how nice of you to spam a guy while he is down!

AND here comes the leeches

Hes in reg lock smartass

Wow, bottom feeding, kudos to you.

jesus christ :Oh crap

Thanks I'll be sure to look into it :)

Terms and conditions cannot knowingly or unknowingly force someone to break the law. There are such things as privacy laws for a reason.

True, but making it on the news by suing for defamation of character and winning proves he/she was not doing what they are blaming...but of course those stories never make it into the media.

I love it, talking points :) LOL

Look your talking about one of the largest registers out there. As others have said they didn't wake up a few days ago and decide to go on a mission..

What could a headline be?

"Domain Registrer Directnic shuts down domains of suspected porn barron with young looking girls"

Who do you think the "mainstream" of american public would side with.. I am a big supporter of the 1st ammed, etc, etc but there is more to this story guys and gals.

Very bad move on the part of DirectNic.

Not that it will make a huge difference to DN but I just bulk transfered all my domains to Moniker.

Actually, can you find any allegations anywhere? I don't see any. Had Slick not brought this to the boards, there would be nothing public about it. I don't think Directnic has said anything in public about the sites specifically having CP images on them.

There is also a black hole of information here. Everyone is assuming that DN is operating as a rogue company, randomly closing domains. You might think perhaps that there is just a little bit more to the story than that?

jumping to conclusions...

You really think him winning a defamation of character suit would make his relationships with his neighbors improve? They're going to fear he's a child predator and make him a pariah.

ya know, you'd make much more money killing prostitutes, robbin' banks, much more than running CP real or pseudo.
What holds you?

... and exactly which US privacy law would be broken here?

Read everything I said in my last paragraph please.

They requested to see age documents on models on his website, are they appointed representatives by the DOJ?

Ya know, I'll have to say it again, I HAVE NO CHILD PORN ON MY FUCKING PAGES !!!!! There are sites out there that are CLEARLY showing child porn, why not go after them.

What the fuck is this, the fucking Pat Robertson Messageboard ???

is a pic/date of birth considered personally identifying information?

all the opinions and advice (with respect to a few) mean nothing.

speak with your legal counsel (as was advised by a few here) for everything here is just spouting speculation. period.

Can you show us where The Federal Privacy Act talks about representatives of the DOJ?

No, they asked to see a picture ID and date of birth only, no personal information, which would not be a violation of privacy laws, because no personal information is shown.

Only the AG (or his appointed staff) may make an official 2257 inspection. Directnic didn't ask to make a 2257 inspection.

I give up, you're entirely right.

What if the content(ID) was shot in 1997 and the girl was born in 1984?
What does the ID prove in that case? You sort of need full docs to make any use of the ID's..

Yes, that pic/DOB can also contain (depending on the state) social security number, blood type and of course a home address.

No, it would be the "porn people tired of having the US federal government on our heads because we are too fucking stupid to control ourselves" messageboard.

Carry on.

it's called a sharpie marker. Get one.

My bank asked me for a picture ID when I wrote a check for cash yesterday. The stores ask for one when I use my credit card or write a check. They aren't representatives of the DOJ either :thumbsup

DN is loaded with lawyers. I can't imagine they turned Slick off without a reason, but if they did, he has EVERY right to sue them. He already has an attorney. I suspect, like when he first approached this situation by making a post here instead of contacting DirectNic or his attorney, that he again posted here before knowing the story of what's going on.

But AGAIN, for those of you who feel someone's "seeding" me, lol, if DN screwed up, they deserve to be sued.

Same arguments as before. Trust me, anyone shooting CP ain't getting model IDs, and ain't staying in contact with the models after to get a current ID.

CP people don't keep 2257 records... and that is the point.

I fail to see how a bank asking YOU for YOUR id compares to DN asking Slick for the model's id. Third party identification is not first party identification and this argument doesn't stand up.

That is a little different. They didn't ask the model for their IDs, they asked a 3rd party to provide it. But, if you are going to have models that look as young as those, you are likely to be harrassed by someone.

True, I was gonna write something like that. Gold rush days are over, this is business pure and simple.

If your sites and pages are totally legit, I would imagine you have nothing much to worry about..

I don't have any domains with DN - as a business person I know they didn't just close down domains for no reason at all, wouldn't serve a purpose...

Very well said. If only everyone would be smart enough to know that difference. :2 cents:

I have plenty, thanks.. Sharpie it out and you run the risk of them saying you altered the ID.

You seem to need a refresher on why we have 2257 then.

i'm not saying anything one way or the other. but to answer your question... they didn't ask to see everything. they wanted a pic/date of birth... they could have clarified that. however, i am fairly certain that they put some thought into the request before they made it being that they have in house legal staff and were threatening to interrupt someones business.

also... i would speculate that asking for information doesn't violate any privacy laws. providing information in a way that violates privacy laws would. holding someone hostage while requiring them to provide information that is not lawful for them to provide, i doubt means that DirectNIC is violating any federal or state privacy laws. privacy laws are centered around information and how it must be stored and when and how it can be shared in various circumstances and in various situations (medical records, financial records etc etc)

wise words:2 cents:

How would he provide the IDs, if he was using FHGs? Will programs provide those to affiliates?

Damn man I feel for you. I had already made up my mind to move my domains away from them because of the way they are handling this. This just confirms it.. What a bunch of ass hats.

On a side note, I know all your thumbs are sponsor hosted FHG's however even myself being in the teen niche I kinda thought some of your thumbs were a bit pushing it. Not just the teen stuff but even some of the others.

However that's just my personal opinion and I do think DirectNic is way out of line here. I hope you sue the shit out of them because I know your network brings in some good money. They are causing a lot of lost income with this stunt which will be hard as hell to recover.

this is pretty accurate I would guess

wow... this isn't a 2257 inspection dude! Nobody is going to bitch for black lines of un-required info!

Holy shit!