Looking for a CA lawyer for this 2257 bs

I don't think people realize how big this really is...

According to an article I read...I think it was AVN.....95% of the people are not compliant as is. Why should they care about any new laws?

Ignorant fucks.

Well I guess thats 95% less competition, I can't wait

I do...

Just dumped 120,000 photos, that we could not get 2257 docs for, because the photographer died, or went out of business, etc etc etc, and bought brand new content... Now our members love us even more, and we're 100% compliant with the new regs.. :D

Where can we REALLY get the facts about this crap ?

Tgps
Galleries
Etc.......

You sir...Are just like every other idiot around here.

You did not read the proposed regulations or consult with an attorney who knew their shit.

Congrats on wasting your money.

I wonder how many more of these fucking retards will do this same shit.

Hit me up bro...I'll give you what I know. Beyond that....Talk to a qualified attorney.

http://www.regulations.gov/freddocs/04-13792.htm

So i guess it's time to pack and leave...


Who's moving overseas, where BIG BROTHER and A.S.H.C.R.O.F.T sick fucks can't do a thing ?

I'm confused...
If 95% aren't compliant as is
And Ashhahahahaha wants to shut us all down...

Why (from what I've heard) has he made ZERO 2257 raids?

But is this shit like PASSED ?
I doubt it........

Can you imagine the sum of work for them to check out everything.

Fuck they can't grab Bin Laden
I think it's like winning the lotery, if your ass is on the line well.....

Wasting my money??? Nahhhh. Content is an investment..

And actually I did read the proposed regulations, AND consulted an attorney that knows his shit...

With the content we dumped, there was no possible way to provide the documentation required by the new proposed regulations, hence it was going to have to be dumped anyway. If the photographer is no longer around, or the content company dead and bured a long time ago, how prey tell would I get proof of age...

WIth the content we bought and our currrent stock, we are in the process of doing the following:

Creating the documentation in paper form and in accordance to section 75.2 Maintenance of records.

We are also in the process of complying with section 75.3 Categorization of records.

Section 75.4 Location of records.
Section 75.6 Exemption statement.
and Section 75.8 Location of the statement.

SO yes, I and my lawyers have done our fucking homework, perhaps you should do yours and not jump to conclusions that everyone is just a fucking retard....

you already have the database with the URL locations of each picture? Dang, you work quick!

Hummm he's got a point there but let's stick to the topic please

Nope, didn't say we were finished, just that we're working on it... It hasn't been passed yet, so we're not in panic mode to get it all finished yet...

Isnt' there a grandfather clause for all that existing shit?

I believe anything produced before Novermber 1 1990 is exempt, but i'm not a lawyer, so don't quote me on that...

If you think this has to be passed by Congress then you really need to look at what a regulation is.

Changes to regulations do not need to be passed by anyone but the Attorney General.

It doesn't go before Congress for a vote and no-one in the administration gives one single shit about costs to us or the privacy concerns of our models.

The Attorney General will sign the regulation and that will then bring it into force.

Costs and privacy are non-starters - they want to shut down the porn business and this is one way they can get rid of a lot of us very quickly.

Oh - and BTW - the regulation will still be on the books regardless of which party wins the election and it will stay on the books to come back and bite us in the future.

If they don't get us this time they probably will the next time a republican gets his hands on power.

Jay,

I will hook you up with my partners icq.

Thanks Cory.

15 responses down and somebody finally answers my question.

Typical.

Ok. He is going over all the "ins and outs" and establishing a business philosophy for our MGPs, as well as some others that he works with.

He said it will take him a couple of days, at which point, he will talk / icq or whatever with you over it all. He said it was no problem, he deals with compliancy / legal issues for aliving

So probably by Tuesday at the latest. I will get him to contact you.

There is a good chance that he will be in Huntington Beach tomorrow to have some drinks with us as well. Hopefully we will see you then, I will call you.

yes, which is what makes all these people taking content from 1980 and trying to find docs for it funny

Bla bla bla


If your attorney had done his homework as you have stated then they would have explained section 75.2 to you a little better and you would not have dumped any content....With this in mind....You are still a fucking retard.

Gee....Ya think?



Not to mention certain idiots dumping content.

Thanks again - it's on tomorrow - it's US open here in HB and there will be sluts everywhere.

Since we are on the subject what about this:
http://gofuckyourself.com/showthread...hreadid=330282

Going offshore.

I would like to know why some of our great RICH affiliate programs or some of the self-proclaimed millionair webmasters around here not challenging this.

From what I understand, and I have a Masters in Political Science so I know a little something about this, though not nearly as qualified as an attorney to deal with it, there are several key constitutional concerns that can in fact put an end to this change in regulation.

1. The models privacy being a huge issue, and no it doesn't matter if Asshat doesn't care about their privacy, the point blank legal discussion is that you are now putting thet models REAL NAME, birthdate, and state they currently reside in in the hands of anybody who wants it.

Hell I am not an internet genious by any means but if I want to track someone down and stalk them I need less information than that to do it.

2. This simply makes it impossible to do business for a lot of TGP owners that do not supply have their own content. The guys who simply crop and post thumbs for 100's of galleries a week cannot possibly keep all of that information.

Not everyone in this business is a millionair work-a-holic, some of us are merly trying to pay our bills and suppliment our incomes.


Everyone here keeps saying the administration does not care about the models privacy or our concerns, but quite frankly it doesn't fucking matter. The regulations can be challenged in court, on several very strong factors, and in court it doesn't if they give a shit or not, THEY ARE IN COURT DISCUSSING LEGAL ISSUES and their defense of the changes in regulations cannot be, "We do not care about that."


So anyone going to challenge that? You sponsors programs know for a fact you need us little guys promoting the hell out of you or you wouldnt deal with us to begin with. So you better start thinking about protecting us.

Jeffrey Douglas is your man.
Hes been my lawyer for 2257 since 1996.
He got Max Hardcore off the hook.

http://www.lawyers.com/jdouglaslaw/

Tell him Matt from Matt's Models sent you.

heres a bit about the Max Hardcore thing and his reference to Jeffrey Douglas:

http://www.ainews.com/story/6782/

The people who have the kind of money that you are referring to also remember the days when there were a lot less people in this industry and there was a lot more money being made.

The average affiliate is a fucking moron and a huge pain in the ass to the affilate programs. Only myself and pimpdog from Epic Cash have the balls to tell you this....Basically because neither one of us want to deal with these stupid fuckers if we don't have to.

Thin the herds.

By the way,

One very important thing to consider here is.

YOU CANNOT PUT SOMEBODY IN JAIL FOR NOT HAVING THE PROPER PAPERWORK!!!!!

Catching someone with an underage model on their site is one thing but your going to throw a harmless webmaster in jail for not having a 30 year old's id on hand when they raid you is quite another and I doubt any court in the country would see fit to send you to jail for a clerical error.

LOL

you might wanna ask Mike Jones about that one dude.
http://www.avnonline.com/index.php?P...ntent_ID=83005

No shit.

What about the BIG hosting players ?
I'm sure they have views on this. How the hell we don't hear from them cause if i was a big hosting company, i would check this out ASP !!!!!
Lots and lots of people are going to move away.

Oh yeah, internet was created so it can't be destroyed (by the army) beleive me, porn won't die because the US decides it's time to pull the plug

So funny that they think they can own the world

Ya u can try Mr.Greg piccionelli Tel # is 310 553-3375 ext 520 I beleive a great guy . Good luck to u .By the way u r right it is important issue we have to deal with it.

This shit gives me a headache, who wants to start a resource center for this bullshit?

a discussion center for legal advice obtained + concerns / questions.

The record-keeping requirements apply to ``[w]hoever produces'' the
material in question. 18 U.S.C. 2257(a). The statute defines
``produces'' as ``to produce, manufacture, or publish any book,
magazine, periodical, film, video tape, computer generated image,
digital image, or picture, or other similar matter and includes the
duplication, reproduction, or reissuing of any such matter, but does
not include mere distribution or any other activity which does not
involve hiring, contracting for[,] managing, or otherwise arranging for
the participation of the performers depicted.'' 18 U.S.C. 2257(h)(3).


but does
not include mere distribution or any other activity which does not
involve hiring, contracting for[,] managing, or otherwise arranging for
the participation of the performers depicted.'' 18 U.S.C. 2257(h)(3).

Bastards trying to cover everything

Damn I need a lawyer... or hell I might just sell hentai. Can't make me get 2257 info for a damn toon.

OK - here's another question. I just talked to a lawyer and he said that the new regs applied only to page published after the 8/24 deadline.

I'm not sure that I believe this 100%. Isn't every time you log onto a webpage isn't it published again? How about modifying it?

thats a good thing.. chances of getting screwed is less, when everyone else is not compliant..

He's right.

Section 75.2 paragraph D.

That's great info, but I wonder what the criteria is going to be "when a page is published" - if you run a thumb TGP and you list a gallery -- when the gallery is listed and the tumb apprears on your page...at that time the thumb is now "published" on your page.

Do you have o have the licence for that thumb when the feds come to call?

This thumb situation does not effect me, but I'm just trying to make and example.

You'll wish you didnt do that in about 3 months.

Like politicians are going to listen to pornographers

Greg Piccionelli
Brull Piccionelli Sarno Braun & Vradenburgh
(310) 553-3375 ex. 520

He is the best in the industry....let him know i referred you :-)

Looks to me that we only have to have the new records system with anything produced or publiched after the effective date

Records. Proposed 28 CFR 75.2 contains a new paragraph (d)
providing for a forward application of the provision of the rule to
require that any record that is created for a performer after the
effective date of the final rule must include updating of related
records to reflect the current standards. This requirement is not a
retroactive application, but a requirement that any future change in
the records must ensure that all records relating to that performer are
complete. The proposed rule will establish an implementation timeframe
that is the minimum effective date rule required under the
Administrative Procedure Act. See 5 U.S.C. 553(d). Accordingly,
producers will be required to comply with the regulations 30 days after
publication of a final rule.

Yes, We at www.WorldWideContent.com are taking these new laws and issues serious and will be providing all webmasters who purchase license to any of our content with model release and id's.

March 26th, 1992 the way it seems to read now, which is very strange since all the video producers use July 1 1995 currently.

Jeffrey Douglas or Paul Cambria would both make nice choices if you're looking still Jay --

Serious shit


Internet Definitions. To bring the regulations up to date with the
2003 Amendments, the definition of a producer has been modified in proposed 28 CFR 75.1. Persons who manage the content of computer sites or services are considered secondary producers. An Internet service provider (ISP) is not a producer under this definition;

A secondary producer is any person who produces, assembles,
manufactures, publishes, duplicates, reproduces, or reissues a book, magazine, periodical, film, videotape, a computer-generated image, digital image, or picture, or other matter intended for commercial distribution that contains a visual depiction of actual sexually explicit conduct, or who inserts on a computer site or service a digital image of, or otherwise manages the content of a computer site or service that contains a visual depiction of, actual sexually explicit conduct, including any person who enters into a contract, agreement, or conspiracy to do any of the foregoing.

A producer who is a secondary producer as defined in Sec.
75.1(c) may satisfy the requirements of this part to create and
maintain records by accepting from the primary producer, as defined in Sec. 75.1(c), copies of the records described in paragraph (a) of this section. Such a secondary producer shall also keep records of the name and address of the primary producer from whom he received copies of the records.

service producers to maintain a ``hard'' physical or electronic copy of the actual depiction with the identification and age files, along with and linked to all accession information, such as each URL used for that depiction. This ensures that all of the data about all of the people in the depictions can be accessed to ensure that none of the people in the depictions are minors.

(i) A copy of the depiction, and

(ii) Where the depiction is published on an Internet Computer site or service, a copy of any URL associated with the depiction.

(2) Any name, other than each performer's legal name, ever used by the performer, including the performer's maiden name, alias, nickname, stage name, or professional name. For any performer portrayed in such a depiction made after May 26, 1992, such names shall be indexed by the title or identifying number of the book, magazine, film, videotape, computer-generated image, digital image, picture, URL, or other matter.

(3) Records required to be created and maintained under this part shall be organized alphabetically, or numerically where appropriate, by the legal name of the performer (by last or family name, then first or given name), and shall be indexed or cross-referenced to each alias or other name used and to each title or identifying number of the book, magazine, film, videotape, computer-generated image, digital image, picture, URL, or other matter.

(b) A producer who is a secondary producer as defined in Sec.
75.1(c) may satisfy the requirements of this part to create and
maintain records by accepting from the primary producer, as defined in Sec. 75.1(c), copies of the records described in paragraph (a) of this section. Such a secondary producer shall also keep records of the name and address of the primary producer from whom he received copies of the records.

I tell you what...I swear -- I will contact every single lawyer I can and PAY FOR IT just do get all this shit out in the open. A big part of this frustration is all of this armchair-lawyering...nobody seems to be on the same page.

I'll meet with at least 2 or 3 next week and get all opinions, then will publish what I can infer from what they told me.

After that - you musther fuckers better kiss my ass and thank me for how much money I just saved you.

Keep 'em coming.