New 2257 regs published (link here) - Page 8 - GoFuckYourself.com

hy777 · 05-28-2005, 05:04 PM

Say you publish a picture of a girl groping her own tits and she has her o face on. Could it be argued she was masturbating?

If it can be argued, then, that masturbation only exists in your head as a projection of your own thoughts. She could as well be calling her cat.

An act of masturbation must be also explicit, according to the defintions used by the new regulations. If you don't see a pussy or you don't see a hand reaching a pussy, or dildo or anything that can unequivocally demonstrate an act of 'masturbation', then it may well not exist.

But I am not a lawyer.

Kingfish · 05-28-2005, 06:02 PM

They were hypothetical scenarios, but I don?t read anywhere in 2257, 2256 or the regulations where it says masturbation while clothed or masturbation by sensitive nipples is excluded from 2257 record keeping requirements. The definitions say merely a depiction of actual masturbation. I offer this merely as food for thought and to point out that essentially the AG can stretch the definition to include things most people wouldn?t think about.

Vegas Babe · 05-28-2005, 10:09 PM

How is everyone planning to keep these records? Anyone know of a script out there to help with this? I am sooooo glad that I have a Lot more non-explicit content then explict content on my servers, but I still have about 80 domains I have to go looking at to see what is what?

I am also curious on censored banners. It says actual or simulated, but if a banner has a big star over the private bits, does it fall under 2257?

Mr.Fiction · 05-28-2005, 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by latinasojourn

and, IF you DO need 2257, what happened to the concept free speech in the USA?

That's why the lawyers get paid, because most politicians don't care about free speech or the constitution. Those in charge of the U.S. right now don't just dislike free speech, they hate it.

This law has never been tested at the Supreme Court. Who wants to be the first to take it there?

CGI · 05-29-2005, 02:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vegas Babe

How is everyone planning to keep these records? Anyone know of a script out there to help with this? I am sooooo glad that I have a Lot more non-explicit content then explict content on my servers, but I still have about 80 domains I have to go looking at to see what is what?

I am also curious on censored banners. It says actual or simulated, but if a banner has a big star over the private bits, does it fall under 2257?

We're developing a software product to help manage the record keeping requirements. I have some screen shots up at http://www.manicproductions.com/komply/ and it should be going into beta before the end of the weekend.

It's something we started developing for in-house use and quickly decided to market to the masses since I think a lot of people are in the same boat as us (a lot of domains, even more sites and a shitload of content).

As for an opinion on the banner thing... I'm no lawyer, but we're going to go to just "non explicit" banners - rather be safe than sorry

- CGI

Vegas Babe · 05-29-2005, 08:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CGI

As for an opinion on the banner thing... I'm no lawyer, but we're going to go to just "non explicit" banners - rather be safe than sorry

- CGI

My banners though are almost as bad as my content as far as all over the place. My later sites I have the banners on rotators, which I can easily change them out to non-explicit, but i've been building sites since 99 so some have the banners just embedded in the pages.

Thanks for the link on the script, I knew someone had to be coming out with something to make life easier on this one!

latinasojourn · 05-29-2005, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CGI

We're developing a software product to help manage the record keeping requirements. I have some screen shots up at http://www.manicproductions.com/komply/ and it should be going into beta before the end of the weekend.

It's something we started developing for in-house use and quickly decided to market to the masses since I think a lot of people are in the same boat as us (a lot of domains, even more sites and a shitload of content).

As for an opinion on the banner thing... I'm no lawyer, but we're going to go to just "non explicit" banners - rather be safe than sorry

- CGI

looks good. does it have a server scan feature?

CGI · 05-29-2005, 09:17 AM

Finally, one feature I didn't think to add (if you're referring to scanning the server for the content - the system will already spider the URLs where the content is published to archive a copy per the regs).

Because of the way the new regs read - the filenames for all of the content are already stored in the system so it will be trivial to add the ability to have it search servers for the content.

The software should be run on a machine at your business address in order to comply with the 2257 requirements (needs to be at your business address) so it will be done either with a script that runs on the server and is accessed remotely, or it will connect via ssh and scan the server that way (I'm leaning towards ssh due to the more secure nature).

The software will run on either UNIX or Windows and can run under an existing webserver install or, in the case of Windows, it provides it's own (using Apache+PHP+MySQL) as well as the few support files it needs (ImageMagick, wget, tar, gz).

Since this will makes our lives a lot easier, it's definatly high on the list of things to add.

- CGI

After Shock Media · 05-29-2005, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CGI

Finally, one feature I didn't think to add (if you're referring to scanning the server for the content - the system will already spider the URLs where the content is published to archive a copy per the regs).

Because of the way the new regs read - the filenames for all of the content are already stored in the system so it will be trivial to add the ability to have it search servers for the content.

The software should be run on a machine at your business address in order to comply with the 2257 requirements (needs to be at your business address) so it will be done either with a script that runs on the server and is accessed remotely, or it will connect via ssh and scan the server that way (I'm leaning towards ssh due to the more secure nature).

The software will run on either UNIX or Windows and can run under an existing webserver install or, in the case of Windows, it provides it's own (using Apache+PHP+MySQL) as well as the few support files it needs (ImageMagick, wget, tar, gz).

Since this will makes our lives a lot easier, it's definatly high on the list of things to add.

- CGI

Silly question, but does this software also include printing options?

CGI · 05-29-2005, 10:40 AM

Of course.. you can print right from the record you're viewing, or tag records and export them to a PDF which you can download and print at will.

- CGI

cjaccardi · 05-29-2005, 03:27 PM

Ummm you should edit that screenshot more you still have the models legal name and birthdate on it for the world to see

EZRhino · 05-29-2005, 05:36 PM

This is going to be a pian in the ass for everybody

CGI · 05-29-2005, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cjaccardi

Ummm you should edit that screenshot more you still have the models legal name and birthdate on it for the world to see

The birthdate is shown, the legal name is not.. everything except the bday is just test data for that EXACT reason and there should be no problem with the bday on it's own.

- CGI

sacX · 05-29-2005, 05:48 PM

so if you're outside the US, just put up an address where the records are kept outside the US. The US authorities can't actually come and check.

s9ann0 · 05-29-2005, 05:57 PM

wow I guess its the end of the adult internet

INever · 05-29-2005, 07:32 PM

I don't see any change in the 2257 regs covering this. If a site is declared to be non-sexually explicit and artistic, then it is not required to maintain records. I don't see this changing with the new 2257 reg update.

jojojo · 05-29-2005, 07:37 PM

You can avoid all this 2257 bullshit by creating websites with no content and get SE traffic which you can feed to sponsors... see sig

Oberon · 05-30-2005, 08:44 PM

Bump! 'cause I felt like it.

05-28-2005, 06:02 PM	#352
Kingfish Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 668	They were hypothetical scenarios, but I don?t read anywhere in 2257, 2256 or the regulations where it says masturbation while clothed or masturbation by sensitive nipples is excluded from 2257 record keeping requirements. The definitions say merely a depiction of actual masturbation. I offer this merely as food for thought and to point out that essentially the AG can stretch the definition to include things most people wouldn?t think about. Last edited by Kingfish; 05-28-2005 at 06:03 PM..

05-28-2005, 10:09 PM	#353
Vegas Babe RedCherry of 3DFiends.com Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Pahrump NV Posts: 149	How is everyone planning to keep these records? Anyone know of a script out there to help with this? I am sooooo glad that I have a Lot more non-explicit content then explict content on my servers, but I still have about 80 domains I have to go looking at to see what is what? I am also curious on censored banners. It says actual or simulated, but if a banner has a big star over the private bits, does it fall under 2257? __________________ 3D Fiends - Our current 3D Toon Porn Packages For Sale The Red Cherry Free Porn Sites - Submit Your Free and AVS Sites Free XXX Porn Links from xXx Porn Tastic - Submit Your Free and AVS Sites Alien's Sex Links Amazing Free Hardcore Sites - Submit Your Free and AVS Sites Free Porn Sites from Got Porn Sites Submit Your Free and AVS Sites Hot Porn For Women - Submit Your Free and AVS Sites For Women

05-29-2005, 09:17 AM	#358
CGI Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 139	Finally, one feature I didn't think to add (if you're referring to scanning the server for the content - the system will already spider the URLs where the content is published to archive a copy per the regs). Because of the way the new regs read - the filenames for all of the content are already stored in the system so it will be trivial to add the ability to have it search servers for the content. The software should be run on a machine at your business address in order to comply with the 2257 requirements (needs to be at your business address) so it will be done either with a script that runs on the server and is accessed remotely, or it will connect via ssh and scan the server that way (I'm leaning towards ssh due to the more secure nature). The software will run on either UNIX or Windows and can run under an existing webserver install or, in the case of Windows, it provides it's own (using Apache+PHP+MySQL) as well as the few support files it needs (ImageMagick, wget, tar, gz). Since this will makes our lives a lot easier, it's definatly high on the list of things to add. - CGI __________________ Komply - The 2257 record keeping & content management application (sneak preview) Manic Cash - Tight Niches, Solid Payouts... ICQ 346121285

05-29-2005, 10:40 AM	#360
CGI Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 139	Of course.. you can print right from the record you're viewing, or tag records and export them to a PDF which you can download and print at will. - CGI __________________ Komply - The 2257 record keeping & content management application (sneak preview) Manic Cash - Tight Niches, Solid Payouts... ICQ 346121285

05-29-2005, 05:48 PM	#364
sacX Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: New Zealand Posts: 2,998	so if you're outside the US, just put up an address where the records are kept outside the US. The US authorities can't actually come and check. __________________ Have Asian Language Traffic?

05-28-2005, 05:04 PM	#351
hy777 I have 6 credit cards, each buying 1 trial a day Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 56	Say you publish a picture of a girl groping her own tits and she has her o face on. Could it be argued she was masturbating? If it can be argued, then, that masturbation only exists in your head as a projection of your own thoughts. She could as well be calling her cat. An act of masturbation must be also explicit, according to the defintions used by the new regulations. If you don't see a pussy or you don't see a hand reaching a pussy, or dildo or anything that can unequivocally demonstrate an act of 'masturbation', then it may well not exist. But I am not a lawyer.

05-29-2005, 03:27 PM	#361
cjaccardi Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 406	Ummm you should edit that screenshot more you still have the models legal name and birthdate on it for the world to see

05-29-2005, 05:36 PM	#362
EZRhino Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: couch Posts: 6,258	This is going to be a pian in the ass for everybody

05-29-2005, 05:57 PM	#365
s9ann0 Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Boston Posts: 4,873	wow I guess its the end of the adult internet

05-29-2005, 07:32 PM	#366
INever Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: .......in a niche, in orbit...... Posts: 3,615	Non-sexual explicit nudity I don't see any change in the 2257 regs covering this. If a site is declared to be non-sexually explicit and artistic, then it is not required to maintain records. I don't see this changing with the new 2257 reg update. __________________ I love Camdough

05-29-2005, 07:37 PM	#367
jojojo Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Vancouver, BC Posts: 2,318	You can avoid all this 2257 bullshit by creating websites with no content and get SE traffic which you can feed to sponsors... see sig __________________ Learn SEO - make $$ residually - icq me 333485092

05-30-2005, 08:44 PM	#368
Oberon Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Calgary Posts: 190	Bump! 'cause I felt like it.