FBI: Companies Inspected For 2257 So Far Were "Administrative Catastrophes" - GoFuckYourself.com

BoyAlley · 12-04-2006, 03:39 PM

Well I was reading through Xbiz, and was shocked to read what I believe is a VERY telling, VERY important fact:

Only ONE company that underwent a 2257 inspection so far "resulting in no reported violations" and only ONE company had records that were "nearly perfect".

ALL other companies that have been inspected have resulted in what the FBI believes are illegal violations that were reported by the FBI to the Department of Justice.

What kind of violations? Are we talking just bazaar cross-referencing violations? Obscure provisions that are impossible for anyone to comply with anyway?

Oh no oh no oh no oh no!

"The most common violations the agents have reported to date have be illegible identification documents, including copies of IDs where the photographic area is little more than a large black dot; missing identification documents, and failure to cross reference".

We're talking violations that include scans of the IDs that are so shitty that you can't even make out the picture on them, and IDs that are just flat out not on file.

THEXY!

BoyAlley · 12-04-2006, 03:44 PM

Also interesting item to note:

The FBI says the database their making of producers, that they're pulling from randomly to do inspections of, INCLUDE FOREIGN COMPANIES.

jact · 12-04-2006, 03:45 PM

Rutroh raggy.. Most docs I've seen from content producers suck balls, and not in a good, pleasurable way.

jact · 12-04-2006, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoyAlley

Also interesting item to note:

The FBI says the database their making of producers, that they're pulling from randomly to do inspections of, INCLUDE FOREIGN COMPANIES.

Say what now?

JD · 12-04-2006, 03:52 PM

well that sucks

REßEL · 12-04-2006, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoyAlley

Also interesting item to note:

The FBI says the database their making of producers, that they're pulling from randomly to do inspections of, INCLUDE FOREIGN COMPANIES.

And you really think they have any legal duristiction to turn up on foreign soil and inspect the records of foreign companies?

They're American, so I don't doubt they have plans to. But that doesn't mean they won't get their arse handed to them for it. Despite the mentality to the contrary, the US is not the world police and has no right to turn up anywhere else in the world to enforce their laws.

If they turned up here I'd just laugh while slamming the door in their face.

Matt 26z · 12-04-2006, 03:58 PM

Link to this story? Who is their source?

After the first three or four the FBI published a writeup saying so far everyone passed. So that right there makes me question the idea that only one passed so far.

Then there is the fact that several companies have come forward to say they were inspected. If they were all found to be in violation of something, wouldn't they have kept the inspection a secret from the industry?

BoyAlley · 12-04-2006, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt 26z

Link to this story? Who is their source?

The source is an article in this month's XBIZ World Magazine titled "Seeking A More Reasonable Environment" written by first amendment attorney Gregory Piccionelli who was quoting from the meeting that took place at FBI Headquarters in Washington DC.

BoyAlley · 12-04-2006, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by REßEL

And you really think they have any legal duristiction to turn up on foreign soil and inspect the records of foreign companies?

Well, knowing what I know about the FBI, I'd suspect what would happen, is they would contact the authorities in the country the producer is located in. They would then accompany the local authorities and would act under their jurisdiction.

I'd suspect that there are treaties in place with most countries that would allow such an arrangement to take place.

However, I'm not an attorney and can't say anything for any certainty.

Peaches · 12-04-2006, 04:05 PM

I wouldn't be surprised. Fatfuckingcash was lucky (by accident) in that all the content they have are pictures/vids they've taken themselves and they always made sure ID copies were clean and readable.

I'm sure most of the companies who have bought content have at least a few pictures that aren't compliant.

Personally, I removed all the pictures off my freesites when 2257 shit starting coming down. Doubled my payouts and I don't have to deal with worrying about this crap.

sicone · 12-04-2006, 04:08 PM

I'm not too surprised, when I was doing 2257 for adult, a few producers would try to pass on unreadable, unusable documents. And then they would act offended when called on it. Somehow it was always my fault that they couldnt obtain and/or follow the proper procedures Spannow and I set in place for them.

will76 · 12-04-2006, 04:13 PM

With the rules they have set in place for cross referencing and indexing and all the bullshit they are asking for I am surprised that even 1 person was able to pass it.

frank7799 · 12-04-2006, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoyAlley

Also interesting item to note:

The FBI says the database their making of producers, that they're pulling from randomly to do inspections of, INCLUDE FOREIGN COMPANIES.

They are welcome anytime.

BoyAlley · 12-04-2006, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by will76

With the rules they have set in place for cross referencing and indexing and all the bullshit they are asking for I am surprised that even 1 person was able to pass it.

I agree with you there.

However, what I found interesting to note, as I said, is that the majority of violations don't appear to even be just these obscure cross referencing and indexing issues. It's been scans of IDs where it's not even possible to see the performer's pictures, and IDs that aren't even on file at all.

What a mess. I really hope we don't see prosecutions taking place now. I'd really hate to see a company get in serious trouble for book keeping problems when they've been working with only performers that are all 18+

This whole process just seems so un-american.

Doctor Dre · 12-04-2006, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoyAlley

The source is an article in this month's XBIZ World Magazine titled "Seeking A More Reasonable Environment" written by first amendment attorney Gregory Piccionelli who was quoting from the meeting that took place at FBI Headquarters in Washington DC.

You and I know that Xbiz is doing the best they can but there make more then their shares of erronus reports... They don't double check the facts and go in deeph...

i just don't see how the US gov could ask from a forgein business to have documents ready for them at opening hours. That'd be crazy.

Peaches · 12-04-2006, 04:19 PM

Well, IMO, if a company is showing pics of girls they don't have decent documents for, then they get what they deserve. I know a LOT of companies removed content BECAUSE they couldn't read the IDs provided by the content sellers.

BlackCrayon · 12-04-2006, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoyAlley

Well, knowing what I know about the FBI, I'd suspect what would happen, is they would contact the authorities in the country the producer is located in. They would then accompany the local authorities and would act under their jurisdiction.

I'd suspect that there are treaties in place with most countries that would allow such an arrangement to take place.

However, I'm not an attorney and can't say anything for any certainty.

for what? to make sure their 2257 docs are in order? other countries don't have these same laws.

BoyAlley · 12-04-2006, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doctor Dre

You and I know that Xbiz is doing the best they can but there make more then their shares of erronus reports... They don't double check the facts and go in deeph...

i just don't see how the US gov could ask from a forgein business to have documents ready for them at opening hours. That'd be crazy.

Here's what the article says:

"It was disclosed that the FBI has compiled a database of adult content producers in which approximately 700 companies, including foreign companies, are identified."

[...]

"To select the companies to be inspected, the FBI uses a program they claim will select 10 producers at random from the database"

BoyAlley · 12-04-2006, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackCrayon

for what? to make sure their 2257 docs are in order? other countries don't have these same laws.

I have read many attorneys state that if you're doing business in the US (ie selling subscriptions or dvds to US consumers), then you have to abide by the 2257 laws.

The same logic is holding true with foreign gaming companies, that have stopped taking bets from US citizens for fear of violating US laws against doing so.

Again, I am not an attorney, so don't take my advice or word on anything legal related. I'm just passing on what I have been told / read.

JD · 12-04-2006, 04:30 PM

if any of the companies get busted... any affiliate that's using their content is fucked as well

PimpDaddyPants · 12-04-2006, 04:35 PM

Its very crazy I see some models signup using a blank image license or just another picture of them and i have to decline thier account and tell them to correct it and the reason why.

JP-pornshooter · 12-04-2006, 05:08 PM

If you content producer gives you bad illegible id copies, its time to look for other producers..
As part of the work for hire agreement which I often sign for my clients, parts of my duty is to check/examine the id's of each model, cross reference the name and birthday and then ask the model when she was born and how old she is etc.
I know of atleast one company using a signature verification company to verify the signature on the ID matches that of the release forms..this sounds like a pretty good idea if you really want to protect yourself (from the DOJ)

ronaldo · 12-04-2006, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doctor Dre

i just don't see how the US gov could ask from a forgein business to have documents ready for them at opening hours. That'd be crazy.

They couldn't force them to be open the hours 2257 instructs, however...

From the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act in Canada as I suspect many other countries are similiar AND since Doctor Dre is a canuck (irrelevant sections omitted)...

(3) For the purpose of clause 4.3 of Schedule 1, and despite the note that accompanies that clause, an organization may disclose personal information without the knowledge or consent of the individual only if the disclosure is

(c) required to comply with a subpoena or warrant issued or an order made by a court, person or body with jurisdiction to compel the production of information, or to comply with rules of court relating to the production of records;

(c.1) made to a government institution or part of a government institution that has made a request for the information, identified its lawful authority to obtain the information and indicated that

(ii) the disclosure is requested for the purpose of enforcing any law of Canada, a province or a foreign jurisdiction, carrying out an investigation relating to the enforcement of any such law or gathering intelligence for the purpose of enforcing any such law, or

(iii) the disclosure is requested for the purpose of administering any law of Canada or a province;"

While the secondary producer section of 2257 is a direct violation of Canadian Privacy laws and CANNOT be enforced by the FBI (meaning they couldn't force ANY Canadian producer to hand over the ID's to their U.S. clients because they'd then be forcing those producers to break their own countries laws), for them to show up on the doorstep of a Canadian producer and request those records themselves, isn't exactly a stretch. Could they do it without cooperation from the RCMP? Not a chance. But does anyone really believe if the FBI approached the RCMP and wanted to make inquiries to ensure the legal age of adult actresses performing in Canada, that the RCMP would object? I for one highly doubt it.

Remember that above all, we are pornographers and while we would certainly have more support than our U.S. counterparts, the overriding sentiment would still be against us.

All imho

From http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/P-8.6/text.html

BlackCrayon · 12-04-2006, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoyAlley

I have read many attorneys state that if you're doing business in the US (ie selling subscriptions or dvds to US consumers), then you have to abide by the 2257 laws.

The same logic is holding true with foreign gaming companies, that have stopped taking bets from US citizens for fear of violating US laws against doing so.

Again, I am not an attorney, so don't take my advice or word on anything legal related. I'm just passing on what I have been told / read.

yeah, i don't know. i just can't seem them being able to enforce such a thing with foreign companies. i could see if they were selling content to people in the US perhaps but in canada for example, a 2257 law breaks other current privacy laws. and most gaming sites are still taking bets from US customers, despite the recent law. the thing is, the law was made against the people, not the gaming companies themselves because they knew they would have no control over these foreign companies.

wyldblyss · 12-04-2006, 05:24 PM

I can't see the authorities in Canada accomodating the FBI in checking 2257 records because our privacy laws in Canada would actually forbid it. In fact, in Canada, your information can not be given to anyone without WRITTEN consent of the individual.

This means when my child went to the dentist and was referred to another dentist, I had to actually sign documents allowing the other dentist to have my childs information.

There is no way the FBI could ask to see the records/ID's without written consent of every single performer/model.

Webby · 12-04-2006, 05:26 PM

MMmm.. the US govt has a nasty habit of not minding it's own biz - unlike almost all other nations. They need to learn what reality means.

Reality does not mean US law applies anywhere else apart from the US. Reality also does not mean they have a hope in hell of making an application to a judge in a foreign jurisdiction (least in terms of boring 2257 stuff) and this being granted - a judge would tell them where to go and ask them what 225? wot is?

The world never did agree to the terms of US domestic law and if the govt does not like it - block all foreign servers and shut up.

PS... The basic principle behind 2257 is fine in that it does provide some protection for under 18's - that's not the problem. The problem is the world never was a record-keeper for the US govt, - nor is there any obligation to speak to them.

Webby · 12-04-2006, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wyldblyss

I can't see the authorities in Canada accomodating the FBI in checking 2257 records because our privacy laws in Canada would actually forbid it. In fact, in Canada, your information can not be given to anyone without WRITTEN consent of the individual.

This means when my child went to the dentist and was referred to another dentist, I had to actually sign documents allowing the other dentist to have my childs information.

There is no way the FBI could ask to see the records/ID's without written consent of every single performer/model.

Same in most other countries wyldblyss - they operate under their own privacy and other laws - not under the laws of a nosy foreign govt.

JackL · 12-04-2006, 05:30 PM

Why all this random checking shit it should be a complaint basis onlyif someone thinks you have illegal content they report you then they should check for documentation american law sucks glad I don't live or host there :P

directfiesta · 12-04-2006, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoyAlley

"To select the companies to be inspected, the FBI uses a program they claim will select 10 producers at random from the database"

I have the same program also:

About foreign companies, they can suck my dick when I pull it out of a filthy hoe's asshole.

Treaties exist for criminal offenses ( in both countries ) like Child Porn, distribution of cocaine, stolen cars, etc ....
Not for document keeping as per the US...

Webby · 12-04-2006, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JackL

Why all this random checking shit it should be a complaint basis onlyif someone thinks you have illegal content they report you then they should check for documentation american law sucks glad I don't live or host there :P

It's the US you're talking about - sperm count, SSN, blood sample, zip code and more commonly available information floating about on individuals than any nation on the planet - and more folks in jail than the whole of China with five times the population. It must be something in the air

Webby · 12-04-2006, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by directfiesta

About foreign companies, they can suck my dick when I pull it out of a filthy hoe's asshole.

Treaties exist for criminal offenses ( in both countries ) like Child Porn, distribution of cocaine, stolen cars, etc ....
Not for document keeping as per the US...

So... you are partial to your freedoms DF?

Fuck em - just don't get in my face

will76 · 12-04-2006, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoyAlley

I agree with you there.

However, what I found interesting to note, as I said, is that the majority of violations don't appear to even be just these obscure cross referencing and indexing issues. It's been scans of IDs where it's not even possible to see the performer's pictures, and IDs that aren't even on file at all.

What a mess. I really hope we don't see prosecutions taking place now. I'd really hate to see a company get in serious trouble for book keeping problems when they've been working with only performers that are all 18+

This whole process just seems so un-american.

if the image is so bad you can;t make it out, then it would be violating 2257 regardless of the new rules. Also I don't think that would be a "book keeping" error. That is a documention error, which IMO something that they should be held to a higher standard. If you can't even prove the girls age or match the picture in the id to the girl used in the content, then you are fucking up more so then just miss filing something.

rounders · 12-04-2006, 05:40 PM

In regards to the 2257, the ids, as well as the release need to be legible as well and some form of passport also? or government issued is ok.

ronaldo · 12-04-2006, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wyldblyss

I can't see the authorities in Canada accomodating the FBI in checking 2257 records because our privacy laws in Canada would actually forbid it. In fact, in Canada, your information can not be given to anyone without WRITTEN consent of the individual.

This means when my child went to the dentist and was referred to another dentist, I had to actually sign documents allowing the other dentist to have my childs information.

There is no way the FBI could ask to see the records/ID's without written consent of every single performer/model.

Being fully compliant with 2257/4452 WOULD be a direct violation of Canadian privacy laws, so Canadian producers cannot legally comply, and CAN'T be forced to by the FBI. If the RCMP suspects that the producer is violating a foreign law however, they can inspect the records...without written consent. I don't believe they'd help inspect the records for the purpose of being 2257 compliant, BUT to ensure that no underage models are being shot in Canada, which is not only a foreign law, but a Canadian one too.

will76 · 12-04-2006, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoyAlley

I have read many attorneys state that if you're doing business in the US (ie selling subscriptions or dvds to US consumers), then you have to abide by the 2257 laws.

The same logic is holding true with foreign gaming companies, that have stopped taking bets from US citizens for fear of violating US laws against doing so.

Again, I am not an attorney, so don't take my advice or word on anything legal related. I'm just passing on what I have been told / read.

That is only if these people come to the US. If you don't come to the US, like the owner of betting sites did recently with a law over in Texas, then you dont have any thing to worry about outside of the US. Just don't come here to visit, or land here inroute to another location.

Or shit for that matter I wouldn't fly in US airspace, they could make the plane land then and get your ass LOL so sad.

munki · 12-04-2006, 05:44 PM

So is the sky falling again...?

Webby · 12-04-2006, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by munki

So is the sky falling again...?

The sad bit is they'd screwup the candy in a candystore. The basic premise of 2257 was sound and did provide for protection of kids - ie that models are 18 +. Most nations have similar laws and photo ID/age proof and a model release has been a standard for years - nothing wrong with that.

But... along comes the US govt creating more bullshit rules and paperwork which do not make any provision for child protection. There are numerous laws existing already where "offenders" can be indicted for the ususal violations - it's just that the US govt needs as many "rules" as it can muster to feel relevant.

Truth is, they have been pathetically poor at child protection - especially where US citizens commit offenses in other nations. They need to clean up their own backyard first.

Foreign corporations? Hell.. dream on in lala land

BoyAlley · 12-04-2006, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by will76

if the image is so bad you can;t make it out, then it would be violating 2257 regardless of the new rules. Also I don't think that would be a "book keeping" error. That is a documention error, which IMO something that they should be held to a higher standard. If you can't even prove the girls age or match the picture in the id to the girl used in the content, then you are fucking up more so then just miss filing something.

I agree which was the entire point of this thread, that the violations alleged by the FBI appear to be major and fundamental ones.

tony286 · 12-04-2006, 06:52 PM

Thats why I bring a scanner to shoots I get wonderful big clear id pics. If someone isnt in this country they cant touch you , unless its some big pedo ring. For just random inspections its not going to happen. Also I wish the people who were at that meeting would share the info. Usually the way it works is they invite the industry leaders so then the leaders pass the info down. This is such bullshit we only get bits and pieces. I also highly doubt they are going to arrest anyone on a cross referencing error if everything else is correct because they have to go in front of a judge and jury and say the model is 30 yrs old but we want to put this person in jail for 5 yrs for a cross referencing error. Also the chance they take going to court over bullshit ,is 2257 being thrown out for being too complicated.

ForteCash · 12-04-2006, 06:54 PM

This thread smells like anus....

BoyAlley · 12-04-2006, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ForteCash

This thread smells like anus....

Maybe that's your upper lip you're smelling?

Grapesoda · 12-04-2006, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony404

Thats why I bring a scanner to shoots I get wonderful big clear id pics. If someone isnt in this country they cant touch you , unless its some big pedo ring. For just random inspections its not going to happen. Also I wish the people who were at that meeting would share the info. Usually the way it works is they invite the industry leaders so then the leaders pass the info down. This is such bullshit we only get bits and pieces. I also highly doubt they are going to arrest anyone on a cross referencing error if everything else is correct because they have to go in front of a judge and jury and say the model is 30 yrs old but we want to put this person in jail for 5 yrs for a cross referencing error. Also the chance they take going to court over bullshit ,is 2257 being thrown out for being too complicated.

sorta like the fucking helmet law in CA . . when I got a ticket for a beanie helmet my defense was 'the law is so complicated no one with normal intelligence can reasonably be expected to understand it' the judge kicked me lose . . true story

Sarah_Jayne · 12-04-2006, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoyAlley

Also interesting item to note:

The FBI says the database their making of producers, that they're pulling from randomly to do inspections of, INCLUDE FOREIGN COMPANIES.

Tell you what, the second a branch of the United States government enters my British property and attempts to search in name of the United States government I will pick up the phone and make two calls. The first call would be to a lawyer and the second to the press.

Phoenix · 12-04-2006, 11:53 PM

fuck the usa and the way they think theyc an invade another country and enforce their laws

fuck this world needs another makeover

Pleasurepays · 12-05-2006, 12:41 AM

A note to the clueless. The FBI is a domestic law enforcement agency with no authority outside the US without first gaining the consent of congress through the granting of extraterritorial jurisdiction, as well as the full consent of the host country where they seek to investigate a crime against the US.

Phoenix · 12-05-2006, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

A note to the clueless. The FBI is a domestic law enforcement agency with no authority outside the US without first gaining the consent of congress through the granting of extraterritorial jurisdiction, as well as the full consent of the host country where they seek to investigate a crime against the US.

tell that to the lumber industry here

12-05-2006, 12:50 AM

How many 2257 inspections have there been so far, total?

S P A N N O W · 12-05-2006, 12:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by REßEL

And you really think they have any legal duristiction to turn up on foreign soil and inspect the records of foreign companies?

They're American, so I don't doubt they have plans to. But that doesn't mean they won't get their arse handed to them for it. Despite the mentality to the contrary, the US is not the world police and has no right to turn up anywhere else in the world to enforce their laws.

If they turned up here I'd just laugh while slamming the door in their face.

As if they'd just show up alone...

They'd never make a move like that without:

Bet you wouldn't be laughing then?!

Pleasurepays · 12-05-2006, 12:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenix

tell that to the lumber industry here

I'll definately do that being that I am scheduled to speak to the Canadian Lumber Industry in Toronto next week. I plan to discuss 2257, seperation of Quebec and the fact that Nickelback annoys me more and more, being that each new hit song of theirs, sounds exactly like their previous hit song.

RogerV · 12-05-2006, 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sicone

I'm not too surprised, when I was doing 2257 for adult, a few producers would try to pass on unreadable, unusable documents. And then they would act offended when called on it. Somehow it was always my fault that they couldnt obtain and/or follow the proper procedures Spannow and I set in place for them.

we had the same problem we just tossed anthing we couldnt see clearly.

Our shit is air tight

12-04-2006, 03:39 PM	#1
BoyAlley So Fucking Gay Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 19,714	FBI: Companies Inspected For 2257 So Far Were "Administrative Catastrophes" Well I was reading through Xbiz, and was shocked to read what I believe is a VERY telling, VERY important fact: Only ONE company that underwent a 2257 inspection so far "resulting in no reported violations" and only ONE company had records that were "nearly perfect". ALL other companies that have been inspected have resulted in what the FBI believes are illegal violations that were reported by the FBI to the Department of Justice. What kind of violations? Are we talking just bazaar cross-referencing violations? Obscure provisions that are impossible for anyone to comply with anyway? Oh no oh no oh no oh no! "The most common violations the agents have reported to date have be illegible identification documents, including copies of IDs where the photographic area is little more than a large black dot; missing identification documents, and failure to cross reference". We're talking violations that include scans of the IDs that are so shitty that you can't even make out the picture on them, and IDs that are just flat out not on file. THEXY! Last edited by BoyAlley; 12-04-2006 at 03:42 PM..

12-04-2006, 03:45 PM	#3
jact Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Oakville, Canada Posts: 9,134	Rutroh raggy.. Most docs I've seen from content producers suck balls, and not in a good, pleasurable way. __________________ Free agent

12-04-2006, 04:08 PM	#11
sicone Retired Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Sac Posts: 18,453	I'm not too surprised, when I was doing 2257 for adult, a few producers would try to pass on unreadable, unusable documents. And then they would act offended when called on it. Somehow it was always my fault that they couldnt obtain and/or follow the proper procedures Spannow and I set in place for them. __________________

12-04-2006, 04:13 PM	#12
will76 Making $$$$ w/ ClickCash Industry Role: Join Date: May 2003 Location: USA Posts: 18,037	With the rules they have set in place for cross referencing and indexing and all the bullshit they are asking for I am surprised that even 1 person was able to pass it. __________________ ICQ: 86364801 Email: will [at] innovativeassets [dot] com PROGRAM SHIT LIST - DO NOT PROMOTE (click link for gfy thread) FNCash \| Media Revenue

12-04-2006, 05:26 PM	#26
Webby Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Far far away - as possible Posts: 14,956	MMmm.. the US govt has a nasty habit of not minding it's own biz - unlike almost all other nations. They need to learn what reality means. Reality does not mean US law applies anywhere else apart from the US. Reality also does not mean they have a hope in hell of making an application to a judge in a foreign jurisdiction (least in terms of boring 2257 stuff) and this being granted - a judge would tell them where to go and ask them what 225? wot is? The world never did agree to the terms of US domestic law and if the govt does not like it - block all foreign servers and shut up. PS... The basic principle behind 2257 is fine in that it does provide some protection for under 18's - that's not the problem. The problem is the world never was a record-keeper for the US govt, - nor is there any obligation to speak to them. __________________ XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.

12-04-2006, 03:44 PM	#2
BoyAlley So Fucking Gay Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 19,714	Also interesting item to note: The FBI says the database their making of producers, that they're pulling from randomly to do inspections of, INCLUDE FOREIGN COMPANIES.

12-04-2006, 03:52 PM	#5
JD Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 22,651	well that sucks

12-04-2006, 03:58 PM	#7
Matt 26z So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: ¤ª"˜¨๑۩۞۩๑¨˜"ª¤ Posts: 18,481	Link to this story? Who is their source? After the first three or four the FBI published a writeup saying so far everyone passed. So that right there makes me question the idea that only one passed so far. Then there is the fact that several companies have come forward to say they were inspected. If they were all found to be in violation of something, wouldn't they have kept the inspection a secret from the industry?

12-04-2006, 04:05 PM	#10
Peaches Old broad Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Away Posts: 13,933	I wouldn't be surprised. Fatfuckingcash was lucky (by accident) in that all the content they have are pictures/vids they've taken themselves and they always made sure ID copies were clean and readable. I'm sure most of the companies who have bought content have at least a few pictures that aren't compliant. Personally, I removed all the pictures off my freesites when 2257 shit starting coming down. Doubled my payouts and I don't have to deal with worrying about this crap.

12-04-2006, 04:19 PM	#16
Peaches Old broad Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Away Posts: 13,933	Well, IMO, if a company is showing pics of girls they don't have decent documents for, then they get what they deserve. I know a LOT of companies removed content BECAUSE they couldn't read the IDs provided by the content sellers.

12-04-2006, 04:30 PM	#20
JD Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 22,651	if any of the companies get busted... any affiliate that's using their content is fucked as well

12-04-2006, 04:35 PM	#21
PimpDaddyPants Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: USA Posts: 1,581	Its very crazy I see some models signup using a blank image license or just another picture of them and i have to decline thier account and tell them to correct it and the reason why.

12-04-2006, 05:08 PM	#22
JP-pornshooter Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: westcoast usa Posts: 4,007	If you content producer gives you bad illegible id copies, its time to look for other producers.. As part of the work for hire agreement which I often sign for my clients, parts of my duty is to check/examine the id's of each model, cross reference the name and birthday and then ask the model when she was born and how old she is etc. I know of atleast one company using a signature verification company to verify the signature on the ID matches that of the release forms..this sounds like a pretty good idea if you really want to protect yourself (from the DOJ)

12-04-2006, 05:24 PM	#25
wyldblyss Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: The Buck Starts Here Posts: 5,779	I can't see the authorities in Canada accomodating the FBI in checking 2257 records because our privacy laws in Canada would actually forbid it. In fact, in Canada, your information can not be given to anyone without WRITTEN consent of the individual. This means when my child went to the dentist and was referred to another dentist, I had to actually sign documents allowing the other dentist to have my childs information. There is no way the FBI could ask to see the records/ID's without written consent of every single performer/model.

12-04-2006, 05:30 PM	#28
JackL So Fucking Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 72	Why all this random checking shit it should be a complaint basis onlyif someone thinks you have illegal content they report you then they should check for documentation american law sucks glad I don't live or host there :P

12-04-2006, 05:40 PM	#33
rounders Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: p0rn0stars & h0es Posts: 2,931	In regards to the 2257, the ids, as well as the release need to be legible as well and some form of passport also? or government issued is ok. __________________ ICQ#: 153923840

12-04-2006, 05:44 PM	#36
munki Do Fun Shit. Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: OC Posts: 13,393	So is the sky falling again...? __________________ “I have the simplest tastes. I am always satisfied with the best.” -Oscar Wilde

12-04-2006, 06:52 PM	#39
tony286 lurker Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: atlanta Posts: 57,021	Thats why I bring a scanner to shoots I get wonderful big clear id pics. If someone isnt in this country they cant touch you , unless its some big pedo ring. For just random inspections its not going to happen. Also I wish the people who were at that meeting would share the info. Usually the way it works is they invite the industry leaders so then the leaders pass the info down. This is such bullshit we only get bits and pieces. I also highly doubt they are going to arrest anyone on a cross referencing error if everything else is correct because they have to go in front of a judge and jury and say the model is 30 yrs old but we want to put this person in jail for 5 yrs for a cross referencing error. Also the chance they take going to court over bullshit ,is 2257 being thrown out for being too complicated.

12-04-2006, 06:54 PM	#40
ForteCash Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Posts: 3,278	This thread smells like anus.... __________________ NO PILLS - NO EXPENSIVE STRETCHERS - JUST REAL EXERCISES THAT WORK! "Upsell Your Members The Top Penis Enlargement Site!" Link Exchanges & Traffic Trades www.penilefitness.com/links/ ICQ: 63935693 $50 per trial with www.ForteCash.com

12-04-2006, 11:53 PM	#44
Phoenix BACON BACON BACON Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Poems everybody, the laddie fancies himself a poet Posts: 35,462	fuck the usa and the way they think theyc an invade another country and enforce their laws fuck this world needs another makeover __________________ Skype Phoenixskype1 Telegram PhoenixBrad https://quantads.io

12-05-2006, 12:41 AM	#45
Pleasurepays BANNED - SUPPORTING TUBES Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: I live in a pile of boogers Posts: 11,913	A note to the clueless. The FBI is a domestic law enforcement agency with no authority outside the US without first gaining the consent of congress through the granting of extraterritorial jurisdiction, as well as the full consent of the host country where they seek to investigate a crime against the US.

12-05-2006, 12:50 AM	#47
teh ghey Guest Posts: n/a	How many 2257 inspections have there been so far, total?