GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   When to give out model ID's to affiliates? (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=478477)

jimmyf 06-08-2005 05:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pornstar2pac
Not giving IDs = good.
Giving out IDS = good.

It just depends on the circumstances.




you should run for office. lol
:1orglaugh :thumbsup

PurrrsianPussyKat 06-08-2005 05:10 PM
AWESOME NEWS LENS!
YOU ROCK!

*enter lensmans dancing banana here*

dopeman 06-08-2005 05:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimmykim
Don't you go getting your panties in a wad. My comment regarding secondary and tertiary is simply a mathematical observation based on the way the goverment has chosen to designate relationships. Their lack of understanding and knowledge in regards to the adult business is not going to deter them from proceeding with whatever scheme they've dreamed up to get some good press and make America safe from the dirty scheming pornographers.

I'd be surprised to see affiliates included in the first wave of their investigations, unless it's by accident. Think what you will of the DOJ, they do have a very sound plan for prosecuting an industry, especially one as much on the fringe of legality as this one happens to be.

However -- the DOJ is not stupid and they look for bang for the buck. If an affiliate gets caught in the crossfire because he is promoting a sponsor program they are after, then that's the way it goes. As I said, they do not understand, nor do they care to imo, just how the system that income is generated exists or is created between affiliates and sponsors.

Just like the FTC or the Meese Commission days when people were prosecuted, the government goes for the biggest target they can find. I've had stories told to me by people that were prosecuted way back when for their video content. People that did go to jail and people that didn't. The ones that didn't paid some pretty massive fines to the government, and in one case ended up with a hung jury to stay out of jail.
well fucking stated. and if these regulations are interpreted as retroactive, that means affiliates taking everything down before the 23rd does nothing to protect them for sponsor content they put up previously. according to the existing regulations, they at least need a copy of the model's ID. and so far, it looks about half and half in terms of sponsors giving out IDs. those affiliates that don't have them can be left very vulnerable.

seeric 06-08-2005 05:20 PM
i think it if it ever came to it, the models should sue the GOV. i mean if you read the comments and the neglect of the department to recognize those comments for their safety, they are reponsible. it is the GOV that is mandating the distribution of the records themselves. they don't care about people. ultimately, they care about votes and that is evident.

dopeman 06-08-2005 05:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by A1R3K
i think it if it ever came to it, the models should sue the GOV. i mean if you read the comments and the neglect of the department to recognize those comments for their safety, they are reponsible. it is the GOV that is mandating the distribution of the records themselves. they don't care about people. ultimately, they care about votes and that is evident.
the government is saying that secondary producers should have had them the entire time. they shouldn't have posted those thumbnails or AVS sites without the model IDs.

Tempest 06-08-2005 05:25 PM
Nice to see a reasonable approach to this... :thumbsup

seeric 06-08-2005 05:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dopeman
the government is saying that secondary producers should have had them the entire time. they shouldn't have posted those thumbnails or AVS sites without the model IDs.
yes, i understand this. even more so then. the studios and content producers didn't disseminate records for that exact reason, i am sure of it. and secondary producer was vaguely defined and that was the gray area. what was the interpretation of "secondary producer". basically i feel they are more at fault now, because they have had the opportunity now to adjust this law to a more "spirit of the law" approach, instead of a "letter of the law" approach. they have drastically blown it by requiring companies to give out their information to comply.

i am pretty sure that they know that most agreements made by the content producers dont have the stipulation that the id's can be passed on to secondary producers, as in the case of a program like Extreme Paychecks who has always had it in their agreements.

:2 cents:

im up to about $80.00 in :2 cents: posts on 2257 and about 100 bucks worth on COPA when it was the issue. :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Cavello 06-08-2005 05:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lensman
Tell it to the DOJ.
I'm not so sure that will hold up in cort.

tony286 06-08-2005 05:32 PM
giving models info to a affiliate or to someone who buys content ,has nothing to do with any privacy law.I dont know who came up with this? Adult mag publishers have been doing this for years. My wife shot for a adult mag(got the cover :) ,the photog who shot her was a freelancer he sold the pics to the mag and that included all her info. Its done all the time in the real world. As for lens if your going to give them the info what are u waiting for the time is ticking? I would assume the 80/20 rule applys here. Meaning 80% of the sales are made by 20% I would take care of the 20. Also I would think about no one becomes a affiliate who incorporated with a tax id number. It saves you money no more 1099's and the person has put some skin in the game.

tony286 06-08-2005 05:36 PM
Also for a frame of reference all the models I have including my wife . None of them have the same address as on their id today. Models move especially in adult

RedShoe 06-08-2005 05:37 PM
http://bootybone.com/gfy/50a.gif

opflix 06-08-2005 05:39 PM
i don't think you will need to give out ID's to affiliates are only using your material to advertise... sure, this 2257 law says that but if anything doesn't stand up in court, that shit won't IMO :2 cents:




..

seeric 06-08-2005 05:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedShoe

you my friend, have earned the "MASTER BRANDER" award for today. that shit was hot. want to be one of my promoters?
:thumbsup

tony286 06-08-2005 05:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by opflix
i don't think you will need to give out ID's to affiliates are only using your material to advertise... sure, this 2257 law says that but if anything doesn't stand up in court, that shit won't IMO :2 cents:




..
For it not stand up in court it has to go to court . Who pays the affiliates legal bills?

Shooting_Manic 06-08-2005 05:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by WiredGuy
I'm thinking more of privacy laws here, particularly the distribution of private information. If the models didn't consent to this information being distributed, RealityCash could land itself into some problems. Maybe not on the 2257 front, but on applicable privacy laws...

WG

I understand what you are saying. However, us as US webmasters have to obey the US law, meaning, we either send out the id's, regardless of where the models are from or change the focus of our free content to affiliates. Thats obeying the law here in the US. Now, in Canada, sending out ones id is against the privacy laws, but a US citizen, we can not break Canadian law, while obeying US law. See what I am saying?

Total catch 22 for sure. Im not at all in favor of sending out ids of either pros or amateurs. Theres solutions for sure and all of this has yet to play out. Its a really tough situation for the big hardcore programs though. Damned if you do, damned if you dont I guess.

Oh btw... I want a nickle for everytime Gator has posted in a 2257 thread and not made sense. :)

TheDoc 06-08-2005 05:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony404
giving models info to a affiliate or to someone who buys content ,has nothing to do with any privacy law.I dont know who came up with this? Adult mag publishers have been doing this for years. My wife shot for a adult mag(got the cover :) ,the photog who shot her was a freelancer he sold the pics to the mag and that included all her info. Its done all the time in the real world. As for lens if your going to give them the info what are u waiting for the time is ticking? I would assume the 80/20 rule applys here. Meaning 80% of the sales are made by 20% I would take care of the 20. Also I would think about no one becomes a affiliate who incorporated with a tax id number. It saves you money no more 1099's and the person has put some skin in the game.
The difference is your wife signed a release that allows them to give out the information. If she didn't they could not pass the information on to others.

If you buy a house, it has a part that allows them to give out private info. Same with credit cards, cars, etc.. Often they ask if they can pass your private info along..



Everyone seemed to get super pissed off when a content company passed info along to Acacia.. How is this different?

dopeman 06-08-2005 05:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony404
For it not stand up in court it has to go to court . Who pays the affiliates legal bills?
exactly. most affiliates are small operations who can't afford to the big names in this industry. added to this, the pool of lawyers savvy in this type of court fight is limited and the ones out there are being saturated by the big guys who have them on retainer. if a bunch of small time affiliates start getting popped, who's going to step in?

bigdog 06-08-2005 05:47 PM
how many monthly sales makes someone a full time webmaster?

Sly 06-08-2005 05:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony404
Also for a frame of reference all the models I have including my wife . None of them have the same address as on their id today. Models move especially in adult
My ID doesn't have my current address either. I'm no model. :-)

tony286 06-08-2005 05:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDoc
The difference is your wife signed a release that allows them to give out the information. If she didn't they could not pass the information on to others.

If you buy a house, it has a part that allows them to give out private info. Same with credit cards, cars, etc.. Often they ask if they can pass your private info along..



Everyone seemed to get super pissed off when a content company passed info along to Acacia.. How is this different?
Thats personal , this is business. My lawyer said you have to give it, we decide to end our very very small program I think he would tell me if giving it out would get me sued. Considering besides being my lawyer he is my friend.The privacy you are talking is for personal transaction. Being a model isnt a private transaction.

opflix 06-08-2005 05:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony404
For it not stand up in court it has to go to court . Who pays the affiliates legal bills?

legal bills? :1orglaugh any attorney would LOVE to get a case like that. its so obviously wrong to give out people's personal info to any tom dick & harry that's joins some program. 2nd of all, i'd LOVE for them to try that shit with me cuz i'd be sending out so many press releases to PROFIT from them trying to get me on the shit cuz i'm in compliance & NONE of my models is underage! :1orglaugh :1orglaugh


PLEASE TAKE ME TO COURT FOR SOME PAPERWORK BULLSHIT SO I CAN GET MILLIONS OF PEOPLE TO VISIT MY SITE AFTER CNN MENTIONS ME ON NATIONAL TV!


..

tony286 06-08-2005 05:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dopeman
exactly. most affiliates are small operations who can't afford to the big names in this industry. added to this, the pool of lawyers savvy in this type of court fight is limited and the ones out there are being saturated by the big guys who have them on retainer. if a bunch of small time affiliates start getting popped, who's going to step in?
Probably noone ,these guys who are the big fish of today for the most part were smart nerds. The pornographers of old were rough and tumble guys with a fuck you attitude toward authority. Today these guys arent the same breed, if they were Acacia wouldnt of been as successful. These guys want to make no waves and dont want to spend money unless its for see how big my dick is parties or show off toys. Im not blaming them but they come from a different world. Larry F. is getting old but I bet 20 yrs ago he would of been in the fight hard.

TheDoc 06-08-2005 06:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony404
Thats personal , this is business. My lawyer said you have to give it, we decide to end our very very small program I think he would tell me if giving it out would get me sued. Considering besides being my lawyer he is my friend.The privacy you are talking is for personal transaction. Being a model isnt a private transaction.
Your lawyer is incorrect.. The model release is a private contract between the producer and the model. A lot of releases say that they can transfer the rights, models sign with no idea what they are doing..

Many many releases, don't say that though.

tony286 06-08-2005 06:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDoc
Your lawyer is incorrect.. The model release is a private contract between the producer and the model. A lot of releases say that they can transfer the rights, models sign with no idea what they are doing..

Many many releases, don't say that though.
I have to respectfully disagree my model release si between a company and a model who is private contractor, paid with a company check. It is not a private contract. If you know for sure give the link so we can read the law.

xxxjay 06-08-2005 06:43 PM
I love Lensman's threads

TheDoc 06-08-2005 06:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony404
I have to respectfully disagree my model release si between a company and a model who is private contractor, paid with a company check. It is not a private contract. If you know for sure give the link so we can read the law.
Sure I can show you the law, soon as you can hunt down the law for what you are saying.. Which is exactly what I said.

It doesnt mater if it's between a company (THE PRODUCER) and a private contracted employee, model, building inspector, etc, it's still a private contract.

tony286 06-08-2005 06:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDoc
Sure I can show you the law, soon as you can hunt down the law for what you are saying.. Which is exactly what I said.

It doesnt mater if it's between a company (THE PRODUCER) and a private contracted employee, model, building inspector, etc, it's still a private contract.
What law school did you got to? I got mine from a lawyer, who is also a Judge.

TheDoc 06-08-2005 06:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony404
What law school did you got to? I got mine from a lawyer, who is also a Judge.
Then what is a model release? Please ask your judge to expand my mind.

tony286 06-08-2005 06:52 PM
this going back and forth is boring if you had the law you would post it to beat me over the head with it but you dont know and are going on misinformation.

Kimmykim 06-08-2005 06:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony404
Probably noone ,these guys who are the big fish of today for the most part were smart nerds. The pornographers of old were rough and tumble guys with a fuck you attitude toward authority. Today these guys arent the same breed, if they were Acacia wouldnt of been as successful. These guys want to make no waves and dont want to spend money unless its for see how big my dick is parties or show off toys. Im not blaming them but they come from a different world. Larry F. is getting old but I bet 20 yrs ago he would of been in the fight hard.
The pornographers of today in the video world are the same guys that were prosecuted 20 years ago. Or in some cases, their children.

The first time someone gets pinched with some video content that doesn't have the correct documentation on it, regardless of whether it's a studio's own site or one their content is just sitting on, shit will start to flow uphill. Any good lawyer can make the case -- especially with an internet company that is very close to compliant and has made a good faith effort to do so, that if there is an error in compliance that is the direct result of a studio either not giving out the information or giving out incorrect information -- that there is non-compliance on the part of the primary producer as well.

Every one of the video guys I referred to in my earlier post is still alive, kicking, and in business today. They've all been shitting their pants over this situation since last summer.

TheDoc 06-08-2005 06:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony404
this going back and forth is boring if you had the l law you would post it to beat me over the head with it but you dont know and are going on misinformation.

WTF?

It's not like you can backup what you are saying either..


And, our lawyer stated that a model release is a private contract between the producer (a company) and the model. Many people have posted the same thing here on the board.

Maybe you should ask a different lawyer, one that knows contracts maybe.

tony286 06-08-2005 06:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimmykim
The pornographers of today in the video world are the same guys that were prosecuted 20 years ago. Or in some cases, their children.

The first time someone gets pinched with some video content that doesn't have the correct documentation on it, regardless of whether it's a studio's own site or one their content is just sitting on, shit will start to flow uphill. Any good lawyer can make the case -- especially with an internet company that is very close to compliant and has made a good faith effort to do so, that if there is an error in compliance that is the direct result of a studio either not giving out the information or giving out incorrect information -- that there is non-compliance on the part of the primary producer as well.

Every one of the video guys I referred to in my earlier post is still alive, kicking, and in business today. They've all been shitting their pants over this situation since last summer.

I m talking about our world , during Meese a bunch of them got together put up large sums of money to fight. You dont see the online guys doing that. Everybody posting to join the fsc (which we did) so they could fight it. The fight should been there already by the big fish online but we both know unless its thier ass actually in the fire that wont happen.

tony286 06-08-2005 06:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDoc
WTF?

It's not like you can backup what you are saying either..


And, our lawyer stated that a model release is a private contract between the producer (a company) and the model. Many people have posted the same thing here on the board.

Maybe you should ask a different lawyer, one that knows contracts maybe.
How come your assuming my lawyer is wrong maybe yours in wrong. Ever think of that?My lawyer know first amendment and adult and mainstream entertainment industry law.Which involves a few contracts.

Kimmykim 06-08-2005 07:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony404
I m talking about our world , during Meese a bunch of them got together put up large sums of money to fight. You dont see the online guys doing that. Everybody posting to join the fsc (which we did) so they could fight it. The fight should been there already by the big fish online but we both know unless its thier ass actually in the fire that wont happen.
I don't know which ones you are talking about, but the 4 I mentioned didn't get together with anyone. They paid their own hefty legal bills and the guy that did his time did it all by himself lol...

TheDoc 06-08-2005 07:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony404
How come your assuming my lawyer is wrong maybe yours in wrong. Ever think of that?

Which lawyers would you like me to ask?

The Canadian lawyers or the American lawyers, how about our 2257 lawyer?

I know law rather well, oddly enough I have been in legal fights for the last 5 years. Do your research, you will see we have a case currently in the Supreme Court of Canada and are the leading company fighting GST in Canada, and winning. Others settled and we spent our own $1m+ to prove we don't owe just because we are an Internet Company.

DWB 06-08-2005 07:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDoc
From what I gather, unless your release states that you are giving out the records, legally, you can't. A person has to sign off to allow personal data to transfer hands.
I have been hearing the same from a few seperate attorneys. You can not give out private information unless they have signed off on it. Kind of like sites when they have to post about their privacy statement and what they are going to do with the info they collect on you.

This is going to get real sticky.

beemk 06-08-2005 07:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lensman
(note to myself - ask Steve about off camera).
:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Kimmykim 06-08-2005 07:19 PM
http://www.laweekly.com/ink/01/14/news-cromer.php

This is an interesting article from '01 regarding the old Meese Commission days.

tony286 06-08-2005 07:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimmykim
I don't know which ones you are talking about, but the 4 I mentioned didn't get together with anyone. They paid their own hefty legal bills and the guy that did his time did it all by himself lol...
I read it a article I dont remember it talked about that and that adam and eve spent 1 million dollars. Also you know I love you but I know you make your living from big fish so it wouldnt be wise to agree with me lol :)

dopeman 06-08-2005 07:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimmykim
I don't know which ones you are talking about, but the 4 I mentioned didn't get together with anyone. They paid their own hefty legal bills and the guy that did his time did it all by himself lol...
but what happens of these guys just start sniping at small time affiliates who are making a few hundred bucks a month while working full time? those guys have zero clout in the industry and not nearly enough money for proper representation. low hanging fruit to appease the Religio-Nuts.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:29 AM.
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123