Protecting Porn Girls - GoFuckYourself.com

Mutt · 05-25-2005, 06:16 AM

The Attorney General in his infinite wisdom denied any concerns commenters on the new 2257 rules had about protecting the safety of girls who work in porn. Correct me if I'm wrong - NOWHERE in 2257 did I see the requirement to include a picture identification card with anything BUT a face and legal name - nothing about the location/address of the girl. So can you black out(redact) that information and just leave the photo and her name? If the answer is no - are there any national ID cards that would suffice for 2257 that would only have a girl's face and her legal name on it, nothing to trace her to a state or city?

Mack · 05-25-2005, 06:26 AM

Mutt, they rejected that bit of common sense. And better yet rejected it under the guise that it put too much of a burden on the content producer because you would have to incur additional costs of having the ppw notorized and the additional time and expense it would take to fire up photoshop and black out the sensitive info. .................gimme a sec I get the exact quote for ya.

Fake Nick · 05-25-2005, 06:27 AM

the only protection a porn girl needs is a condom

alias · 05-25-2005, 06:29 AM

I can see it now: porn0slut.info

sweetcuties · 05-25-2005, 06:29 AM

Just a matter of time before something happens to a porn girl, then common sense will take place. The same thing applies to traffic lights etc. Nothing happens till someone dies, then a light goes up

Mack · 05-25-2005, 06:32 AM

Privacy

Sixty-two commenters commented that revealing personal information
of performers, for example, in the form of their addresses on drivers'
licenses used as identification documents in compliance with this
regulation, is an invasion of performers' privacy and could lead to
identity theft or violent crimes. Forty commenters commented that
including the names and addresses of businesses where the records at
issue are located would similarly lead to crimes against those
businesses. The Department declines to adopt these comments. While the
Department is certainly concerned about possible crimes against
performers and businesses that employ them, the necessity of
maintaining these records to ensure that children are not exploited
outweighs these concerns. Furthermore, specifically regarding personal
information about performers required to be provided to primary
producers, the Department notes that the information required is no
different from that required by other forms of employee or business
records, such as social security numbers and dates of birth required
for tax reporting purposes, emergency contact numbers in case of health
problems, or addresses used to transmit paychecks. Regarding
information about producers, such as their physical location, that
those producers must include in their statements, the Department notes
that producers are already required, under the current Part 75
regulations, to include that information. Finally, regarding personal
information about performers that must be transmitted to secondary
producers, the Department again notes, first, that such information is
already required by the current Part 75 regulations, and, second, that
none of the commenters presented any evidence that a hypothetically
possible crime, such as the stalking of a performer, was in any way
tied to the dissemination of the information about a performer provided
to a producer in compliance with Part 75.
Another commenter proposed that secondary producers be required to
store sanitized (i.e., without personal information such as home
address) hard or digital copies of performers' identification documents
along with a notarized affidavit from the primary producer stating the
location of the complete records. The Department declines to adopt this
comment. Although the Department understands the commenter's desire to
protect private information about performers from being too widely
disseminated, it believes that the suggested plan would be overly
burdensome on primary producers and add an unnecessary layer of
complexity to the record-keeping process. Primary producers would be
required first to sanitize the identification documents and then to
draft, sign, and pay for a notarized affidavit. It is simpler and less
burdensome simply to have primary producers transfer a copy of the
records to secondary producers.

Good thing they are looking out for ya huh???

alias · 05-25-2005, 06:34 AM

sponsor content 4L

Doc911 · 05-25-2005, 07:22 AM

This is only going to get worse before it gets better

Adam-EB · 05-25-2005, 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mack

Mutt, they rejected that bit of common sense. And better yet rejected it under the guise that it put too much of a burden on the content producer because you would have to incur additional costs of having the ppw notorized and the additional time and expense it would take to fire up photoshop and black out the sensitive info. .................gimme a sec I get the exact quote for ya.

I read that, too. But, if they rejected it under the premise that it puts an extra burden on the producers, shouldn't we be able to do it anyway if we feel it's not an extra burden?

Mutt · 05-25-2005, 07:29 AM

the good thing as far as porn girls go is there is no requirement to show them
anything but a picture ID card from a state or federal department/agency with her legal name - I see nothing that would make you non-compliant if you black out the girl's location/address. I'm still asking are there any national picture ID cards that don't have location/address on them? There must be a bunch of cards that the federal government issues for various programs and such no?

bigdog · 05-25-2005, 07:53 AM

Blocking out a location and address would be nice, but still people would have access to their real names, and what about social security cards. They are just asking for more id theft.

BuggyG · 05-25-2005, 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sweetcuties

Just a matter of time before something happens to a porn girl, then common sense will take place. The same thing applies to traffic lights etc. Nothing happens till someone dies, then a light goes up

it's all fun and games untiul someone loses an eye!

I love that quote

Mutt · 05-25-2005, 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigdog

Blocking out a location and address would be nice, but still people would have access to their real names, and what about social security cards. They are just asking for more id theft.

yeah i know but a name, i.e. Karen Schmucker , without anything tying her down to a state ain't gonna be much use to anybody. Only to a weirdo, the name and date of birth would give that type an easy head start i assume. What public records are available to people?

I'm worried about girls like the one in my sig - only solution is affiliates get no free content/promo materials that is 2257 applicable - just very softcore nudes and NN banners, free content, galleries.

Gramma · 05-25-2005, 08:07 AM

Furthermore, specifically regarding personal
information about performers required to be provided to primary
producers, the Department notes that the information required is no
different from that required by other forms of employee or business
records, such as social security numbers and dates of birth required
for tax reporting purposes, emergency contact numbers in case of health
problems, or addresses used to transmit paychecks.

Actually, when you apply for a job - an employer, the accountant, and perhaps the payroll department have access to your information - not everyone that comes in to buy a slurpie. So that analogy is flawed as well.

Looking for webmasters in the STL area (maybe 100 mile radius) - to share office space and hours in office. 1910009 icq

NaughtyRob · 05-25-2005, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mutt

the good thing as far as porn girls go is there is no requirement to show them
anything but a picture ID card from a state or federal department/agency with her legal name - I see nothing that would make you non-compliant if you black out the girl's location/address. I'm still asking are there any national picture ID cards that don't have location/address on them? There must be a bunch of cards that the federal government issues for various programs and such no?

Do passports have address etc? I dont think they do.

goBigtime · 05-25-2005, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alias

I can see it now: porn0slut.info

Complete with google maps satellite imagery.

LaraRoxx · 05-25-2005, 08:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mutt

The Attorney General in his infinite wisdom denied any concerns commenters on the new 2257 rules had about protecting the safety of girls who work in porn. Correct me if I'm wrong - NOWHERE in 2257 did I see the requirement to include a picture identification card with anything BUT a face and legal name - nothing about the location/address of the girl. So can you black out(redact) that information and just leave the photo and her name? If the answer is no - are there any national ID cards that would suffice for 2257 that would only have a girl's face and her legal name on it, nothing to trace her to a state or city?

fbi be watching....

LaraRoxx · 05-25-2005, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BuggyG

it's all fun and games untiul someone loses an eye!

I love that quote

that is so true !now try to figer who is giong to loose that body part first?

goBigtime · 05-25-2005, 08:17 AM

The solution is here

LaraRoxx · 05-25-2005, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mack

Privacy

Sixty-two commenters commented that revealing personal information
of performers, for example, in the form of their addresses on drivers'
licenses used as identification documents in compliance with this
regulation, is an invasion of performers' privacy and could lead to
identity theft or violent crimes. Forty commenters commented that
including the names and addresses of businesses where the records at
issue are located would similarly lead to crimes against those
businesses. The Department declines to adopt these comments. While the
Department is certainly concerned about possible crimes against
performers and businesses that employ them, the necessity of
maintaining these records to ensure that children are not exploited
outweighs these concerns. Furthermore, specifically regarding personal
information about performers required to be provided to primary
producers, the Department notes that the information required is no
different from that required by other forms of employee or business
records, such as social security numbers and dates of birth required
for tax reporting purposes, emergency contact numbers in case of health
problems, or addresses used to transmit paychecks. Regarding
information about producers, such as their physical location, that
those producers must include in their statements, the Department notes
that producers are already required, under the current Part 75
regulations, to include that information. Finally, regarding personal
information about performers that must be transmitted to secondary
producers, the Department again notes, first, that such information is
already required by the current Part 75 regulations, and, second, that
none of the commenters presented any evidence that a hypothetically
possible crime, such as the stalking of a performer, was in any way
tied to the dissemination of the information about a performer provided
to a producer in compliance with Part 75.
Another commenter proposed that secondary producers be required to
store sanitized (i.e., without personal information such as home
address) hard or digital copies of performers' identification documents
along with a notarized affidavit from the primary producer stating the
location of the complete records. The Department declines to adopt this
comment. Although the Department understands the commenter's desire to
protect private information about performers from being too widely
disseminated, it believes that the suggested plan would be overly
burdensome on primary producers and add an unnecessary layer of
complexity to the record-keeping process. Primary producers would be
required first to sanitize the identification documents and then to
draft, sign, and pay for a notarized affidavit. It is simpler and less
burdensome simply to have primary producers transfer a copy of the
records to secondary producers.

Good thing they are looking out for ya huh???

what about if the performer decides to reavel who she really is (her real name adresse number background)other peaple are still not alound to do it?anyways I am looking for a new lawyer accualy i need the best in the world because dugmor is a genius ...maybe smarter than me...one thing is for shure we have the same mental desease. TheArtistInternationalyKnownAsLaraRoxx/Pascale.Abitbol !.514.606.8832.

LaraRoxx · 05-25-2005, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goBigtime

The solution is here

is this link ment for me or for my nemessis?anyways how may I possibly ever trust a pornoMan that doesnt tell me who he is.

Mack · 05-25-2005, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mutt

the good thing as far as porn girls go is there is no requirement to show them
anything but a picture ID card from a state or federal department/agency with her legal name - I see nothing that would make you non-compliant if you black out the girl's location/address. I'm still asking are there any national picture ID cards that don't have location/address on them? There must be a bunch of cards that the federal government issues for various programs and such no?

Sixty-two commenters commented that revealing personal information
of performers, for example, in the form of their addresses on drivers'
licenses used as identification documents in compliance with this
regulation, is an invasion of performers' privacy and could lead to
identity theft or violent crimes. Forty commenters commented that
including the names and addresses of businesses where the records at
issue are located would similarly lead to crimes against those
businesses. The Department declines to adopt these comments

Mutt, I know your intent is good. I would suggest you speak with your lawyer and get his opinion. Afterall he is the one who will be protecting you if the govt gets a wild hair up their ass and decides to come to your place of biz.

Honestly, personal opinions are just that. The only real opinions that come into play is that of the govt, and your legal counsel.

There seem to be two schools of thought here.
A. I want to comply but I'm not sure how. ( in which case your counsel can help)
B. I want to find a way NOT to comply. ( in which case many folk at GFY will be happy to help you find a way to work harder to not comply than you ever would doing what is being asked of us)

I agree as a content producer, you may be in a new spot of being a whole lot pickier in who you sell content to and provide these doc's. I don't like it, but if things don't change in the next few weeks, we are all going to have to change the way we view content and who and how we provide it.

Mutt · 05-25-2005, 08:24 AM

goBigtime,

you had a chance to make a comment/suggestion to the the DOJ and i'm guessing you didn't. they don't care, go read the document and how they responded to what 'commenters' had to say. Gonzalez is very happy with what he has now, he's not looking for solutions - he believes he has the solution - and not the solution to child porn, the solution to putting a big dent in this industry.

the risk still isn't all that great to girls - not much more risk of being stalked than the average girl out there. bigger worry for a girl is the kind of thing that drove Tiffany Teen into retirement.

LaraRoxx · 05-25-2005, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ContentProducer

Do passports have address etc? I dont think they do.

Im sorry Canadian passports do not but if you are looking for my adress....we can arange that.
TheArtistInternationnalyKnownAsLaraRoxx/Pascale.Abitbol

LaraRoxx · 05-25-2005, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mutt

goBigtime,

you had a chance to make a comment/suggestion to the the DOJ and i'm guessing you didn't. they don't care, go read the document and how they responded to what 'commenters' had to say. Gonzalez is very happy with what he has now, he's not looking for solutions - he believes he has the solution - and not the solution to child porn, the solution to putting a big dent in this industry.

the risk still isn't all that great to girls - not much more risk of being stalked than the average girl out there. bigger worry for a girl is the kind of thing that drove Tiffany Teen into retirement.

I have been a money maker since I am & years old reference available.....TheArtistInternationalyKnownAsLaraRo xx/Pascale.Abitbol

LaraRoxx · 05-25-2005, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alias

sponsor content 4L

Santa loves me?I thought he didnt exist?

LaraRoxx · 05-25-2005, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigdog

Blocking out a location and address would be nice, but still people would have access to their real names, and what about social security cards. They are just asking for more id theft.

yeah but like that there will be no doubt about the person that owns the intelectual propreties... no?

goBigtime · 05-25-2005, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mutt

goBigtime,

you had a chance to make a comment/suggestion to the the DOJ and i'm guessing you didn't. they don't care, go read the document and how they responded to what 'commenters' had to say. Gonzalez is very happy with what he has now, he's not looking for solutions - he believes he has the solution - and not the solution to child porn, the solution to putting a big dent in this industry.

the risk still isn't all that great to girls - not much more risk of being stalked than the average girl out there. bigger worry for a girl is the kind of thing that drove Tiffany Teen into retirement.

Mutt,

Hopefully the DOJ will still be open for further discussion/modifications if the FSC and others can successfully argue their side of things. It has only been a little over a day now to where that was even possible.

But yeah... I should have dedicated some time thinking about that solution during the time that they were accepting comments.

I'm not hip to what happend with Tiffany Teen.... I must have been working that week.

goBigtime · 05-25-2005, 08:51 AM

Btw.. Is LaraRoxx the real lararoxx? Or fake nick?

Trixxxia · 05-25-2005, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaraRoxx

yeah but like that there will be no doubt about the person that owns the intelectual propreties... no?

In theory, if you signed your releases - you don't own the copyright - you signed it over.

To you, it's more of a risk than a benefit - you don't own the copyright yet your name & personal details (depending on the document you have on hand) is being given out with every hardcore set that is either sold or given as promotional content. There could be thousands of people with your personal info - real name, home address, phone, passport number.....

Quite frankly - as a model & at this point in time, copyright is the least of your worries.

College Downtime · 05-25-2005, 09:25 AM

You wouldnt even own it

Trixxxia · 05-25-2005, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goBigtime

Btw.. Is LaraRoxx the real lararoxx? Or fake nick?

Videotron is one of the biggest providers in Quebec - there's a good chance it's her (based on that email address)

NaughtyRob · 05-25-2005, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaraRoxx

Im sorry Canadian passports do not but if you are looking for my adress....we can arange that.
TheArtistInternationnalyKnownAsLaraRoxx/Pascale.Abitbol

I already have your model release and IDs hun.

NaughtyRob · 05-25-2005, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goBigtime

Mutt,

I'm not hip to what happend with Tiffany Teen.... I must have been working that week.

Somebody posted her High School pic, and I think her real name as well. She got scared and pissed and quit her very lucrative site. The biggest selling non-nude site ever probably.

emmanuelle · 05-25-2005, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ContentProducer

Somebody posted her High School pic, and I think her real name as well. She got scared and pissed and quit her very lucrative site. The biggest selling non-nude site ever probably.

Ironicly a non nude site would not be subject to 2257

Doc911 · 05-25-2005, 10:39 AM

Thats like requiring every company in the US to post the drivers licence and ss of every employee in a public place to protect the child labor law...

05-25-2005, 06:16 AM	#1
Mutt Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 34,431	Protecting Porn Girls The Attorney General in his infinite wisdom denied any concerns commenters on the new 2257 rules had about protecting the safety of girls who work in porn. Correct me if I'm wrong - NOWHERE in 2257 did I see the requirement to include a picture identification card with anything BUT a face and legal name - nothing about the location/address of the girl. So can you black out(redact) that information and just leave the photo and her name? If the answer is no - are there any national ID cards that would suffice for 2257 that would only have a girl's face and her legal name on it, nothing to trace her to a state or city? __________________ I moved my sites to Vacares Hosting. I've saved money, my hair is thicker, lost some weight too! Thanks Sly!

05-25-2005, 06:29 AM	#4
alias aliasx Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 19,010	I can see it now: porn0slut.info __________________ https://porncorporation.com

05-25-2005, 06:29 AM	#5
sweetcuties Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Somewhere Posts: 5,859	Just a matter of time before something happens to a porn girl, then common sense will take place. The same thing applies to traffic lights etc. Nothing happens till someone dies, then a light goes up __________________

05-25-2005, 06:34 AM	#7
alias aliasx Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 19,010	sponsor content 4L __________________ https://porncorporation.com

05-25-2005, 07:22 AM	#8
Doc911 Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: If i was up your ass you'd know Posts: 3,695	This is only going to get worse before it gets better __________________ For PHP/MySQL scripts ICQ 161480555 or email [email protected]

05-25-2005, 06:26 AM	#2
Mack Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,017	Mutt, they rejected that bit of common sense. And better yet rejected it under the guise that it put too much of a burden on the content producer because you would have to incur additional costs of having the ppw notorized and the additional time and expense it would take to fire up photoshop and black out the sensitive info. .................gimme a sec I get the exact quote for ya.

05-25-2005, 06:27 AM	#3
Fake Nick So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: go troll goo! Posts: 7,708	the only protection a porn girl needs is a condom

05-25-2005, 06:32 AM	#6
Mack Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,017	Privacy Sixty-two commenters commented that revealing personal information of performers, for example, in the form of their addresses on drivers' licenses used as identification documents in compliance with this regulation, is an invasion of performers' privacy and could lead to identity theft or violent crimes. Forty commenters commented that including the names and addresses of businesses where the records at issue are located would similarly lead to crimes against those businesses. The Department declines to adopt these comments. While the Department is certainly concerned about possible crimes against performers and businesses that employ them, the necessity of maintaining these records to ensure that children are not exploited outweighs these concerns. Furthermore, specifically regarding personal information about performers required to be provided to primary producers, the Department notes that the information required is no different from that required by other forms of employee or business records, such as social security numbers and dates of birth required for tax reporting purposes, emergency contact numbers in case of health problems, or addresses used to transmit paychecks. Regarding information about producers, such as their physical location, that those producers must include in their statements, the Department notes that producers are already required, under the current Part 75 regulations, to include that information. Finally, regarding personal information about performers that must be transmitted to secondary producers, the Department again notes, first, that such information is already required by the current Part 75 regulations, and, second, that none of the commenters presented any evidence that a hypothetically possible crime, such as the stalking of a performer, was in any way tied to the dissemination of the information about a performer provided to a producer in compliance with Part 75. Another commenter proposed that secondary producers be required to store sanitized (i.e., without personal information such as home address) hard or digital copies of performers' identification documents along with a notarized affidavit from the primary producer stating the location of the complete records. The Department declines to adopt this comment. Although the Department understands the commenter's desire to protect private information about performers from being too widely disseminated, it believes that the suggested plan would be overly burdensome on primary producers and add an unnecessary layer of complexity to the record-keeping process. Primary producers would be required first to sanitize the identification documents and then to draft, sign, and pay for a notarized affidavit. It is simpler and less burdensome simply to have primary producers transfer a copy of the records to secondary producers. Good thing they are looking out for ya huh???

05-25-2005, 07:29 AM	#10
Mutt Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 34,431	the good thing as far as porn girls go is there is no requirement to show them anything but a picture ID card from a state or federal department/agency with her legal name - I see nothing that would make you non-compliant if you black out the girl's location/address. I'm still asking are there any national picture ID cards that don't have location/address on them? There must be a bunch of cards that the federal government issues for various programs and such no? __________________ I moved my sites to Vacares Hosting. I've saved money, my hair is thicker, lost some weight too! Thanks Sly!

05-25-2005, 07:53 AM	#11
bigdog Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 6,964	Blocking out a location and address would be nice, but still people would have access to their real names, and what about social security cards. They are just asking for more id theft.

05-25-2005, 08:07 AM	#14
Gramma Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 402	Furthermore, specifically regarding personal information about performers required to be provided to primary producers, the Department notes that the information required is no different from that required by other forms of employee or business records, such as social security numbers and dates of birth required for tax reporting purposes, emergency contact numbers in case of health problems, or addresses used to transmit paychecks. Actually, when you apply for a job - an employer, the accountant, and perhaps the payroll department have access to your information - not everyone that comes in to buy a slurpie. So that analogy is flawed as well. Looking for webmasters in the STL area (maybe 100 mile radius) - to share office space and hours in office. 1910009 icq

05-25-2005, 08:17 AM	#19
goBigtime Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 7,761	The solution is here

05-25-2005, 08:24 AM	#23
Mutt Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 34,431	goBigtime, you had a chance to make a comment/suggestion to the the DOJ and i'm guessing you didn't. they don't care, go read the document and how they responded to what 'commenters' had to say. Gonzalez is very happy with what he has now, he's not looking for solutions - he believes he has the solution - and not the solution to child porn, the solution to putting a big dent in this industry. the risk still isn't all that great to girls - not much more risk of being stalked than the average girl out there. bigger worry for a girl is the kind of thing that drove Tiffany Teen into retirement. __________________ I moved my sites to Vacares Hosting. I've saved money, my hair is thicker, lost some weight too! Thanks Sly! Last edited by Mutt; 05-25-2005 at 08:25 AM..

05-25-2005, 08:51 AM	#29
goBigtime Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 7,761	Btw.. Is LaraRoxx the real lararoxx? Or fake nick?

05-25-2005, 09:25 AM	#31
College Downtime Confirmed User Join Date: May 2005 Location: Illinois Posts: 557	You wouldnt even own it __________________ College Downtime.com

05-25-2005, 10:39 AM	#36
Doc911 Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: If i was up your ass you'd know Posts: 3,695	Thats like requiring every company in the US to post the drivers licence and ss of every employee in a public place to protect the child labor law... __________________ For PHP/MySQL scripts ICQ 161480555 or email [email protected]