Those Who Have Gotten Legal Advice On What Is 2257 Exempt

[Mutt]

Looking for the range of opinions lawyers are giving webmasters on what they feel is softcore enough to be exempt from 2257. Going through Ashley's content with her to decide what she can keep and what goes, as far as affiliates go.

Cupping bare boobs - exempt or 'sexually explicit'?

Pinching nipples - exempt or 'sexually explicit'?

Hand down pants/panties, no nudity - exempt or 'sexually explicit'?

Pubic mound on display, no genitals tho - exempt or 'lascivious display of genitals or pubic area'?

not looking for opinions from anybody who hasn't gotten a legal opinion from an actual attorney - looking for the range of opinions various attorneys are giving people on what is exempt content, knowing that an attorney has no more ability to read the minds of the DOJ, a judge or a jury member.

thanks

[pr0]

someone needs to put up nothing but free porn on 400 badass servers. No ads, no join fee...just free fucking hardcore artistic porno with no commercial gain in mind, write off the fee's as a charitable donation

cmon i know some of you rich fucks out there wanna throw up a middle finger

[xenigo]

someone needs to put up nothing but free porn on 400 badass servers. No ads, no join fee...just free fucking hardcore artistic porno with no commercial gain in mind, write off the fee's as a charitable donation

cmon i know some of you rich fucks out there wanna throw up a middle finger

Sure, let's break your 2257 cherry. Throw up the pics and tell us how it goes.

[Mutt]

i don't think this 2257 nonsense has put anybody in a worse position than Ashley Brookes when it comes to personal privacy and safety - young, living alone, owns her own site, relatively small hometown, interactive with her members and yes in the short three months her site has been up there have been several members who have been 'trouble'. They might as well have ordered her to provide every wackjob with a map to her home.

[pr0]

i don't think this 2257 nonsense has put anybody in a worse position than Ashley Brookes when it comes to personal privacy and safety - young, living alone, owns her own site, relatively small hometown, interactive with her members and yes in the short three months her site has been up there have been several members who have been 'trouble'. They might as well have ordered her to provide every wackjob with a map to her home.

yea it is sad...people can't tell the difference between reality & fantasy

& i have no plans of running into 2257 trouble, i gave up porn over a year ago, thanx, but i'll take the backseat to orange jumpsuits & fighting over my cornflakes

[Raven]

Looking for the range of opinions lawyers are giving webmasters on what they feel is softcore enough to be exempt from 2257. Going through Ashley's content with her to decide what she can keep and what goes, as far as affiliates go.

Cupping bare boobs - exempt or 'sexually explicit'?

Pinching nipples - exempt or 'sexually explicit'?

Hand down pants/panties, no nudity - exempt or 'sexually explicit'?

Pubic mound on display, no genitals tho - exempt or 'lascivious display of genitals or pubic area'?

not looking for opinions from anybody who hasn't gotten a legal opinion from an actual attorney - looking for the range of opinions various attorneys are giving people on what is exempt content, knowing that an attorney has no more ability to read the minds of the DOJ, a judge or a jury member.

thanks

You bring up very good points and that, I believe, is the point. I've spoken to and listened to no less than six attorneys. Each one has their own interpretation. From what I can gather, if she's touching herself, it can be construed as sexually explicit.

In San Diego, one of the attorneys stated that a fully clothed non nude 17 year old, which is legal......IF she is shown with a camel toe, it is sexually explicit, so you can imagine what is going on with age compliant nudity.

My own attorney advises me to err on the side of extreme caution and tease, which, by the way, Fantasyman's sites used to do. Only tits. No pussy. Nothing that could be interpreted as lascivious in any way, shape or form. I've tried to follow that with my own stuff....tease...and if the surfer wants pleasure, then we can please....inside the members' areas.

[AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE]

Regardless of only softcore photos exposure the models are still at risk much more than before.

Wasnt there something called "Right to privacy"?

[Dirty Dane]

?sexually explicit conduct? means actual or simulated?
(A) sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex;
(B) bestiality;
(C) masturbation;
(D) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or
(E) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person;

[jact]

?sexually explicit conduct? means actual or simulated?
(A) sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex;
(B) bestiality;
(C) masturbation;
(D) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or
(E) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person;

Great, your copy and paste function works, too bad your reading is sub-standard.

[chadglni]

?sexually explicit conduct? means actual or simulated?
(A) sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex;
(B) bestiality;
(C) masturbation;
(D) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or
(E) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person;

Captain Obvious saves the day again!

[jimmyf]

Great, your copy and paste function works, too bad your reading is sub-standard.

[Lensman]

?sexually explicit conduct? means actual or simulated?
(A) sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex;
(B) bestiality;
(C) masturbation;
(D) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or
(E) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person;

Very true, except that the 2267 Law exempts (E). So all nudity is fine for 2257, except masturbation or above, that means no fucking, no BJs, and especially no one can be touching a cock or pussy, even outside of the clothes (that's masturbation). No censored or cropped sex images either, but softcore sex images are ok, where you cannot see anything.

[stevo]

Lets use pictures...

Picture A:
I'm guessing softcore even though it shows her bush.


Picture B:
You can kinda make out her pussy, but no pink - is this softcore?


Picture C:
Perfect view of the pussy. She's not touching the pussy, not spreading or showing pink - is this classified as softcore?


Picture D:
Spreading her pussy, showing pink - sexually explicit


Picture E:
Not showing pink or touching herself, but you can make out her asshole - is this explicit or softcore?

[invza1]

B, C & E are definitey grey areas-I could see someone on a jury calling them sexually explicit

[Dirty Dane]

especially no one can be touching a cock or pussy, even outside of the clothes (that's masturbation).

Except if it is itching

I think it all depends on the situation. If it is for sexual pleasure, then it is masturbation, otherwise not. With pics it can be hard to tell/proof, but with videos its more obvious.

[tony286]

no pinching nipples either

[NaughtyRob]

An answer to the pics above, I would say that only A and B are softcore.

[Dirty Dane]

Lets use pictures...

In my opinion, I would say all those pictures are softcore. But it does not matter really matter what we think or define as softcore or hardcore.
What matters, is if it is sexually explicit or not. Picture D is sexually explicit because she is touching genital and show pink. Rest is just naked body, and not simulated sex.

[mardigras]

Very true, except that the 2267 Law exempts (E). So all nudity is fine for 2257, except <snip>

Word of the Day for Sunday May 25, 2003: lascivious

2. Tending to arouse sexual desires.

I'm looking at this from the angle of a gay man. If a guy I found attractive was naked in front of me that would tend to arouse my sexual desires. I'm assuming this works similarly for heterosexuals.

[xxxice]

Interesting thread however grabbing your privates outside of clothes can not be considerd sexually expicit ? This happens all the time on tv and videos.

That is crazy

[Nightwind]

Interesting thread however grabbing your privates outside of clothes can not be considerd sexually expicit ? This happens all the time on tv and videos.

That is crazy

Yup, especially rappers, you don't see if big pixelated blob on them when they do it.

[xxxice]

Yup, especially rappers, you don't see if big pixelated blob on them when they do it.

yes i can understand naked would be sexually explicit but with clothes on seems to be pushing it

[$pikes]

or.. you can promote our Classics. Full hardcore promo with no docs required.

100% 2257 exempt pre-1995 Pornstars: PornstarClassics.com

[iwantchixx]

or.. you can promote our Classics. Full hardcore promo with no docs required.

100% 2257 exempt pre-1995 Pornstars: PornstarClassics.com

I thought it was only exempt if it was PUBLISHED before 1995. Putting a pre-1995 content set up today means it's not exempt.

[baddog]

I thought it was only exempt if it was PUBLISHED before 1995. Putting a pre-1995 content set up today means it's not exempt.

and therein lies the problem

[Dirty Dane]

I thought it was only exempt if it was PUBLISHED before 1995. Putting a pre-1995 content set up today means it's not exempt.

it is exempt if its made before or published before

[Mutt]

or.. you can promote our Classics. Full hardcore promo with no docs required.

100% 2257 exempt pre-1995 Pornstars: PornstarClassics.com

big market for that i'm sure