Promote Softcore/NN sites in the US? Think you're safe from 2257? WRONG! - GoFuckYourself.com

Dameian · 09-16-2005, 07:12 AM

hahahah I am reading this article about the bill that "strengthens" 2257 and I am laughing my ass off at the potential ramifications of it.

http://www.xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=10343

If you don't want to read the above, here is the executive summary: "Among other provisions ... adds nudity and clothed images of pubic areas to the definition of ?explicit sexual activity? as defined in U.S.C. 18 § 2256, and criminalizes the production and distribution of R-rated mainstream motion pictures that fail to comply with the record creation and notice provisions of 2257..."

Not just mere nudity would become illegal, but also clothed areas of the pubic area? hahahah Do you realize who this potentially turns into criminal violators? Here is a short list off the top of my head. The creators of:

1. baby diaper commercials and print ads
2. cosmo/glamor mag (they always have bare butt shots of women in ads)
3. many, if not the majority of PG-R rates movies these days
4. most music videos
5. underwear commericals and print ads
6. everything involving Victoria's Secret marketing
7. journalists coverage of fashion shows
8. SI swimsuit issue
9. and be careful taking home pictures/movies of your newborns/infants/toddlers... post them on a homepage that has a commercial banner on it to share with family and friends and you're a violator too!

The list goes on and on. Not to metion anyone and everyone who distributes or publishes these things would also need 2257 documentation.

The activities that this bill would potentially criminalize are completely insane, will cause us all a lot of headaches until it is sorted out in the courts, and is also fucking great for comic relief right now despite all of that.... Thanks Mike Pence!

Patrick_Bateman · 09-16-2005, 07:33 AM

here is a bump for ya

dready · 09-16-2005, 07:41 AM

Who is this {Rep Mike Pence, R-Ind.} nut bar?

2257-Ben · 09-16-2005, 07:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dameian

hahahah I am reading this article about the bill that "strengthens" 2257 and I am laughing my ass off at the potential ramifications of it.

http://www.xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=10343

If you don't want to read the above, here is the executive summary: "Among other provisions ... adds nudity and clothed images of pubic areas to the definition of ?explicit sexual activity? as defined in U.S.C. 18 § 2256, and criminalizes the production and distribution of R-rated mainstream motion pictures that fail to comply with the record creation and notice provisions of 2257..."

Not just mere nudity would become illegal, but also clothed areas of the pubic area? hahahah Do you realize who this potentially turns into criminal violators? Here is a short list off the top of my head. The creators of:

1. baby diaper commercials and print ads
2. cosmo/glamor mag (they always have bare butt shots of women in ads)
3. many, if not the majority of PG-R rates movies these days
4. most music videos
5. underwear commericals and print ads
6. everything involving Victoria's Secret marketing
7. journalists coverage of fashion shows
8. SI swimsuit issue
9. and be careful taking home pictures/movies of your newborns/infants/toddlers... post them on a homepage that has a commercial banner on it to share with family and friends and you're a violator too!

The list goes on and on. Not to metion anyone and everyone who distributes or publishes these things would also need 2257 documentation.

The activities that this bill would potentially criminalize are completely insane, will cause us all a lot of headaches until it is sorted out in the courts, and is also fucking great for comic relief right now despite all of that.... Thanks Mike Pence!

This is a post for an appropriate sig placement... I just love these sig spots!

jawanda · 09-16-2005, 08:01 AM

Damn, this is getting fucking ridiculous.

Jimthefieeeeennnddddd .... tell your fellow republicans to CHILL THE FUCKKKK OUT!

-P

BuggyG · 09-16-2005, 08:35 AM

hehehe well they should go after them if it does go thru
but doubt it very much
they just want porn industry..
don't care fuck-all about cosmo..diapers..etc..etc..

JD · 09-16-2005, 08:38 AM

it'll get shot down so fast. That's rediculous. Now they're fucking with mainstream and people like playboys wallets.....

fl_prn_str · 09-16-2005, 08:57 AM

i wonder if this style of clothing would be to risque.....

after they pass such legislation. those bible thumpers.....give 'em a foot and they take a mile.

Dameian · 09-16-2005, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patrick_Bateman

here is a bump for ya

Love the American Psycho references in your nick and sig heheheh

Dameian · 09-16-2005, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BuggyG

hehehe well they should go after them if it does go thru
but doubt it very much
they just want porn industry..
don't care fuck-all about cosmo..diapers..etc..etc..

You are absolutely correct. They would most likely cherry pick selected targets in our industry and leave the big/mainstream media companies alone, but that does not relieve them of their requirements to keep the records. I was just poking fun based on who, legally, would have to keep records.

Pence has stated that he wants to target "home pornographers", so if this goes through, you can expect some guys who run their business from home to be raided and have their property seized. To the DOJ that is a perfect scenario because in such a case the small webmaster making $100k - $200k a year would not be able to defend himself well. An easy victory could be won and a precedent set.

Redrob · 09-16-2005, 02:07 PM

The new proposed regulations expand the RICO forfeitures to include 2257.

How long do you think it would take for them to use the RICO laws to go after major adult websites AND their affiliates as co-conspirators.......?

"Close relationships can be part of the circumstantial
evidence from which a jury may infer that the defendant knew of a
conspiracy. See Salazar, 958 F.2d at 1294 - 95."

Ready to give it all up? Read what happened to Great Western Litho, CPLC, and Video Team in Dallas, Texas.

http://www.romingerlegal.com/fifthci...4.CV0.wpd.html

dynastoned · 09-16-2005, 02:07 PM

at this rate your going to need to have 2257 documentation stamped on your forehead to go outside.

jscott · 09-16-2005, 02:16 PM

fucking horrible for anyone to even come up with these new anti-obcenety laws & tactics

phogirl69 · 09-16-2005, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redrob

The new proposed regulations expand the RICO forfeitures to include 2257.

How long do you think it would take for them to use the RICO laws to go after major adult websites AND their affiliates as co-conspirators.......?

"Close relationships can be part of the circumstantial
evidence from which a jury may infer that the defendant knew of a
conspiracy. See Salazar, 958 F.2d at 1294 - 95."

Ready to give it all up? Read what happened to Great Western Litho, CPLC, and Video Team in Dallas, Texas.

http://www.romingerlegal.com/fifthci...4.CV0.wpd.html

Wow, just anal sex tapes were considered obscene in Mississipi back in 1993. That's considered mainstream now and acceptable I would hope.

Mr.Fiction · 09-16-2005, 02:51 PM

Another Republican who wants to destroy the Constition?

09-16-2005, 07:12 AM	#1
Dameian Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Relative Obscurity Posts: 122	Promote Softcore/NN sites in the US? Think you're safe from 2257? WRONG! hahahah I am reading this article about the bill that "strengthens" 2257 and I am laughing my ass off at the potential ramifications of it. http://www.xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=10343 If you don't want to read the above, here is the executive summary: "Among other provisions ... adds nudity and clothed images of pubic areas to the definition of ?explicit sexual activity? as defined in U.S.C. 18 § 2256, and criminalizes the production and distribution of R-rated mainstream motion pictures that fail to comply with the record creation and notice provisions of 2257..." Not just mere nudity would become illegal, but also clothed areas of the pubic area? hahahah Do you realize who this potentially turns into criminal violators? Here is a short list off the top of my head. The creators of: 1. baby diaper commercials and print ads 2. cosmo/glamor mag (they always have bare butt shots of women in ads) 3. many, if not the majority of PG-R rates movies these days 4. most music videos 5. underwear commericals and print ads 6. everything involving Victoria's Secret marketing 7. journalists coverage of fashion shows 8. SI swimsuit issue 9. and be careful taking home pictures/movies of your newborns/infants/toddlers... post them on a homepage that has a commercial banner on it to share with family and friends and you're a violator too! The list goes on and on. Not to metion anyone and everyone who distributes or publishes these things would also need 2257 documentation. The activities that this bill would potentially criminalize are completely insane, will cause us all a lot of headaches until it is sorted out in the courts, and is also fucking great for comic relief right now despite all of that.... Thanks Mike Pence!

09-16-2005, 07:41 AM	#3
dready Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Toronto, ON Posts: 5,247	Who is this {Rep Mike Pence, R-Ind.} nut bar? __________________ ICQ: 91139591

09-16-2005, 02:07 PM	#11
Redrob Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: In a refrigerator box by the tracks. Posts: 4,791	The new proposed regulations expand the RICO forfeitures to include 2257. How long do you think it would take for them to use the RICO laws to go after major adult websites AND their affiliates as co-conspirators.......? "Close relationships can be part of the circumstantial evidence from which a jury may infer that the defendant knew of a conspiracy. See Salazar, 958 F.2d at 1294 - 95." Ready to give it all up? Read what happened to Great Western Litho, CPLC, and Video Team in Dallas, Texas. http://www.romingerlegal.com/fifthci...4.CV0.wpd.html Last edited by Redrob; 09-16-2005 at 02:09 PM..

09-16-2005, 02:51 PM	#15
Mr.Fiction Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Free Speech Land Posts: 9,484	Another Republican who wants to destroy the Constition? __________________ Don't be lazy, protect free speech: ACLU \| Free Speech Coalition \| EFF \| IMPA

09-16-2005, 07:33 AM	#2
Patrick_Bateman Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 280	here is a bump for ya

09-16-2005, 08:01 AM	#5
jawanda Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 6,040	Damn, this is getting fucking ridiculous. Jimthefieeeeennnddddd .... tell your fellow republicans to CHILL THE FUCKKKK OUT! -P

09-16-2005, 08:35 AM	#6
BuggyG Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Ottawa Posts: 4,179	hehehe well they should go after them if it does go thru but doubt it very much they just want porn industry.. don't care fuck-all about cosmo..diapers..etc..etc..

09-16-2005, 08:38 AM	#7
JD Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 22,651	it'll get shot down so fast. That's rediculous. Now they're fucking with mainstream and people like playboys wallets.....

09-16-2005, 08:57 AM	#8
fl_prn_str Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Tampa, FL Posts: 5,736	i wonder if this style of clothing would be to risque..... after they pass such legislation. those bible thumpers.....give 'em a foot and they take a mile.

09-16-2005, 02:07 PM	#12
dynastoned mmm yeah! Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: roseville, ca Posts: 5,061	at this rate your going to need to have 2257 documentation stamped on your forehead to go outside.

09-16-2005, 02:16 PM	#13
jscott So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Taipei Posts: 25,198	fucking horrible for anyone to even come up with these new anti-obcenety laws & tactics