GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   A new 2257 Thought: Cam Shows (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=328830)

Elli 07-20-2004 09:33 PM

A new 2257 Thought: Cam Shows
 
We are required to keep a list of every hardcore image produced, right? We are also required to note the date of publication of each image.

My webcam is not true streaming, so it uploads a new image every 3 seconds.

So does this mean I need to keep lists of the thousands of images I upload every cam show as well? Even though each image is only viewable for a few seconds?

Thoughts?

Fabuleux 07-20-2004 09:38 PM

A framerate of 0.333 is still video.

Digipimp 07-20-2004 09:40 PM

yes technically you would if the government ever decided to be an asshole about it

AaronM 07-20-2004 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Elli
We are required to keep a list of every hardcore image produced, right? We are also required to note the date of publication of each image.

My webcam is not true streaming, so it uploads a new image every 3 seconds.

So does this mean I need to keep lists of the thousands of images I upload every cam show as well? Even though each image is only viewable for a few seconds?

Thoughts?

Get an attorney. :2 cents:

Elli 07-20-2004 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AaronM
Get an attorney. :2 cents:
Obviously. I was wondering what the rest of the folks thought about it, though. You know, free exchange of ideas and all that claptrap.

InsaneMidget 07-20-2004 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Elli
Obviously. I was wondering what the rest of the folks thought about it, though. You know, free exchange of ideas and all that claptrap.





That sounded a little snippy. Beautiful.

AaronM 07-20-2004 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Elli
Obviously. I was wondering what the rest of the folks thought about it, though. You know, free exchange of ideas and all that claptrap.
On this board...That's as useless as tits on a boar.

Only a small percentage of these people are compliant or even understand the current law. Even fewer for the proposed regulations.

I've decided to stop helping people with this issue for free. I pay good money to lawyers for this shit and so can they.

If people can't afford an attorney who knows this shit then maybe they should not be fucking up this business for the rest of us anyway.

Elli 07-20-2004 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by InsaneMidget
That sounded a little snippy. Beautiful.
I am only human. I've heard "get a lawyer" so much lately that it's getting on my nerves. The neccessity of a lawyer is obvious in this case. But that shouldn't stop me from asking what the general population thinks about the problem. Maybe my thought will help someone else? Who knows?

SleazyDream 07-20-2004 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AaronM
On this board...That's as useless as tits on a boar.

Only a small percentage of these people are compliant or even understand the current law. Even fewer for the proposed regulations.

I've decided to stop helping people with this issue for free. I pay good money to lawyers for this shit and so can they.

If people can't afford an attorney who knows this shit then maybe they should not be fucking up this business for the rest of us anyway.

sometimes those that think they understand it don't look forward either

Elli 07-20-2004 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AaronM
On this board...That's as useless as tits on a boar.

Only a small percentage of these people are compliant or even understand the current law. Even fewer for the proposed regulations.

Good point.

Quote:

I've decided to stop helping people with this issue for free. I pay good money to lawyers for this shit and so can they.
Another good point; though it sounds rather selfish, I can see where you're coming from.

We will all need lawyers by the end of this. BUT this is new to the lawyers, too. It would be interesting to see where they agree and where they differ, don't you think?

AaronM 07-20-2004 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Elli
I am only human. I've heard "get a lawyer" so much lately that it's getting on my nerves. The neccessity of a lawyer is obvious in this case. But that shouldn't stop me from asking what the general population thinks about the problem. Maybe my thought will help someone else? Who knows?
The general population around here are idiots. 2257 has been hashed, rehashed, and beaten to death too many times to count yet these stupid bastards are still not compliant. That's not about to change.

History repeats itself. Everybody panicked with the amber alert stuff as if 2257 was new then they all calmed down and chose to ignore it as usual....The same thing will happen again....Until prosecutions are made.

Elli 07-20-2004 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AaronM
The general population around here are idiots. 2257 has been hashed, rehashed, and beaten to death too many times to count yet these stupid bastards are still not compliant. That's not about to change.

History repeats itself. Everybody panicked with the amber alert stuff as if 2257 was new then they all calmed down and chose to ignore it as usual....The same thing will happen again....Until prosecutions are made.

Call me a foolish optimist, then. I like to think sometimes I can be helpful to someone or that I can learn something here.

AaronM 07-20-2004 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SleazyDream
sometimes those that think they understand it don't look forward either
Damn...Maybe I should bury my head in the sand and forget all about those phone conversations with my attorney and Brandon today.

I should also stop the development of the new file system I am working on.

I wanna be like the rest of the sheep. :glugglug

AaronM 07-20-2004 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Elli
Call me a foolish optimist, then. I like to think sometimes I can be helpful to someone or that I can learn something here.
I fully appreciate that. But my advice still rings true. No matter what anybody on GFY says, you should take those questions to an attorney.

Jace 07-20-2004 09:58 PM

if you are the model, you only have to have 2257 once per model

you don't have to have seperate docs for each image, that is just stupid to think...by that rationale, when you buy a set of pics from matrix content, you will get 150-175 copies of the 2257 docs...ROFL

if it is your site and your cam show, you just need the 2257 docs once for the whole site for you

Elli 07-20-2004 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JaceXXX
if you are the model, you only have to have 2257 once per model

you don't have to have seperate docs for each image, that is just stupid to think...by that rationale, when you buy a set of pics from matrix content, you will get 150-175 copies of the 2257 docs...ROFL

if it is your site and your cam show, you just need the 2257 docs once for the whole site for you

No. Each hardcore image's filename must be kept in the database, cross indexed with the publication date of the image and all the model's names.

xxxdesign-net 07-20-2004 10:01 PM

I personally want to know what will happen to AVS network.. are theyr responsible for their members' sites..?
What about PPV sites like aben?
Sites with ripped DVDs.. etc..

Elli 07-20-2004 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AaronM
I fully appreciate that. But my advice still rings true. No matter what anybody on GFY says, you should take those questions to an attorney.
I have no problem with that. I agree with you whole heartedly there.

FightThisPatent 07-20-2004 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Elli

So does this mean I need to keep lists of the thousands of images I upload every cam show as well? Even though each image is only viewable for a few seconds?

Thoughts?



Video and Images are both covered under 2257.

You don't need a 2257 record per image. Since you are the same model, you have the same model release.. your production is most likely your continually running show.. whereas photographers have their works done in sets (and then hopefully registered at copyright office).

The major problem for single/solo sites is that you would need to list your home address (since that is your place of business) for records.. which means stalkers and "fans" would know where you live.

There are many nuances to this biz that the DOJ does not understand, and in addition, everyone's situation is different, that's why you do need to consult with an attorney about your specific situation.

I think threads like these are a great place to gain information, and to allow you to formulate the right questions to ask your attorney, rather than act as a replacement.

By doing as much of your research, you can reduce the amount of hourly time you spend with an attorney.

People who run their cams through a cam network can be protected by having the cam network store their 2257 records so that arrangement protects your personal identity.


-brandon

Jace 07-20-2004 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Elli
No. Each hardcore image's filename must be kept in the database, cross indexed with the publication date of the image and all the model's names.
rofl, that ain't what our lawyer said....but what does he know

toddler 07-20-2004 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JaceXXX
rofl, that ain't what our lawyer said....but what does he know
you might rofl less. A smart man/woman checks with more than one. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse that stands up. Speaking as someone with 5 lawyers in my family, I know.

AaronM 07-20-2004 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Elli
We will all need lawyers by the end of this.
"We" should all have them already.

FightThisPatent 07-20-2004 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Elli
No. Each hardcore image's filename must be kept in the database, cross indexed with the publication date of the image and all the model's names.


The cross indexing function applies to primary record keepers, and applies to keeping track of a model with all their aliases, stage names, professional names, and production.

Every time a photo shoot is done, the model release is needed that captures this info.. repeat.. EVERY time you do a shoot.... technically, if you shoot a girl on monday and you shoot her again on friday, you need another form filled out because her hair color could have changed, and it's a different production.

For elli, as a webcam model, your "production" is that one continual stream, so you don't need to do this cross indexing stuff. You are the model and there is just one production. If you have people in your video that are doing stuff that require 2257, then you would include them with their model info.

My focus is more on the webmaster side being a secondary record keeper. Primary Record Keepers have more things to do to comply with current and proposed regulations.

So many content producers are not doing their 2257 record keeping properly and also don't consult with legal.


-brandon

ps. i think i was a TV attorney in another life

Kimmykim 07-20-2004 10:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JaceXXX
rofl, that ain't what our lawyer said....but what does he know
I'd talk to another lawyer, I've heard at least 5 so far directly take it to mean that.

FightThisPatent 07-20-2004 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Elli
Each hardcore image's filename must be kept in the database, cross indexed with the publication date of the image and all the model's names.

This is correct from my understanding and consultations.

If the DOJ asks for the records of a specific record, you need to be able to point to the primary record keeper and to the model info.

(small plug - this is what 2257lookup.com service does).


-brandon

ps. in case anyone is thinking i have contradicted myself.. I have been replying in general to 2257 requirements along with trying to help answer Elli's specific questions. For her case, since the image is updated (ie. overwritten), it's not stored continually as a separate file (ie. a growing still image library). If you do have a growing image library (and thus a perfect example of why an attorney is needed to address your specific situation), then you would need to be able to cross reference the image, epecially if you have other "performers" in the still shots doing "sexually explicit" things.

Elli 07-20-2004 10:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FightThisPatent
This is correct from my understanding and consultations.

If the DOJ asks for the records of a specific record, you need to be able to point to the primary record keeper and to the model info.

(small plug - this is what 2257lookup.com service does).


-brandon

Thanks for the info, Brandon! You seem to be quite on top of things. :)

I'm glad I wasn't totally off base there. I'm sorry if I came off sounding like a know-it-all. That was one of the parts of the document that really surprised me, so I thought I remembered it pretty well.

tony286 07-20-2004 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kimmykim
I'd talk to another lawyer, I've heard at least 5 so far directly take it to mean that.
I see alot of copying and pasting of links in Jaces future. Too bad we couldnt hire the mexican guys who hang by home depot in the morning looking for work. Get 10 of them in here copying and pasting links for me . I would be done in no time lol.

FightThisPatent 07-20-2004 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Elli
Thanks for the info, Brandon! You seem to be quite on top of things. :)



I don't want to come across as a "know it all" either... 2257 current statutes and the new proposed regulations are very complex, vague, and broad.

I listen, talk, read, and learn as much as I can and try to distill the info into more simpler, laymen terms.... which I am sure may make me oversimply things.. but.. atleast it's a start to begin looking for the answers to your questions.


-brandon

Elli 07-20-2004 10:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tony404
I see alot of copying and pasting of links in Jaces future. Too bad we couldnt hire the mexican guys who hang by home depot in the morning looking for work. Get 10 of them in here copying and pasting links for me . I would be done in no time lol.
I have a few so far:

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth...hreadid=326698
http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=327790&perpage=50&pagen umber=1
http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=327050&perpage=50&pagen umber=1

Elli 07-20-2004 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FightThisPatent

I listen, talk, read, and learn as much as I can and try to distill the info into more simpler, laymen terms

I'm just trying to do the same thing over here. :)

FightThisPatent 07-20-2004 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Elli
I'm just trying to do the same thing over here. :)

I think what would help if some graphic artists would draw a Madden style illustration that shows the webmaster or content producer as the quarterback, and the movement of the play that leads to the touchdown (ie. 2257 compliance).

ok, corny imagery, but a pic is worth a thousand words.

:1orglaugh


-brandon

Jace 07-20-2004 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tony404
I see alot of copying and pasting of links in Jaces future. Too bad we couldnt hire the mexican guys who hang by home depot in the morning looking for work. Get 10 of them in here copying and pasting links for me . I would be done in no time lol.
hey now, i am simply referring to a single girl site with only that girl featured in the site..which from my understanding, is what she runs

so, by the new laws, I need to have the same 2257 docs for every photo shoot of my wife? so, we have 250 sets, i need to have 250 duplicate 2257 docs in a filing cabinet? each referencing different shoots?

Elli 07-20-2004 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FightThisPatent
I think what would help if some graphic artists would draw a Madden style illustration that shows the webmaster or content producer as the quarterback, and the movement of the play that leads to the touchdown (ie. 2257 compliance).

ok, corny imagery, but a pic is worth a thousand words.

:1orglaugh


-brandon

Or one of those "this is your brain on drugs" style photos.

"this is you shooting anal sex. this is you not keeping records. This is you getting anal sex from your cell mate. Any questions?"

:1orglaugh

tony286 07-20-2004 10:37 PM

One of the things my lawyer did say was until it goes to court somethings are going to be murky. Thats where the big guns in our business are going to have to step up, I cant understand why they havent yet. with my 9000 images this sucks moosedick I cant image for a big company what the costs are going to be. IF I was a big dog I would had my lawyers filing suits and injunctions before the words finished coming out of Johnny A's mouth.

Elli 07-20-2004 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JaceXXX
hey now, i am simply referring to a single girl site with only that girl featured in the site..which from my understanding, is what she runs

so, by the new laws, I need to have the same 2257 docs for every photo shoot of my wife? so, we have 250 sets, i need to have 250 duplicate 2257 docs in a filing cabinet? each referencing different shoots?

Not different forms. They want a database, like in MS Access. Cross referenced by fields: model's name, date of shoot, filename, date of publication, URL of publication. As far as I know.

tony286 07-20-2004 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JaceXXX
hey now, i am simply referring to a single girl site with only that girl featured in the site..which from my understanding, is what she runs

so, by the new laws, I need to have the same 2257 docs for every photo shoot of my wife? so, we have 250 sets, i need to have 250 duplicate 2257 docs in a filing cabinet? each referencing different shoots?

No but you need the url of each image going back to a model release, name, aliases ,production date cross indexed.

Jace 07-20-2004 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Elli
Not different forms. They want a database, like in MS Access. Cross referenced by fields: model's name, date of shoot, filename, date of publication, URL of publication. As far as I know.
or a filing cabinet, which is what I use....stupid shit if that is true...I have NO CLUE when half this was taken or the date published....

Jace 07-20-2004 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tony404
No but you need the url of each image going back to a model release, name, aliases ,production date cross indexed.
haha, so i need 22,000 urls referencing 22,000 images????

hahahaha..oh wow...

Elli 07-20-2004 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JaceXXX
or a filing cabinet, which is what I use....stupid shit if that is true...I have NO CLUE when half this was taken or the date published....
If you are keeping all this cross-indexing in a file cabinet, then holy cow man. Why do it the hard way? Keep it all in one database and it'll keep itself in order.

I don't know that info, either. Esp. for all the CDs and DVD's I have out. And even if I remove them from sale and start from scratch, does that really help much? Even if a picture is not currently online or available to surfers, if it's in my collection and has been previously published, should I have the records for it? Gah!

rowan 07-20-2004 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by FightThisPatent
ps. in case anyone is thinking i have contradicted myself.. I have been replying in general to 2257 requirements along with trying to help answer Elli's specific questions. For her case, since the image is updated (ie. overwritten), it's not stored continually as a separate file (ie. a growing still image library). If you do have a growing image library (and thus a perfect example of why an attorney is needed to address your specific situation), then you would need to be able to cross reference the image, epecially if you have other "performers" in the still shots doing "sexually explicit" things.
Don't forget that there are both websites and consumer apps that will automatically archive this sort of cam "show." This may affect your interpretation...


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:33 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123