court strikes down secondary producer concept - GoFuckYourself.com

mikesouth · 12-28-2005, 05:26 PM

Thisis a big win for the FSC, the tenth circuit has agreed with a prior tenth circuit rylling striking down the secondary producer concept as it relates to 2257

Good Job Tom Hymes

Cory W · 12-28-2005, 05:29 PM

Do you have a link?

Lycanthrope · 12-28-2005, 05:29 PM

Yes, link would be nice, this would be good big news.

Screaming · 12-28-2005, 05:30 PM

Link me baby.

FightThisPatent · 12-28-2005, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WEG Cory

Do you have a link?

http://www.avnonline.com/index.php?P...tent_ID=252970

story is still developing.

Fight the link challenged!

AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE · 12-28-2005, 05:31 PM

Comming from SOuth, its most likely true.

Though it is earlier than expected ruling.

mikesouth · 12-28-2005, 05:32 PM

ya I just got it...I figured Id post it here quickly I know it to be accurate but lack the details If AVN doesn't have it Im sure they will soon

mikesouth · 12-28-2005, 05:33 PM

Thanks for the vote of confidence alienq

FightThisPatent · 12-28-2005, 05:34 PM

So far, it seems like a big win for webmasters over the incredibly ridiculous burdens they were looking to apply.. BUT, remember, existing 10 year 2257 still applies to all webmasters...and this is the 10th circuit.

What has not changed is the responsibility to be able to point DOJ to the content producer of any image you carry on your website.

So if you are playing the "knock knock, it's DOJ " game at home, look at any image on your site, and see if you can identify which content producer that is listed on your 2257.html page that image belongs to.

If you can't do that, then doesn't matter that the secondary recordkeeper requirements have been knocked down, you still have a 2257 problem.

Fight the rain on the parade!

mikeyddddd · 12-28-2005, 05:36 PM

Yes! Most Excellent!

"it appears as though the court has also struck down the requirement to keep a copy of the depiction as it applies to Internet chat sites, which may or may not include live web streaming."

sltr · 12-28-2005, 05:37 PM

that is great news!!1

slapass · 12-28-2005, 05:39 PM

Yeah baby!

mikesouth · 12-28-2005, 05:50 PM

Yes technically it is a small win in what should be a larger battle to rid the industry of 2257 there should never be a law providing you to prove you didn't do something

MrChips · 12-28-2005, 06:17 PM

"If you can't do that, then doesn't matter that the secondary recordkeeper requirements have been knocked down, you still have a 2257 problem."

Only if you live in the "Free America"

LiveDose · 12-28-2005, 06:27 PM

That's great news.

12-28-2005, 05:26 PM	#1
mikesouth Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: My High Horse Posts: 6,334	court strikes down secondary producer concept Thisis a big win for the FSC, the tenth circuit has agreed with a prior tenth circuit rylling striking down the secondary producer concept as it relates to 2257 Good Job Tom Hymes __________________ Mike South It's No wonder I took up drugs and alcohol, it's the only way I could dumb myself down enough to cope with the morons in this biz.

12-28-2005, 05:29 PM	#2
Cory W Deeply shallow Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Hollywood, Ca. Posts: 9,133	Do you have a link? __________________ ICQ: 292310358 Offering writing and content services (mainstream). Marketing for L3 Payments

12-28-2005, 05:29 PM	#3
Lycanthrope Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 4,517	Yes, link would be nice, this would be good big news. __________________

12-28-2005, 05:30 PM	#4
Screaming I can change this!!!!! Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 18,972	Link me baby. __________________

12-28-2005, 05:31 PM	#6
AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE best designer on GFY Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: IALIEN.COM - High Definition Video and Photographic Productions -ICQ 78943384 Posts: 30,307	Comming from SOuth, its most likely true. Though it is earlier than expected ruling. __________________ NAKED HOSTING FTW!11 I'm On The INSANE PLAN $9.95/mo! \| The Alien Blog Adult News Worth Reading Updated Daily \| Content For Sale! 641 PICS 216 MINUTES OF VIDEO $350.00 \|ICQ: 78943384 \|

12-28-2005, 05:32 PM	#7
mikesouth Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: My High Horse Posts: 6,334	ya I just got it...I figured Id post it here quickly I know it to be accurate but lack the details If AVN doesn't have it Im sure they will soon __________________ Mike South It's No wonder I took up drugs and alcohol, it's the only way I could dumb myself down enough to cope with the morons in this biz.

12-28-2005, 05:33 PM	#8
mikesouth Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: My High Horse Posts: 6,334	Thanks for the vote of confidence alienq __________________ Mike South It's No wonder I took up drugs and alcohol, it's the only way I could dumb myself down enough to cope with the morons in this biz.

12-28-2005, 05:34 PM	#9
FightThisPatent Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 4,090	So far, it seems like a big win for webmasters over the incredibly ridiculous burdens they were looking to apply.. BUT, remember, existing 10 year 2257 still applies to all webmasters...and this is the 10th circuit. What has not changed is the responsibility to be able to point DOJ to the content producer of any image you carry on your website. So if you are playing the "knock knock, it's DOJ " game at home, look at any image on your site, and see if you can identify which content producer that is listed on your 2257.html page that image belongs to. If you can't do that, then doesn't matter that the secondary recordkeeper requirements have been knocked down, you still have a 2257 problem. Fight the rain on the parade! __________________ http://www.t3report.com (where's the traffic?) v5.0 is out! \| http://www.FightThePatent.com \| ICQ 52741957

12-28-2005, 05:36 PM	#10
mikeyddddd Viva la vulva! Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: you can't please everyone, so you got to please yourself Posts: 16,557	Yes! Most Excellent! "it appears as though the court has also struck down the requirement to keep a copy of the depiction as it applies to Internet chat sites, which may or may not include live web streaming." __________________ AdultStarProfits AmbyaCash AnilosCash AzianiGold ColdHardCash FlashTheMoney IdolBucks MediumPimpin NSCash Nubiles PussyCash ScoreCash Sextronix SpunkyCash TubeTitans Twistys

12-28-2005, 05:37 PM	#11
sltr Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 3,191	that is great news!!1

12-28-2005, 05:39 PM	#12
slapass Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Earth Posts: 14,625	Yeah baby!

12-28-2005, 05:50 PM	#13
mikesouth Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: My High Horse Posts: 6,334	Yes technically it is a small win in what should be a larger battle to rid the industry of 2257 there should never be a law providing you to prove you didn't do something __________________ Mike South It's No wonder I took up drugs and alcohol, it's the only way I could dumb myself down enough to cope with the morons in this biz.

12-28-2005, 06:17 PM	#14
MrChips Confirmed User Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 1,504	"If you can't do that, then doesn't matter that the secondary recordkeeper requirements have been knocked down, you still have a 2257 problem." Only if you live in the "Free America"

12-28-2005, 06:27 PM	#15
LiveDose Show Yer Tits! Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Somewhere Out there... Posts: 25,792	That's great news. __________________ Scammer Alert: acer19 acer [email protected] [email protected] Money stolen using PayPal