![]() |
2257 ruled constitutional
|
http://www.photoattorney.com/uploade...257-769583.jpg
Quote:
The most important points I took from the article are that the last inspection was 2007, the FBI dismantled their 2257 inspection program in early 2008, and the DOJ has shown no interest in resuming inspections in 6 years. :stoned ADG |
saw that as well, lot more tax dollars to be wasted:2 cents:
|
I think everyone assumed it was unconstitutional even the FBI and DOJ hence why the never bothered to do any inspections
|
The ruling indicates that inspections at "bona fide residences of producers" are unconstitutional without a warrant.
businesses are not |
bad for porners...good for mom and pop sites
|
From my point of view this is a lose-lose with a sweetener added of the Fourth Amendment warrantless searches unconstitutional ONLY at personal residences. |
Quote:
|
I have to confess, every time I try to delve into the details of 2257, I get a whopping headache .. so can anyone capsulize what all this means for affiliate webmasters?
Thanks. |
Additional coverage here: http://www.ynot.com/content/119021-d...itutional.html
|
So I take it they are probably going to start enforcing secondary producer again and all these tubes with "user submitted" content are going to be immune from it while the people who are legitimate will have to deal with it?
|
Quote:
|
The implication for secondary producers that work from home could be quite significant. If I understand this correctly, since it's also a primary residence, DOJ would need a search warrant in order to do a 2257 inspection in such a situation. Search warrants require probable cause and also limit the scope of the search.
|
Quote:
|
bump for a real business thread
|
It would be great if they defined the tubes as "producers". I'd love to see them sweat a 2257 inspection.
We were the 2nd inspection by the FBI back in the day and passed with no issue. I'm all for it. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Funny, but kinda serious in a way, he has about every model out there.... |
Quote:
The tubes are defined as "secondary producers" now. Anyone who "publishes sexually explicit content" is a "producer". |
This is my take on what's most important in Judge Baylson's curious Opinion.
http://www.xxxlaw.com/articles/baylson.html No, there's nothing in the Opinion ever requiring warrants. Start reading at page 63 of Judge Baylson's Opinion and start reading closely at page 68. He's all across the boards and rambles his way into a finding that no other court has come close to. He says 2257 Inspections don't need a warrant, and while he is not touching the statute, he's concerned with the Regulations. He won't expressly determine them to be facially unconstitutional. He says it works with advance notice when the records are in a bona fide home, not a warrant. He then seems to excuse custodians who go on vacation and don't comply with the Regulations that require availability for inspection - and the presence of the custodian - at least 20 hours per week - at page 69. But he never directly deals with the Regulations insofar as they require those 20 hours per week. And he doesn't begin to explain why the situation in the home, in that respect, should be different in an office or studio. This ramble around the issues is honestly difficult if you are looking for a logical, coherent judicial determination. The words that come to mind are "peculiar" and "curious" with regard to what he has to say about home inspections. The word "wrong" comes to mind about the whole document readily. |
Would this setup mean you cannot be inspected for 2257?
You live somewhere in the US. You place your servers outside of the US. You place the main company that owns the rights and - more or less - everything else, outside of the US. You operate out of a daughter company of the main company based in the US? (since you need to pay bills in the US and get salary, I presume you need to be incorporated in the US). Purely theoretical of course, since I am not actually in the US. Neither is any of my companies. |
Joe, I didn't have the benefit of reading the memo thanks for posting it |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:36 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123