2257....

well lightspeed just said that he won't be giving affiliates the 2257 docs. i think that will set the precedence for other sponsors. this is really going to change everything.

2257 means a restriction of the industry. .Xxx can wipe it all out.

I don't blame him and I support him.

We are meeting with our lawyers on the 9th to finalize our decision.

Both are awful. I'd vote for .xxx being the bigger problem only because I have complete confidence that the industry will either completely defeat all the 2257 regs, or get them altered so much that they won't be a problem in their final form. What stinks so much about .xxx is that people inside the industry helped bring this down on us... we're used to dealing with the government and issues like 2257, but .xxx is an assault from both the outside and within, and financed by private business interests. That's trickier to beat. Now, if 2257 were to stand exactly as it is right now and nothing were changed in court, then it would be a tougher call which was worse. But I am confident that the FSC will be successful to at least some degree in its challenge. Let's hope I'm right there.

Is there a thrid option?

The real battle will be with Visa

See post above.

possible :(

as long as there is no retroactive action taken against affiliates who cannot now get the docs.

Very True.

EXACTLY. Visa will just say right, all adult sites have to be on .xxx, no .com or .net just like they ban certain words they will ban TLDs just as easily thus enforcing .xxx.

Of course this is in ICM's interest and notice they are employing all the sleazy DC lobbyists to help them advance their cause, soon they will set them loose on senators and on visa, just wait and see.

$70 for a domain , they are the scum of the earth in my book :mad:

As it has been explained to me by an attorney there is no retroactivity with the new 2257. This is subject to debate and also the million dollar question.

Is a webpage published?

1. The day it goes live on the internet.
2. The day it goes live on the internet, then AGAIN ? when it is updates.
3. A webpage is published every time you log onto it.

From lawyers I have talked to, the DOJ will take the position that (3) ?A webpage is published every time you log onto it.?

Therefore retroactivity is moot.

.xxx is scary... imagine if they force us to switch to .xxx and leave .com for non-adult purposes only...

what if i renewed 10 .com for 10 years (till 2015)?

will they force me to use only non-adult pages in these domains?

What if these domains contain adult words, like Fuck, shemale, sex, tit, pussy, etc?

well i'm not sure the definition of 'publish' is key issue here. have secondary publishers always been required to maintain model IDs?:

so by publishing these new regulations, is this giving the DOJ the right to go back and force inspections on any secondary producer who ever published an image even of they have since taken them down before june 23rd?

if that's the case, sponsors are effectively leaving their affiliates out to dry by not giving out the proper documents.

Your posts are always so well put Jay

No. The new law redefines secondary producer.

Short answer to your second question is "yes", but it's not the sponsors hanging you. It is the goverment.

Answer to all questions is talk to a qualified lawyer. I have all of their numbers if you need them.

well if that's the case, what can a lawyer tell me? if they can retroactively punish affiliates (even if they have taken down all images) we're just sitting ducks if the sponsors won't supply the docs. great.

You have the power to kill both problems with your time, expertise, and money.

Go to: http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=477622

For the answer.

what about requiring a code in the metatag that labels the page as adult?

I had suggested that before - I think it is a great idea. Most people seemed to have slept on it though.