Originally Posted by ClevelandSlim

finally... the shit was gettin funny, but this statement by chadglni was just too fuckin ridiculously humerous. because making a website has been technically known as "publishing" you can see a difference here between a site owner sticking a thumb on his page to send traffic to the sponsored site where the actual records keeping is maintained. well, what if they change "publish" to "build" it's still the same fuckin thing... you can build a webpage AND just like a store owner can build his store. then placing the magazines inside on a rack would classify him as a secondary producer.

the fact remains, as long as the statute reads the way it does, it can go either way. the free speech challenges need to include this, and the many other sections that can be interpreted too many different ways to be clarified.

Originally Posted by GatorB

So I guess what we need is a way to "distribute" porn over the web without "publishing" it. Any ideas?

Originally Posted by Oberon

Mail-order. Send me money, I'll mail you your HARDCORE CONTENT RIGHT NOW.

Originally Posted by GatorB

A) I said OVER THE WEB

B) Mail order can get you into trouble especially if you are mailing to places like Utah or Alabama.

Originally Posted by nikad

no, hosting providers are the equivalent to paper providers, they are not responsible.
Can't you see that the main problem is going to be for content producers and paysite owners??? Even if we are all " secondary producers" the only shit we should do to be compliant isi to have a copy of the records form the sponsors we are promoting and a fucking link on the homepage of the site, what is so difficult to understand?

Originally Posted by nikad

We are not distributors. We are publishers.
We are not distributors. We are publishers.
We are not distributors. We are publishers.
We are not distributors. We are publishers.
We are not distributors. We are publishers.
We are not distributors. We are publishers.
We are not distributors. We are publishers.
We are not distributors. We are publishers.
We are not distributors. We are publishers.
We are not distributors. We are publishers.

Originally Posted by vdc-Loki

First I hate to have to add yet another 2257 thread to the growing pile but I've looked over alot of them and some ppl are ONLY quoting part of a VERY important statement, and in doing so I'm sure alot of u.s. ppl are freaking the fuck out....

Here is the statement as it pertains to secondary producers (READ IT ALL!)

(2) A secondary producer is any person who produces, assembles,
manufactures, publishes, duplicates, reproduces, or reissues a book,
magazine, periodical, film, videotape, digitally- or computer-
manipulated image, picture, or other matter intended for commercial
distribution that contains a visual depiction of an actual human being
engaged in actual sexually explicit conduct, or who inserts on a
computer site or service a digital image of, or otherwise manages the
sexually explicit content of a computer site or service that contains a
visual depiction of an actual human being engaged in actual sexually
explicit conduct, including any person who enters into a contract,
agreement, or conspiracy to do any of the foregoing.
(3) The same person may be both a primary and a secondary producer.
(4) Producer does not include persons whose activities relating to
the visual depiction of actual sexually explicit conduct are limited to
the following:
(i) Photo or film processing, including digitization of previously
existing visual depictions, as part of a commercial enterprise, with no
other commercial interest in the sexually explicit material, printing,
and video duplicators;
(ii) Mere distribution; AFFILS
(iii) Any activity, other than those activities identified in
paragraphs (c) (1) and (2) of this section, that does not involve the
hiring, contracting for, managing, or otherwise arranging for the
participation of the depicted performers; AFFILS

In short:

if you ONLY Distro it, OR designed website with it you are safe from the extensive record keeping,

Also I read & re-read the whole mess a few times, and though it does NOT say that "It would be acceptable for affils to just have a link to the sponsors 2257 page" with the above statement about the actual deff of a 2ndry producer affils and webdesigners DO NOT FALL UNDER THE SECONDARY PRODUCER CATAGORY.

So to affils "The sky is NOT falling" but we as producers and sponsors have to do alot more work :(

-Loki-

Originally Posted by Kevin2

Hit me up 146156431? I want to ask about your hosting prices?

Originally Posted by ClevelandSlim

finally... the shit was gettin funny, but this statement by chadglni was just too fuckin ridiculously humerous. because making a website has been technically known as "publishing" you can see a difference here between a site owner sticking a thumb on his page to send traffic to the sponsored site where the actual records keeping is maintained. well, what if they change "publish" to "build" it's still the same fuckin thing... you can build a webpage AND just like a store owner can build his store. then placing the magazines inside on a rack would classify him as a secondary producer.

the fact remains, as long as the statute reads the way it does, it can go either way. the free speech challenges need to include this, and the many other sections that can be interpreted too many different ways to be clarified.