The agreement between FSC and DOJ is here

[FightThisPatent]

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO



FREE SPEECH COALITION, et al., :

Plaintiffs, :



v. Case No. 05-CV-1126-WDM-BNB

Honorable Walker Miller

ALBERTO GONZALES,



Defendant. :

STIPULATION REGARDING

MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER



The parties, by through the their respective counsel, hereby enter into the following stipulation regarding the Plaintiffs? motion for temporary restraining order. The parties agree as follows:



1. The Court will forego ruling on the pending motion for temporary restraining order, treat the motion as a motion for preliminary injunction, and will take up scheduling matters at the time of hearing for temporary restraining order on June 23, 2005, 1:30 P.M.

2. From the date of this agreement until no later than 30 days after the date of the hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction or the date of a decision on the motion, whichever comes first, unless otherwise extended by the Court, the Government agrees: (1) not to conduct any inspections, with regard to the Plaintiffs and their members, under 18 U.S.C. section 2257 and the Attorney General?s new implementing regulations; and (2) not to pursue any claim against Plaintiffs and their members under 18 U.S.C. section 2257 and the Attorney General?s new implementing regulations.



3. The Government takes the position that the regulations codified at 28 CFR, part 75, et seq., are in effect as of June 23, 2005, and reserves the right, after the expiration of this agreement or the denial of a preliminary injunction, to prosecute or otherwise commence enforcement proceedings with respect to any violation that occurs on or after June 23, 2005 (including any violation that may occur during the period of this agreement).



4. The parties mutually propose that the hearing on preliminary injunction occur as close as practicable to one month from the date of this agreement, subject to the Court?s schedule and as convenience permits.



5. By June 29, 2005, Plaintiff Free Speech Coalition, Inc., agrees to provide to a Special Master appointed by the Court a list of the names of those persons or entities who were members of Plaintiff Free Speech Coalition, Inc., as of June 25, 2005, at 2 p.m. The Government shall not be provided with the names of such persons, but shall instead consult with the Special Master before conducting any inspections under 18 U.S.C. 2257 and its implementing regulations, in order to ensure that such inspection would not involve a member of the Free Speech Coalition, Inc. Plaintiff Free Speech Coalition, Inc., shall bear all costs associated with this Special Master. For purposes of paragraph 2, ?the Plaintiffs? shall mean persons or entities on the list, Plaintiff Free Speech Coalition, Inc., as an organization, Plaintiff Free Speech Coalition of Colorado as an organization, David Connors, and Lenjo, Inc. D/B/A New Beginnings Ltd.

Dated: June 24, 2005

/s/ Michael W. Gross

ARTHUR M. SCHWARTZ

MICHAEL W. GROSS

[Doctor Dre]

I wonder what's in it for the DOJ ...

[Fletch XXX]

how long before "Special Master" nick is regged

[FightThisPatent]

if you are still on the fence about supporting FSC, please look at this all as the glass is half-full.... in not pre-occupying yourself with whatever perceived "marketing tactic' about only being covered by an injunction if you are an FSC member. join!


Fight the Half Empty!

[AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE]

Thats step one

[dopeman]

Originally Posted by Doctor Dre

I wonder what's in it for the DOJ ...

not only did they accept this agreement, the extra two days was allowed AFTER the original deal was agreed upon wednesday night. the original deal only covered existing FSC members. cambria and company then asked them to allow a couple more days to let more people join - and they allowed this. pretty amazing. but yeah - you have to wonder why.

[Spunky]

Thanks for the information FTP

[chadglni]

Originally Posted by dopeman

not only did they accept this agreement, the extra two days was allowed AFTER the original deal was agreed upon wednesday night. the original deal only covered existing FSC members. cambria and company then asked them to allow a couple more days to let more people join - and they allowed this. pretty amazing. but yeah - you have to wonder why.

This is the scary part. DOJ had nothing to gain by allowing 2 more days except......more names on the list. If anyone has a better theory I'm all ears.

[FightThisPatent]

Originally Posted by chadglni

This is the scary part. DOJ had nothing to gain by allowing 2 more days except......more names on the list. If anyone has a better theory I'm all ears.

the DOJ's response to FSC prior to the above agreement:
http://xbiz.com/pdf/2257restraining.pdf


They make it clear that they are looking to ensure that children are not used in production. It is pretty clear, that anyone joining FSC is not going to be using models under the age of 18 (knowingly)....but it suggests to me that young teen sites would be more likely targets than MILF material.


Fight the Knock Knock!

[Snake Doctor]

Originally Posted by Doctor Dre

I wonder what's in it for the DOJ ...

This is what's in it for the DOJ.


3. The Government takes the position that the regulations codified at 28 CFR, part 75, et seq., are in effect as of June 23, 2005, and reserves the right, after the expiration of this agreement or the denial of a preliminary injunction, to prosecute or otherwise commence enforcement proceedings with respect to any violation that occurs on or after June 23, 2005 (including any violation that may occur during the period of this agreement).

If a TRO had been issued they wouldn't be able to take this position.

[Tom_PM]

Clarification Please.

It's been brought to my attention that someone has claimed to have spoken to the board and was told that *ONLY* FSC Corporate members are covered by this "deal", and the individual Webmaster members ($300 option) are NOT covered.

Can anyone state with authority whether or not this is true? I see nothing on the FSC website stating this, nor does the press release make ANY distinction, it merely says "FSC members".

Thanks for any help before I yank out the last of my hair in the 11th hour.

[chadglni]

Originally Posted by PR_Tom

Clarification Please.

It's been brought to my attention that someone has claimed to have spoken to the board and was told that *ONLY* FSC Corporate members are covered by this "deal", and the individual Webmaster members ($300 option) are NOT covered.

Can anyone state with authority whether or not this is true? I see nothing on the FSC website stating this, nor does the press release make ANY distinction, it merely says "FSC members".

Thanks for any help before I yank out the last of my hair in the 11th hour.

Let's hope your source is wrong...

[LadyB]

Originally Posted by PR_Tom

Clarification Please.

It's been brought to my attention that someone has claimed to have spoken to the board and was told that *ONLY* FSC Corporate members are covered by this "deal", and the individual Webmaster members ($300 option) are NOT covered.

Can anyone state with authority whether or not this is true? I see nothing on the FSC website stating this, nor does the press release make ANY distinction, it merely says "FSC members".

Thanks for any help before I yank out the last of my hair in the 11th hour.

I've heard the same thing tonight. Somebody from the FSC needs to do some fast clarifying on this issue.

[Tom_PM]

Evidently it was a thread on this board. I dont know which one.

[FightThisPatent]

Originally Posted by PR_Tom

It's been brought to my attention that someone has claimed to have spoken to the board and was told that *ONLY* FSC Corporate members are covered by this "deal", and the individual Webmaster members ($300 option) are NOT covered.

not true:

http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/online_app.htm

everyone will be covered who are members.. just got clarification.


Fight the Panic!

[LadyB]

Originally Posted by FightThisPatent

not true:

http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/online_app.htm

everyone will be covered who are members.. just got clarification.


Fight the Panic!

Here's a post from another board that was supposedly copy and pasted from a thread on this board. I've been looking but haven't found a thread containing this post yet. Anybody else seen it?

--------------------------------
I just got off the phone with Jeffrey Douglas, FSC Board chair and attorney. He said, if you joined FSC as an individual, your websites are not covered. You have to sign up for membership as a company, and pay according to your annual sales volume, the dues for which can be found here:

<http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/...types=Corporate>

What you want to make sure is that we have all you D/B/As and URLs. They can be compiled and emailed to [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>.

If you have any questions, please send them my way and I'll try to get answers, but please understand that I'm overwhelmed with calls and interviews today and probably through the weekend. I'll get back to you as soon as I can.

Tom Hymes
FSC Communications Director
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>

[FightThisPatent]

Originally Posted by LadyB

..... He said, if you joined FSC as an individual, your websites are not covered. You have to sign up for membership as a company, and pay according to your annual sales volume, the dues for which can be found here:

ok, on the phone with tom now.. here is the clarification... he is relaying that if you joined as in individual (ie . $50) you are covered under the injunction as an individual. if you joined as a corporate member, then all of your websites and DBAs are covered.


Fight the Misunderstandings!

[Tom_PM]

And how about if you joined as a "Webmaster" at the $300 level?
And also, theres only spot for one URL on the form, so thats all I gave of course, but I have several domains.

My whois is all accurate, I'd simply like to know if *I* am covered, including my websites obviously.. it's very late to be unsure and thank you for helping.

[Spunky]

Originally Posted by FightThisPatent

not true:

http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/online_app.htm

everyone will be covered who are members.. just got clarification.


Fight the Panic!

Their site has been fucked up for awhile..I tried yet again and get this..
Invalid request

[DWB]

They are a fucking mess over there. I'm sorry but for as much money as they are getting, they need to be making all this shit very clear and helping the industry join correctly. What good will it do to join and not have your sites protected from inspection? Jesus.

[DWB]

Originally Posted by FightThisPatent

ok, on the phone with tom now.. here is the clarification... he is relaying that if you joined as in individual (ie . $50) you are covered under the injunction as an individual. if you joined as a corporate member, then all of your websites and DBAs are covered.


Fight the Misunderstandings!

Then I know some people who are going to get FUCKED because the idiots on the phones today had to clue what was going on and joined them incorrectly.

[Theo The Theologian]

OK I just joined. I feel so dirty now. Dirtier than I have ever felt in all my years in this business.

[FightThisPatent]

Originally Posted by PR_Tom

And how about if you joined as a "Webmaster" at the $300 level?

i ya ya, what a mess.. i see what you are saying... i have articuated your point, waiting on an answer...



Fight the Thumb twirling!

[Tom_PM]

Well thats obviously my concern as well, DirtyWhiteBoy. I believe I was joined as "Webmaster" ($300), and if I was joined up under the wrong membership, then the information needs to be corrected and there is simply no time apparently to sort through it.
However, if all "Members" are covered (presumably all of their domains as well), then it's all good and I'll finish my beer and go to sleep.

[Chio The Pirate]

YARGH! I feel a tad dirty me self. Get back to work you fruit!

[LadyB]

Originally Posted by FightThisPatent

ok, on the phone with tom now.. here is the clarification... he is relaying that if you joined as in individual (ie . $50) you are covered under the injunction as an individual. if you joined as a corporate member, then all of your websites and DBAs are covered.


Fight the Misunderstandings!

When I phoned in my membership my dues were based on my income, so I can only assume the woman taking my info put me in corporate and not individual.

And not that you would know, but it just begs to be asked, what good is an individual membership if only you yourself are covered by it and none of your sites? lol


PR_Tom - The url issue.. when I phoned in my info I was only asked for one url and was never directed to email all of my other domains to them either. They have my DBA, but only one of my many domains.

I support the FSC and appreciate the fact that they are fighting for us, and I also understand that they are little overwhelmed at the moment.. but.. not telling me they needed all of my domain names when I called is just well.. half-ass imo.

In anycase, I'll prepare an email and send them my domain names now.

[Theo The Theologian]

I have a question. I joined as a webmaster. It was listed under Individual though? So did I need to do Corporate? OY! I need a knish!

[Theo The Theologian]

I had nowhere to add urls in the form. What's the deal with that?

[pornguy]

Originally Posted by FightThisPatent

the DOJ's response to FSC prior to the above agreement:
http://xbiz.com/pdf/2257restraining.pdf


They make it clear that they are looking to ensure that children are not used in production. It is pretty clear, that anyone joining FSC is not going to be using models under the age of 18 (knowingly)....but it suggests to me that young teen sites would be more likely targets than MILF material.

Oh, ok. I get it. So any c p person out there that also runs legit sites will NOT pay to be a member???

And Not a single Cop in the entire US has ever committed a crime.


People that grow pot, DO NOT smoke it, they sell it only


The guy that got busted with 3 kilos of cocaine is going to use it all for himself??


That is a bad misstatment!

[dopeman]

how can an individual be covered, but not that individual's websites? what if the websites are all registered to that individual and that individual's name is on all the checks he or she gets? wtf?

[Tom_PM]

I agree LadyB, and I also appreciate that these are difficult times for them trying to man the phones and faxes and not go insane under a pile of papers.

Thanks again FTP for helping out like this. Hoping this will cap a crazy month once and for all..

[pornguy]

then you pay per website.

[FightThisPatent]

ok, got more clarifications.. and yes, the signup form is very confusing.

If you did sign up as individual webmaster for $300.. you, your websites,and your DBAs are covered.

Since the form only has 1 box for URL, email your domains/Url/DBA to [email protected]


I think what they meant is affiliate webmasters go under the individual plan. if you own paysites, then you are under corporate by rate scale.. but then again, some affiliate webmasters make some high 5 and 6 digits....

so the word now from tom hymes, is that if you did sign up as a $300 individual webmaster member, you are covered, just email above your info so those can be added in.

if you paid $50 as an individual membership, then only YOU are covered, not any of your websites or DBAs.


Fight the Confusion!

[Theo The Theologian]

I went back and saw the corporate option. I tried ordering the correct one but couldn't. How can I change from Individual to the same price level on corp? am going to hell?

[devilspost]

[Theo The Theologian]

Originally Posted by FightThisPatent

ok, got more clarifications.. and yes, the signup form is very confusing.

If you did sign up as individual webmaster for $300.. you, your websites,and your DBAs are covered.

Since the form only has 1 box for URL, email your domains/Url/DBA to [email protected]


I think what they meant is affiliate webmasters go under the individual plan. if you own paysites, then you are under corporate by rate scale.. but then again, some affiliate webmasters make some high 5 and 6 digits....

so the word now from tom hymes, is that if you did sign up as a $300 individual webmaster member, you are covered, just email above your info so those can be added in.

if you paid $50 as an individual membership, then only YOU are covered, not any of your websites or DBAs.


Fight the Confusion!

Phew! Thanks for all the information.

[FightThisPatent]

Originally Posted by pornguy

Oh, ok. I get it. So any c p person out there that also runs legit sites will NOT pay to be a member???

this is what the DOJ believes.. .my work at ASACP for the last years has proven with alot of database facts.... adult webmasters are not CP website operators, so your hypothesis is not supported by any facts, other than what the DOJ has assumed.


Fight the Assuming!

[Tom_PM]

OK thanks again, I'll send off an email with all of my information as submitted and my domain names so they know who's account to attach them to.

[pornguy]

I dont know why, and I CAN NOT BASE THIS FEELING ON ANYTHING! but I get the funny feeling that the FSC is going to fuck us all.

JUST MY FEELING, and nothing to support that!

[crockett]

Well WTF they need to get their damn shit together.. I joined today and they told me $50 which I thought was strange.. I asked if all my sites would be covered and they said yes.

Now I find out that's not the case? I still have not received my conformation e-mail stating that I joined.. How long does that take? So now it looks like I have to call back and join again?

[LadyB]

Originally Posted by crockett

Well WTF they need to get their damn shit together.. I joined today and they told me $50 which I thought was strange.. I asked if all my sites would be covered and they said yes.

Now I find out that's not the case? I still have not received my conformation e-mail stating that I joined.. How long does that take? So now it looks like I have to call back and join again?

Not sure what you were told, but when I called and joined at 8am yesterday morning I specifically asked if I would be getting some kind of confirmation that I had joined and I was told that it "takes 10 business days to be processed". So I haven't received anything from them either.

FTP - Thanks for your help

[FightThisPatent]

Originally Posted by crockett

Well WTF they need to get their damn shit together.. I joined today and they told me $50 which I thought was strange.. I asked if all my sites would be covered and they said yes.

man, what a nightmare....like asking a booth bunny about the technical requirements for the product and they just smile at you and ask if you want a t-shirt


the $50 level was for individual.. more like a single person, a board of director member, etc. They should have told you to signup as a webmaster for $300.. or if you were an operating company (ie. a paysite), then under the income level of the corporate membership.

while the signup form is confusing, i do have it confirmed that the $50 membership level ONLY covers you as a person. It might mean you need to join under the $300 plan and email your other domains/URL/DBA to [email protected] and get a refund for the $50.



Fight the Chargeback!

[crockett]

so how long do we have left to join is there a time limit?

[FightThisPatent]

Originally Posted by LadyB

Not sure what you were told, but when I called and joined at 8am yesterday morning I specifically asked if I would be getting some kind of confirmation that I had joined and I was told that it "takes 10 business days to be processed". So I haven't received anything from them either.

i asked about that too.. they are focusing on just getting people registered as members, and the confirmation stuff will come later on in the mail.

i was told to pass on that people who registered to become members would be added to the list.. and to give them some time to catch up on the confirmation issues.

i should add FSC therapy hotline to my sig


Fight the Doctor is in!

[FightThisPatent]

Originally Posted by crockett

so how long do we have left to join is there a time limit?

i believe the cut-off is June 25, 2005, at 2 p.m from the document i posted above.


Fight the short answers!

[Shark]

So after doing an online corporate signup, are we supposed to email the company name info and URLS to [email protected] ?

The online signup page doesnt have any fields for a company name.
I filled the ccbill form out with the card holder info as per norm. but the card holder name is different from the corporate name listed on my domain whois.

[Spunky]

Originally Posted by crockett

so how long do we have left to join is there a time limit?

Like today would be a good idea if you are concerned about it

[FightThisPatent]

Originally Posted by Shark

So after doing an online corporate signup, are we supposed to email the company name info and URLS to [email protected] ?

yes. i know it's all f*cked up.. but so much has happened in so little of time, that they didn't have time to get the logistics worked out on the website. email the address with your info, and staff members will get to it.


Fight the Bugs!

[PatrickKing]

Originally Posted by FightThisPatent

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO



FREE SPEECH COALITION, et al., :

Plaintiffs, :



v. Case No. 05-CV-1126-WDM-BNB

Honorable Walker Miller

ALBERTO GONZALES,



Defendant. :

STIPULATION REGARDING

MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER



The parties, by through the their respective counsel, hereby enter into the following stipulation regarding the Plaintiffs? motion for temporary restraining order. The parties agree as follows:



1. The Court will forego ruling on the pending motion for temporary restraining order, treat the motion as a motion for preliminary injunction, and will take up scheduling matters at the time of hearing for temporary restraining order on June 23, 2005, 1:30 P.M.

2. From the date of this agreement until no later than 30 days after the date of the hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction or the date of a decision on the motion, whichever comes first, unless otherwise extended by the Court, the Government agrees: (1) not to conduct any inspections, with regard to the Plaintiffs and their members, under 18 U.S.C. section 2257 and the Attorney General?s new implementing regulations; and (2) not to pursue any claim against Plaintiffs and their members under 18 U.S.C. section 2257 and the Attorney General?s new implementing regulations.



3. The Government takes the position that the regulations codified at 28 CFR, part 75, et seq., are in effect as of June 23, 2005, and reserves the right, after the expiration of this agreement or the denial of a preliminary injunction, to prosecute or otherwise commence enforcement proceedings with respect to any violation that occurs on or after June 23, 2005 (including any violation that may occur during the period of this agreement).



4. The parties mutually propose that the hearing on preliminary injunction occur as close as practicable to one month from the date of this agreement, subject to the Court?s schedule and as convenience permits.



5. By June 29, 2005, Plaintiff Free Speech Coalition, Inc., agrees to provide to a Special Master appointed by the Court a list of the names of those persons or entities who were members of Plaintiff Free Speech Coalition, Inc., as of June 25, 2005, at 2 p.m. The Government shall not be provided with the names of such persons, but shall instead consult with the Special Master before conducting any inspections under 18 U.S.C. 2257 and its implementing regulations, in order to ensure that such inspection would not involve a member of the Free Speech Coalition, Inc. Plaintiff Free Speech Coalition, Inc., shall bear all costs associated with this Special Master. For purposes of paragraph 2, ?the Plaintiffs? shall mean persons or entities on the list, Plaintiff Free Speech Coalition, Inc., as an organization, Plaintiff Free Speech Coalition of Colorado as an organization, David Connors, and Lenjo, Inc. D/B/A New Beginnings Ltd.

Dated: June 24, 2005

/s/ Michael W. Gross

ARTHUR M. SCHWARTZ

MICHAEL W. GROSS

FightThisPatent I am actually compliant, I am also a corporate member of FSC . I just want to thank you for your job of spreading useful information on GFY. Since I became a member I have saw you telling people and helping people with the confusing aspects of this bizz. You have never spamed for your own benifit. You are a realiable resource of information .
This Post Is Just a Thank You For Your Work!

Best Wishes To You
Pat

[FightThisPatent]

If you read through my first post about the deal that was made with DOJ, a special master will be holding the list of FSC members, and DOJ can't see the list, but they will be asking if who they are interested in investigating is (sorta like Go Fish! )

they will probaby be asking the special master to lookup by Domain/URL.

So anyone who registered, whether as a corporate or individual webmaster, you should email [email protected] a list of your Domains/URL and DBA's so that it can be added onto the list.

probably would be a good idea to include whatever info you filled on signup to help them find your record.


Fight the Do you have a 3 of hearts?!