Lawyer will tear a new asshole in 2257 - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

newbreed · 06-07-2005, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by damian2001

Oh thank god for that... Ive been sitting here thinking about that for ages. It was driving me nuts.

I owe you a beer.

I accept your invite for a beer and raise you a RB and Vodka!

edit - woj can blow my nutzzzzzz

j/k......lol

Damian_Maxcash · 06-07-2005, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

Correctamundo.

The law applies to those who PRODUCE the content. Not the affiliates. Not the distributors. The PRODUCERS, and PROVIDERS. Basically those who deal directly with the models, and who have direct contact (i.e. media company, photographer, publisher).

All you keyboard warrior GFY attorney's need to call a real lawyer.

Some of the people in these drama threads are apparently too poor to afford counsel, and come to the GFY to seek advice on how to run their business. Anyone see the problem in that?

If you are simply an affiliate, TGP or a webmaster who does nothing but distribute, resell, the content from a provider, then you just need to make sure your documentation is good for whereever your shit's coming from. That's how it's been for years.

This law is nothing more to make sure that if someone has a questionable model on their site, and should another webmaster, affiliate, O'Reilly, some Bush administration official, DOJ, or anyone else ask for you to prove she is over the age of 18 at the the of the shoot, you can produce these records. So you have a copy of their ID's, and preferible a picture of them laying on today's (or that day's) newspaper (i.e. showing the date).

End of story.

You dont need to be a lawyer to understand that the new rules have changed a lot more than you seem to think. Read it yourself and then ask your legal advisor for a full refund.

psili · 06-07-2005, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psili

Laws exist merely to control the masses. The same law can be, has been and will be interpreted and judged differently for different groups / individuals within the mass based on the whims, feelings, agendas, etc. of the controlling body.

Read into that how you want, but it's pretty much a time-tested fact.

I always wanted to quote my own post, and with that, here's

+ previous

which equal $.04 -

I'd love to think that an entity / individual participating in the purveying of "sexually explicit" libidinous content would be seen as equal to all others doing the same thing. However, and this is just opinion, I think anyone trying to compare an "adult" business so widely participated in by members of this board to any mainstream one; cable companies, google, yahoo, Hollywood movie studios, etc., should not do so, regardless of how close the gray areas between the "adult" and mainstream businesses may cross in regard to proposed regulations.

Again, I wish and hope the arguments posed in this thread and many others come to fruition as having a positive outcome. I just wanted to add what I see as reality compared to what I see as speculation and "what should be right".

jonesy · 06-07-2005, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

The law applies to [ SNIP ]

All you keyboard warrior GFY attorney's need to call a real lawyer.

are you a lawyer?

tranza · 06-11-2005, 02:09 PM

Old news....

06-11-2005, 02:09 PM	#55
tranza ICQ: 197-556-237 Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: BRASIL !!! Posts: 57,559	Old news.... __________________ I'm just a newbie.