2257 - Is a nonnude photo from a nude gallery covered? - GoFuckYourself.com

V_RocKs · 04-14-2007, 04:34 AM

Someone brought up that a nonnude photo from a nude gallery could be construed as part of a nude "body of work" and therefor need 2257 documentation.

However, a lawyer with half a brain could argue that video cases where video stills are used on the packaging are not considered part of the nude work on the video, therefor, a precedence has already been set on the issue.

A nonnude photo inside a gallery that contains other nude photos does not need 2257.

spacedog · 04-14-2007, 08:35 AM

They say we need 2257 for using a NN thumb if the original image is from a set containing nude.

BoyAlley · 04-14-2007, 08:49 AM

I asked a couple of attorneys this very question, here's what i was told:

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=722569

RawAlex · 04-14-2007, 09:34 AM

V, the problem right now is that the definition of a "work" is very loose indeed. If a model poses for 20 pictures in a row, are they part of the same work or are they each unique instances?

If those still images are stills from a video, is that somehow different than 20 images taken with a still camera? Afterall, the video would be the underlying work, and therefore the images woudl be subject to 2257 if the model gets naked at any point.

It isn't clear. The only way for a US based webmaster or company to be safe is to require documents for all images that appear on an adult site, IMHO.

Good luck.

xxxdesign-net · 04-14-2007, 09:38 AM

so 2257 isnt just for hardcore anymore.. ?

Dollarmansteve · 04-14-2007, 09:38 AM

I was talking at length with someone about 2257 yesterday. I think until there is legal precedent everything is just speculation.

The law is not explicit and we dont know how the authorities will apply the law in court. Until there are some actual cases involving 2257, everything is up in the air.

spacedog · 04-14-2007, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dollarmansteve

I was talking at length with someone about 2257 yesterday. I think until there is legal precedent everything is just speculation.

The law is not explicit and we dont know how the authorities will apply the law in court. Until there are some actual cases involving 2257, everything is up in the air.

Problem with that is that nobody want's to become the victim of a case that would set the precedent.

Ace_luffy · 04-14-2007, 07:15 PM

thanks for the info...

chadknowslaw · 04-14-2007, 07:32 PM

I do not believe that 2257 is triggered by a non-nude photo even if it DID come from a gallery that had nude photos.

However -- I do believe that if an image is cropped from a sexually explicit image, and the new image is not sexually explicit, that 2257 still applies.

Oh yeah, I really AM a lawyer~

spasmo · 04-14-2007, 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chadknowslaw

I do not believe that 2257 is triggered by a non-nude photo even if it DID come from a gallery that had nude photos.

However -- I do believe that if an image is cropped from a sexually explicit image, and the new image is not sexually explicit, that 2257 still applies.

Oh yeah, I really AM a lawyer~

You just saved me a $350 call to Jeffrey Douglas. Thank you!

Please don't bill me.

enriquem21 · 06-20-2007, 12:02 AM

just a question, in case someone do a capture of a nude video, but the crop isn't really nude, it's illegal?, what will happened?

V_RocKs · 06-20-2007, 01:38 AM

Nonnude crop of a nude work is 2257 data in need

JP-pornshooter · 06-20-2007, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chadknowslaw

I do not believe that 2257 is triggered by a non-nude photo even if it DID come from a gallery that had nude photos.

However -- I do believe that if an image is cropped from a sexually explicit image, and the new image is not sexually explicit, that 2257 still applies.

Oh yeah, I really AM a lawyer~

what kind of law do you practice?

D · 06-20-2007, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxdesign-net

so 2257 isnt just for hardcore anymore.. ?

Was it ever for "just hardcore"?

I don't think so.

Nude model = 2257 docs needed.

crockett · 06-20-2007, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spacedog

They say we need 2257 for using a NN thumb if the original image is from a set containing nude.

What gets me is how do they decide what a "set" is?

Say a sponsor has some non nude content up and you only use the NN content.. but at the same time they also have a nude set from the same photo shoot.

The whole law makes no sense at all.

NTSS · 06-20-2007, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoyAlley

I asked a couple of attorneys this very question, here's what i was told:

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=722569

I thought this was common knowledge? I couldn't see how an unaltered non-nude pic would be subject to 2257..

04-14-2007, 04:34 AM	#1
V_RocKs Damn Right I Kiss Ass! Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Cowtown, USA Posts: 32,422	2257 - Is a nonnude photo from a nude gallery covered? Someone brought up that a nonnude photo from a nude gallery could be construed as part of a nude "body of work" and therefor need 2257 documentation. However, a lawyer with half a brain could argue that video cases where video stills are used on the packaging are not considered part of the nude work on the video, therefor, a precedence has already been set on the issue. A nonnude photo inside a gallery that contains other nude photos does not need 2257.

04-14-2007, 09:38 AM	#6
Dollarmansteve Confirmed User Join Date: May 2005 Location: T.O. Posts: 2,849	I was talking at length with someone about 2257 yesterday. I think until there is legal precedent everything is just speculation. The law is not explicit and we dont know how the authorities will apply the law in court. Until there are some actual cases involving 2257, everything is up in the air. __________________ I died.

04-14-2007, 07:15 PM	#8
Ace_luffy www.creationcrew.com Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: CREATIONCREW.COM CREATIONCREW.COM CREATIONCREW.COM CREATIONCREW.COM CREATIONCREW.COM CREATIONCREW.COM Posts: 12,111	thanks for the info... __________________ ++ Adult and Mainstream Websites Designs \| 10 banners for only $50 \| html5 Banners ++ email : [email protected] Telegram : https://t.me/creationcrew \| HTML5/Responsive Site - Div/CSS - ElevatedX - NATs - Wordpress

04-14-2007, 07:32 PM	#9
chadknowslaw Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Phoenix, Arizona Posts: 343	I do not believe that 2257 is triggered by a non-nude photo even if it DID come from a gallery that had nude photos. However -- I do believe that if an image is cropped from a sexually explicit image, and the new image is not sexually explicit, that 2257 still applies. Oh yeah, I really AM a lawyer~ __________________ ChadKnowsLaw

04-14-2007, 08:35 AM	#2
spacedog Yes that IS me. Bitch. Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 14,149	They say we need 2257 for using a NN thumb if the original image is from a set containing nude.

04-14-2007, 08:49 AM	#3
BoyAlley So Fucking Gay Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 19,714	I asked a couple of attorneys this very question, here's what i was told: http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=722569

04-14-2007, 09:34 AM	#4
RawAlex So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In a house. Posts: 9,465	V, the problem right now is that the definition of a "work" is very loose indeed. If a model poses for 20 pictures in a row, are they part of the same work or are they each unique instances? If those still images are stills from a video, is that somehow different than 20 images taken with a still camera? Afterall, the video would be the underlying work, and therefore the images woudl be subject to 2257 if the model gets naked at any point. It isn't clear. The only way for a US based webmaster or company to be safe is to require documents for all images that appear on an adult site, IMHO. Good luck.

04-14-2007, 09:38 AM	#5
xxxdesign-net My hips don't lie Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 10,129	so 2257 isnt just for hardcore anymore.. ?

06-20-2007, 12:02 AM	#11
enriquem21 Registered User Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 32	just a question, in case someone do a capture of a nude video, but the crop isn't really nude, it's illegal?, what will happened?

06-20-2007, 01:38 AM	#12
V_RocKs Damn Right I Kiss Ass! Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Cowtown, USA Posts: 32,422	Nonnude crop of a nude work is 2257 data in need