?? Affiliates using only non-nude content of 18 + models - GoFuckYourself.com

ChatCash_Rob · 11-04-2005, 02:15 PM

Bloggers and the like, how much is too much ?

"lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area" is obviously out

Are you willing to risk topless? Hand bra's ? or what?

Xplicit · 11-04-2005, 02:17 PM

uhh why would anything be too much if theyre 18+?

The law you quoted only applies to photos of minors.

Doctor Dre · 11-04-2005, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xplicit

uhh why would anything be too much if theyre 18+?

The law you quoted only applies to photos of minors.

He probably was talking about 18-

ChatCash_Rob · 11-04-2005, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xplicit

uhh why would anything be too much if theyre 18+?

The law you quoted only applies to photos of minors.

having a lot of requests for non nude promo.. I am assuming to avoid 2257 hassles.

gornyhuy · 11-04-2005, 02:34 PM

I know i'm overly cautious and paranoid, but I don't even want to have the compliance conversation in the first place. I don't want them to even get so far as to wonder if i have documentation.

As I understand it, the 2257 laws apply to sexually explicit content. If the girls are 18+, you still have to have documentation to verify that, and you are subject to having the audit take place. Given the crap over Janet Jackson, I wouldn't be surprised if that includes exposed boobs.

THEREFORE: I am looking for suggestive and 'teasing' totally non-nude promo content so that they won't even bother with me in the first place.

Am I dillusional? Will totally non-nude content still require IDs and records?

Teasing will sell better than giving away "free milk" in my humble opinion.

ChatCash_Rob · 11-04-2005, 02:38 PM

so would this be pushing it for those like gorny?

what about fully topless etc..

adultchica · 11-04-2005, 02:41 PM

On my blogs I post them with tits showing sometimes only...no full on nude or hardcore porn

ChatCash_Rob · 11-04-2005, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adultchica

On my blogs I post them with tits showing sometimes only...no full on nude or hardcore porn

congrats on the 1k

would you post this?

Dirty Dane · 11-04-2005, 02:44 PM

Its not about what they wear or not wear. Its about what they are doing - actual or "simulated". Mere nudity is excempt!

ChatCash_Rob · 11-04-2005, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane

Its not about what they wear or not wear. Its about what they are doing - actual or "simulated". Mere nudity is excempt!

That's what I thought too, but some don't want to go even that far I guess.

Matiz · 11-04-2005, 03:26 PM

The girl on the indexpage of privatefeeds.com is yawning

ChatCash_Rob · 11-04-2005, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matiz

The girl on the indexpage of privatefeeds.com is yawning

You want docs for that?

gornyhuy · 11-04-2005, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LiveBucks_Rob

congrats on the 1k

would you post this?

This one is over the top for me because the ass and puss are poised and visible and "waiting for it"... the see-through top I think would be okay - its not in an explicitly sexual situation and technically its not nude.

gornyhuy · 11-04-2005, 07:03 PM

The fucking government has made a pussy out of me.

ChatCash_Rob · 11-04-2005, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gornyhuy

The fucking government has made a pussy out of me.

better safe than sorry, and you're right tease sells better...with cams anyway.

ChatCash_Rob · 11-04-2005, 07:08 PM

Couldn't resist, I love this girl.

gornyhuy · 11-04-2005, 07:13 PM

She is a hottie.... yum yum.

Aric · 11-04-2005, 07:28 PM

I think we need to see some more pics

MrPinks · 11-04-2005, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gornyhuy

I know i'm overly cautious and paranoid, but I don't even want to have the compliance conversation in the first place. I don't want them to even get so far as to wonder if i have documentation.

As I understand it, the 2257 laws apply to sexually explicit content. If the girls are 18+, you still have to have documentation to verify that, and you are subject to having the audit take place. Given the crap over Janet Jackson, I wouldn't be surprised if that includes exposed boobs.

THEREFORE: I am looking for suggestive and 'teasing' totally non-nude promo content so that they won't even bother with me in the first place.

Am I dillusional? Will totally non-nude content still require IDs and records?

Teasing will sell better than giving away "free milk" in my humble opinion.

I like this thread because I am a paranoid dude too. Plus, I want to put some softcore samples up. Now, I have heard that you still might need docs. if the pic if from a hardcore set. Anyone know the answer to that one. Now, things are changing that you might need docs. on SIMULATED sexual activities. Who knows. I want to add samples but I am trying to be compliant.

ChatCash_Rob · 11-04-2005, 07:53 PM

Well it's all pure speculation still I believe.

You can take a look at this if you're so inclined:

http://www.livebucks.com/doc/2257review.pdf

It's our lawyers "opinion" on the matter...enough said. Not totally the same issue but enough crossover to be relevant I think.

ChatCash_Rob · 11-04-2005, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aric

I think we need to see some more pics

More pics you say? I'm running out of "non nude" ...

RawAlex · 11-04-2005, 09:23 PM

Remember, it isn't just a single picture, but can be a question of the set of images. If the photoshoot required documentation (because the girl got naked) then each image in that set coudl be subject to 2257 as a "work" or as a single session.

trying to dodge an elephant is a really good way to get hit with the left leg instead of the right... but you still end up flat fucked.

Alex

ChatCash_Rob · 11-04-2005, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

trying to dodge an elephant is a really good way to get hit with the left leg instead of the right... but you still end up flat fucked.
Alex

I've never heard that saying before, I'll have to remember it.

ChatCash_Rob · 11-04-2005, 09:45 PM

everybody is hitting 1k in this thread

3M TA3 · 11-04-2005, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LiveBucks_Rob

Bloggers and the like, how much is too much ?

"lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area" is obviously out

Are you willing to risk topless? Hand bra's ? or what?

how about www.wildwestbabes.com ?

there are plenty of non-nude model shots to choose from. ICQ me if you want more than what the site has on it now.

PatrickKing · 11-04-2005, 11:55 PM

We have NN hosted gallys at http://www.CityStyleCreations.com

11-04-2005, 02:15 PM	#1
ChatCash_Rob Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 749	?? Affiliates using only non-nude content of 18 + models Bloggers and the like, how much is too much ? "lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area" is obviously out Are you willing to risk topless? Hand bra's ? or what? __________________ www.chatcash.com ...coming soon! icq # 131127104 rob{AT}chatcash

11-04-2005, 02:34 PM	#5
gornyhuy Chafed. Join Date: May 2002 Location: Face Down in Pussy Posts: 18,041	I know i'm overly cautious and paranoid, but I don't even want to have the compliance conversation in the first place. I don't want them to even get so far as to wonder if i have documentation. As I understand it, the 2257 laws apply to sexually explicit content. If the girls are 18+, you still have to have documentation to verify that, and you are subject to having the audit take place. Given the crap over Janet Jackson, I wouldn't be surprised if that includes exposed boobs. THEREFORE: I am looking for suggestive and 'teasing' totally non-nude promo content so that they won't even bother with me in the first place. Am I dillusional? Will totally non-nude content still require IDs and records? Teasing will sell better than giving away "free milk" in my humble opinion. __________________ icq:159548293

11-04-2005, 02:38 PM	#6
ChatCash_Rob Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 749	so would this be pushing it for those like gorny? what about fully topless etc.. __________________ www.chatcash.com ...coming soon! icq # 131127104 rob{AT}chatcash

11-04-2005, 02:41 PM	#7
adultchica Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: usa Posts: 5,141	On my blogs I post them with tits showing sometimes only...no full on nude or hardcore porn __________________

11-04-2005, 03:26 PM	#11
Matiz Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: ICQ:342419601 Posts: 1,740	The girl on the indexpage of privatefeeds.com is yawning __________________ ...

11-04-2005, 02:17 PM	#2
Xplicit Confirmed User Join Date: May 2003 Location: █◄►█ Posts: 3,558	uhh why would anything be too much if theyre 18+? The law you quoted only applies to photos of minors.

11-04-2005, 02:44 PM	#9
Dirty Dane Sick Fuck Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: www Posts: 9,491	Its not about what they wear or not wear. Its about what they are doing - actual or "simulated". Mere nudity is excempt!

11-04-2005, 07:03 PM	#14
gornyhuy Chafed. Join Date: May 2002 Location: Face Down in Pussy Posts: 18,041	The fucking government has made a pussy out of me. __________________ icq:159548293

11-04-2005, 07:08 PM	#16
ChatCash_Rob Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 749	Couldn't resist, I love this girl. __________________ www.chatcash.com ...coming soon! icq # 131127104 rob{AT}chatcash

11-04-2005, 07:13 PM	#17
gornyhuy Chafed. Join Date: May 2002 Location: Face Down in Pussy Posts: 18,041	She is a hottie.... yum yum. __________________ icq:159548293

11-04-2005, 07:28 PM	#18
Aric Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 1,209	I think we need to see some more pics __________________ Awesome cloud hosting by DigitalOcean

11-04-2005, 07:53 PM	#20
ChatCash_Rob Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 749	Well it's all pure speculation still I believe. You can take a look at this if you're so inclined: http://www.livebucks.com/doc/2257review.pdf It's our lawyers "opinion" on the matter...enough said. Not totally the same issue but enough crossover to be relevant I think. __________________ www.chatcash.com ...coming soon! icq # 131127104 rob{AT}chatcash

11-04-2005, 09:23 PM	#22
RawAlex So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In a house. Posts: 9,465	Remember, it isn't just a single picture, but can be a question of the set of images. If the photoshoot required documentation (because the girl got naked) then each image in that set coudl be subject to 2257 as a "work" or as a single session. trying to dodge an elephant is a really good way to get hit with the left leg instead of the right... but you still end up flat fucked. Alex

11-04-2005, 09:45 PM	#24
ChatCash_Rob Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 749	everybody is hitting 1k in this thread __________________ www.chatcash.com ...coming soon! icq # 131127104 rob{AT}chatcash

11-04-2005, 11:55 PM	#26
PatrickKing Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Looking in your hahahahahaha. Posts: 2,096	We have NN hosted gallys at http://www.CityStyleCreations.com __________________ [email protected]