nate-MM2 05-20-2005 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by V_RocKs
I really doubt the government is going to charge 10,000 affiliates... I just so highly doubt that. I think 2257 was done in order to get the producers in the groove of obtaining PROPER identification. I highly doubt it will be used to persecute thousands of people. The backlash would be to great for that to happen.

They don't need to charge 10,000 affiliates.

For every 1 affiliate they charge probably another 100 will leave the business or not get started in the business because of it.

For affiliates without a protest agenda everybody has a point where the reward doesn't outweigh the risk any longer.

Snake Doctor 05-20-2005 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDSmith
I intend to find the 2257 pages of each of my sponsors, and put a link to THOSE pages up on my galleries. If an inspector wants that information he/she can click on that link, go to the page with the information on it, and be happy about it.

That's what I intend to do. End of story.

They then have access to the 2257 records right from the content owner, there should be no complaining about it.

Be glad that you're in Canada then, because none of what you just said comes anywhere close to complying with the regulations.

I love how people say "This is what the law says, but I don't like that, so this is what I'm going to do"

I hope you guys that think like this have fun filming your new gay reality site from prison :1orglaugh

Nate-MM2 05-20-2005 03:08 PM

As always in this industry, change breeds opportunity.

If the shit hits the fan I plan to be giving US-based affiliates alternative options to a mountain of documentation.

After Shock Media 05-20-2005 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by V_RocKs
I think 2257 was done in order to get the producers in the groove of obtaining PROPER identification. I highly doubt it will be used to persecute thousands of people. The backlash would be to great for that to happen.

The Government never officially used the old 2257 laws. They never bothered to see if they were working or not. The DOJ publically said they never checked anyone for compliance. Ashcroft was supposed to and give an annual report to congress, yet again the DOJ showed up empty handed. Then they got the bright idea to "update" them. For what purpose? 2257 itself did not need updating, if they wanted to clarify anything they would of just updated 2256 which has the deffinitions on it.

As for a backlash, a backlash from whom? Do you really think that anyone that does not make money in porn gives a rats ass about what happens to us aside from a few organizations who may question the constitutionality of it?

The truth is the Government and specially the DOJ hates to loose. They relize it is near impossible to get an obscenity case to be found guilty, so like they always do when the front door closes, they kick in the back door.

Nate-MM2 05-20-2005 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lenny2
Be glad that you're in Canada then, because none of what you just said comes anywhere close to complying with the regulations.

I love how people say "This is what the law says, but I don't like that, so this is what I'm going to do"

I hope you guys that think like this have fun filming your new gay reality site from prison :1orglaugh

His post didn't come across as legal advice and I agree with his viewpoint.

CDSmith 05-20-2005 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nate-MM2
His post didn't come across as legal advice and I agree with his viewpoint.

You're right, it wasn't legal advice. I was going by what their main mission statement read as, which from what I understand of plain English means they want access to the information they want access to. I plan to comply and provide that access.

Lenny just loves to cock off at me whenever he gets the opportunity for some odd reason. I must smell good today.

V_RocKs 05-20-2005 03:26 PM

So why don't they force compliance? Why don't they enforce the state laws of New York against anal sex? Because we are currently fighting a war on terrorism and the war on drugs is keeping cops (good people) in nice homes and fat with incomes you can support a family on.

When you bust a drug lord in Miami, guess what? The gov't gets to auction off his shit. We are talking millions of dollars, plus the millions in cash that is confiscated. In effect, the drug lord PAYS for his own procescution. All of that money pays for the cops that busted him, the DA that prosecuted him, the jury that convicted him and the judge that presided over it all.

When you bust a band of college kids who run a piracy ring you get SQUAT... You get some fines levied that the kids will not pay off for 10 years and the total in fines might be only $250,000. Whoopie... Now you know why the recording industry goes after them in civil court. No one will waste money prosecuting them since drug cases pay to prosecute themselves. Hallelujah to the fucking war on drugs!

What do you get for prosecuting a porn magnate? Nothing... a lot of grief. Possibly not elected next year or appointed to your post because you put porn on the front page of news papers and a lot of conservetives weigh that against the single porn guy that got taken down and the grand scheme of things. More porn was probably sold because of the increased interest the case generated.

And that is why I think that worrying about spitting on the sidewalk is a lot of worrying and no substance.

Do I think in the back of my mind, "Shit! I could be the 1% that they fuck with!" Yes I do, but I have never won a lottery so I am sure I am just not that lucky.

iBanker 05-20-2005 03:35 PM

What cracks me up is how many threads there are on "would you hit it" and it get more views than business related threads.

Sorry, off topic.... back to work...

Nate-MM2 05-20-2005 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by V_RocKs
Do I think in the back of my mind, "Shit! I could be the 1% that they fuck with!" Yes I do, but I have never won a lottery so I am sure I am just not that lucky.

There is a lot more the government can do outside of explicitly charging somebody for not being 2257 compliant.

They can lean on Visa, who lean on the processors, who lean on the... and on it goes..

Mr.Fiction 05-20-2005 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by V_RocKs

What do you get for prosecuting a porn magnate? Nothing... a lot of grief. Possibly not elected next year or appointed to your post because you put porn on the front page of news papers and a lot of conservetives weigh that against the single porn guy that got taken down and the grand scheme of things. More porn was probably sold because of the increased interest the case generated.

You think a porn "magnate" is closer to a broke college kid than to a rich drug dealer? And you think that conservatives will get angry if right wing politicians take down a porn site?

What country do you live in?

V_RocKs 05-20-2005 04:08 PM

2257 - 101
 
I live in America where policy is dictated by what is on the frong page news, or what you want to keep OFF of the front page news...


Mon - Wed | 1pm - 4pm | 2257 Compliance 101 | Staff - TBA | Building 1 | Room 7

iBanker 05-20-2005 04:14 PM

I really think I could pull off a digital solution. Gonna bat it around in my head over the weekend.

V_RocKs 05-20-2005 04:56 PM

Well, the 2257 data just has to be available right? So lets say two detectives come to my house and ask me for that data... Then I contact you and say, Yo! I need that data... Then you create me an account so I can go online and print that data to my printer. Then I give that data to the detectives and they can lick my sweaty balls...

Who am I kidding.. I use air conditioning, my balls are cold as ice.

V_RocKs 05-20-2005 04:58 PM

Then again, you would still run into the whole thing about stalkers... I could pretend the detectives came looking for the info... I would imagine they would also have some kinda important papers with the papers they are looking for stated on them... Then I could fax that to you... but then you would still not know if I am just a stalker...

After Shock Media 05-20-2005 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by V_RocKs
So lets say two detectives come to my house and ask me for that data... Then I contact you and say, Yo! I need that data...

And their phone picks up and says pleave leave your message at the beep and someone will get back to you as soon as possible. Then eventually call back but by that time they get your machine because you happen to be in jail waiting for them.

latinasojourn 05-20-2005 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iBanker
Okay, now continuing from before, lets use A TGP like Mark?s Bookmarks (because it?s a great TGP and Mike is a good guy).

Affiliate Joe comes to us and say ?Hey, I like your new Brazil site and I want to push it?. Our response would be, ?Hey that is great, glad to have you aboard. Just a few questions before we get you approved.

1. How long have you been in this business?
2. What references do you have?
3. Would you like free hosting?
4. What type of promoting do you do?
5. You understand we don?t allow mail, correct?
6. How much traffic do you see yourself sending?

Essentially we start doing a background check on them. Why? Because if his answer to number 3 above is NO for what ever reason, then I essentially have to send him copies of all the 2257 info for the site he is pushing. God forbid he wants to promote 10 sites of ours without free hosting, then I am sending him literally over 7,000 pages of information. And that is one affiliate. So 1,000 affiliates in a program (we have more than that, but keeping the numbers simple, imagine what nasty dollars has?lol) at that point costs me 7,000,000 pieces of paper. That paper needs to be printed on, and someone needs to be paid to do it. I?m not even going to guess what that costs, but essentially, we are no longer a porn company, WE ARE A PUBLISHING company.

No way can a program send this to every affiliate, sure if you are throwing 10 joins a day to us, I?ll pop for all of it (postage on that would be a bitch and I doubt webmasters would want scanned copies that THEY have to print out.

What happens if this webmaster is Joe webmaster THE STALKER?. Thus a reason why background checks help. He starts harassing a model cause he has their information, driving by her house, ?..I don?t want to further than that, cause it pisses me off, but we all know there are sick sick fucks out there that don?t care and would do some very bad things that could essentially bring down this entire industry if models started getting stalked. Nobody would want to model anymore, and something tell me our 80s porn wouldn?t retain to well.

Back to the TGPs, Joe webmaster want to submit to Mark?s Bookmarks with the content for our sites. Now Luckily, mark?s happen to be mainly text links with only 4 banners at the top, and I don?t even want to get into what banners will do with 2257 proposed, but lets pretend they are not there. Who here thinks Mark would have to have a copy of the 2257?

Back to work?.be back again to talk about whats going to happen to the webmasters??give me 15 minutes?

this thread should be copied to the FSC as a court exhibit.

fireorange 05-20-2005 05:20 PM

Why couldn't the sponsors give affiliates the 2257 documents in digital format but encrypted and when the government asks the affiliate for the docs, the affiliate calls the sponsor's special hotline and request it and they give the affiliate the key to de-crypt the data into readable text?

After Shock Media 05-20-2005 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fireorange
Why couldn't the sponsors give affiliates the 2257 documents in digital format but encrypted and when the government asks the affiliate for the docs, the affiliate calls the sponsor's special hotline and request it and they give the affiliate the key to de-crypt the data into readable text?

Again do you trust your sponsor enough to keep you out of jail?

fireorange 05-20-2005 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord of the fungi
Again do you trust your sponsor enough to keep you out of jail?

Good point :winkwink:

RogerV 05-20-2005 05:35 PM

Most of the US based Programs I know have been prepared for these new Regs for a year now so it?s no surprise we will evolve and comply if you don?t want to get in trouble with the law. It?s a pain in the ass but it not impossible to comply.

They have put so much money into the war on drugs has it even effected it. Not that I can tell, I still see kids buying whatever illegal drug they want and drugs are illegal Pornography isn't at least not since the last time I checked.

Follow the rules the government just wants to organize and clean it up. Which I think we should have done in a long time. This way the conversions will get better and so will the retention when people can't view obscene content for free.

I?m not going to go into anymore detail just study and follow the new rules very simple
We will evolve and prosper

Snake Doctor 05-20-2005 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDSmith
You're right, it wasn't legal advice. I was going by what their main mission statement read as, which from what I understand of plain English means they want access to the information they want access to. I plan to comply and provide that access.

Lenny just loves to cock off at me whenever he gets the opportunity for some odd reason. I must smell good today.

Don't flatter yourself, I give you shit when you post moronic things, such as your earlier post. If you keep acting like a moron, I'm obliged to keep calling you one.

Also, I never said you were providing legal advice, what I said was if that's your plan be glad you're in Canada, because people in the U.S. who think that if the law says A, but all they really want is B, so I'll do B, will end up filming gay reality sites in prison.

It's like saying "The speed limit is 65, but they really just want people to drive safely and not have an accident, so I'll drive 80 but be extra careful"

PhotoGreggXXX 05-20-2005 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fireorange
Why couldn't the sponsors give affiliates the 2257 documents in digital format but encrypted and when the government asks the affiliate for the docs, the affiliate calls the sponsor's special hotline and request it and they give the affiliate the key to de-crypt the data into readable text?

I really like the encrypting idea. We've considered a database online with our set numbers for easy 2257 compliance, vs. sending every guy that buys a $10 photo set the complete private info on our talent. The problem is the same, now ANY tom, dick or harry will eventually get access to that database.

I know video can be encrypted with drm...any programs that do this with .jpg's?

My 2 cents. This whole law will blow over. The government hasn't set a budget for prosecution...they don't have any special agency in place to go after anyone. Think of the billions of dollars spent with tons of govt. agencies formed 20 years for the "WAR ON DRUGS'. I don't know about you, but there's more drugs of every type available on any corner now, then there was before the govt's billion dollar a year war.

RawAlex 05-20-2005 07:17 PM

Sponsor content (not throw away stuff but actual "from the site" stuff) is the best way to sell the product, increases the conversions, and lowers the chance of a chargeback because the content shown in the sale (free site) is the same as what is on the site.

Under what was originally proposed, it would be required to hand full 2257 documents to every affiliate wanting to use the content. That is overwhelming amounts of paper out there (imaging a program with 1000 affiliates used 30 images each per day... )that would be 60,000 pieces of paper having to be mailed each day... and the end of 1 year that is 22 million pieces of new paperwork not currently required by law. Multiple that over the hundreds of bigger program out there with content, multiply by the number of sites each one has, and you are looking at more than a billion new pieces of paper - and not a single bit of it will stop child porn.

The scale of the government's idea is a little overwhelming.

Alex

orcastudios 05-20-2005 07:44 PM

Some of you are missing the fine-points of the new proposed regulations. You must have your 2257 documents ready to show the inspectors when they arrive at your front door. The documents MUST be in alphabetical order. You must also have your documents CROSS-INDEXED by the stage names used by the performers AND by the locations of where these performers can be found (video name, URL, etc.) If one document is out of order (eg: not alphabetized) then that is a violation. The inspectors may visit you up to three times a year.

The obvious purpose of making this so difficult is to drive the porn industry out of business.

(And to the poster above who said that there is no funding or organization to do this - the Justice Department has set-up a new Obscenity Division to handle this.)

CDSmith 05-20-2005 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lenny2
Don't flatter yourself, I give you shit when you post moronic things, such as your earlier post. If you keep acting like a moron, I'm obliged to keep calling you one.

Also, I never said you were providing legal advice, what I said was if that's your plan be glad you're in Canada, because people in the U.S. who think that if the law says A, but all they really want is B, so I'll do B, will end up filming gay reality sites in prison.

It's like saying "The speed limit is 65, but they really just want people to drive safely and not have an accident, so I'll drive 80 but be extra careful"

Christ lenny, take a midol already.

Isn't it your wifey's birthday? Shouldn't you two be out sharing a happy meal or something?

After Shock Media 05-20-2005 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhotoGreggXXX
My 2 cents. This whole law will blow over. The government hasn't set a budget for prosecution...they don't have any special agency in place to go after anyone. Think of the billions of dollars spent with tons of govt. agencies formed 20 years for the "WAR ON DRUGS'. I don't know about you, but there's more drugs of every type available on any corner now, then there was before the govt's billion dollar a year war.

They have set up a budget, they do have a special agency in place. Hell they even hold special meetings, go look it up or sell a few 10.00 sets and get an hour with an attorney.


Do not compare this to the war on drugs, anyone who does any research will quickly understand the government and a wide assortment of agencies get way to much money with it ongoing.

Snake Doctor 05-20-2005 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhotoGreggXXX
Think of the billions of dollars spent with tons of govt. agencies formed 20 years for the "WAR ON DRUGS'. I don't know about you, but there's more drugs of every type available on any corner now, then there was before the govt's billion dollar a year war.

Yes but how many people are in prison serving 10 year minimum sentences for drug offenses.

Answer: Most of them.

Most of the people in prison today are there on drug charges. Sure you can still get drugs on any street corner, but do you want to risk prison time for the cash you'll make selling them?

Nate-MM2 05-20-2005 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex
Under what was originally proposed, it would be required to hand full 2257 documents to every affiliate wanting to use the content. That is overwhelming amounts of paper out there (imaging a program with 1000 affiliates used 30 images each per day... )that would be 60,000 pieces of paper having to be mailed each day... and the end of 1 year that is 22 million pieces of new paperwork not currently required by law.

The sponsor only has to mail the documents once per each model.

It's up to the affiliate to track which URL's the images are published to.

CDSmith 05-20-2005 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orcastudios
Some of you are missing the fine-points of the new proposed regulations. You must have your 2257 documents ready to show the inspectors when they arrive at your front door. The documents MUST be in alphabetical order. You must also have your documents CROSS-INDEXED by the stage names used by the performers AND by the locations of where these performers can be found (video name, URL, etc.) If one document is out of order (eg: not alphabetized) then that is a violation. The inspectors may visit you up to three times a year.

The obvious purpose of making this so difficult is to drive the porn industry out of business.

(And to the poster above who said that there is no funding or organization to do this - the Justice Department has set-up a new Obscenity Division to handle this.)

Since none of that is likely to fly, meaning I don't see thousands upon thousands of affiliates complying to that degree or being able to comply to that degree, what is the alternative?

I'd certainly love to hear Lenny's solution, but I doubt he has one. Mouthy obnoxious twits never do.

Like I posted earlier, I intend to lead anyone who cares to look on a path linking them directly back to the sponsor/program/owner's own 2257 information page. I see no other alternative, except to shut all your sites down of course. Unless you change out your sites to send hits to pay sites and FHG's via text links only, Yes, go with the clean look.

To me it is the most ridiculous thing to suggest that someone merely promoting (as in linking to) an adult pay site needs to be responsible for keeping records on all of IT'S content. A link to those records should suffice for affiliates. Hopefully there will be some upcoming court battles over this and maybe, just maybe we will see some changings such as I'm suggesting here. It would certainly be a hell of a lot simpler and make more sense to have affilliates linking to the sponsor's 2257 information than all this garbage about distributing millions of documents.

I don't see why anyone calling themself a webmaster would want to argue with that.

Mr.Fiction 05-20-2005 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RogerV
the government just wants to organize and clean it up. Which I think we should have done in a long time. This way the conversions will get better and so will the retention when people can't view obscene content for free.

Do you honestly believe that?

If you really think that, you need to talk to your lawyer right now.

There is no free speech lawyer in the United States who is worth talking to that will tell you that the government is just doing this to help "organize" the adult industry.

The right wing claim this is a change to help fight child porn, but it is an attempt to stifle legal free speech and will do nothing to fight child porn.

This is an attack on free speech. "Obscene" content is another issue altogether.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:57 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123