Are content providers charging for IDs? (Compliancy docs)
 

I heard that some content providers are charging webmasters / programs for obtaining ids on previously purchased content.

This could add up?

No?

This the new norm?

YEP >> SOBE GIRL strikes again. That will teach everyone to buy my content from that SCMUCK

$10 per set on a guy I know.

That would cost a lot.

I have to wonder if this is avoidance at giving out the Lic.

Hmmmm....why avoid that? :feels-hot

Sobe asked me for $10 per id set, so at 200 sets we are talking $2000 for content which was already purchased and all paid for.

Good thing is that I don't use his crappy content anyways. :ak47:

We and all our affiliate sites will not charge a cent for any documentation.

We value our customers and do not see that this should be a burden to them.

Its the people making the laws thats the cause of all this not the customers or the content providers.

We will soon even be posting pages for those who have purchased in the past to get documentation. ( with proof of purchase of course)

We see it as the cost of doing business.

Are you charging for these docs?

Somehow I doubt it.

There you go.:thumbsup

Ill do it for $9 per doc set :Graucho

There needs to be a url to list the content providers who are not giving out the ids.


I have contacted several and still no reply. I don't buy alot of hardstuff but I want ids anyway.

LOL

This is either a cheap way to make a profit or the requested information is not available.

:2 cents:

I agree.

I am hoping more of them post here.

we don't charge anything for that :winkwink:

It is called: screw them on the back end..you might get people to pay and you may even make a penny or two but your customers will get hip to your greedy ways and find any excuse NOT to do biz in the future. Every biz has fixed cost (labor overhead etc)
that should be part of your fixed cost.

The reason webmasters are being charged for this is the reason that the authorities are clamping down on the industry.
An industry which cannot govern it's own is one which gets scrutiny from outside.

This is not meant as a general criticism of any particular person. It is meant as a general crisicism of how some industry people are bringing it down for themselves, for their fellow industry people, for surfers and for society.

Get rid of the bad eggs within this industry or everyone suffers, as you are now.

Anyone tries that with me, I'll out their ass on the boards and they'll lose a lot of business over it (mine and anyone else that has any common sense).

simple if a content provider does this, tell them where to go

:thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup

I agree.

The name is posted in this thread.

$10 per set, I couldn't agree more.

It is few and far between when you will see my name attached to a thread like this, but I just can't believe it.

The charges on this are worth more than the content.

I seriously wonder about the validity of the info, if you catch my drift.

i wish someone could explain to me why providers feel the need to charge for ids and releases. charging for that should never be a thought.

the provider is the copyright holder and producer. when a contract for purchase is signed, the providers info should be all over the documentation.

does it take that much time to copy this shit or burn it to cd where charges now have to be added to the cost of the content? maybe the model should charge as well for providing legit info. that is the only way charging customers for ids and releases makes any sense at all.

i will never do business with someone who a, refuses to give me a copy of this info and b, will charge me for said info.

2257 does not apply to non-explicit material

all our stuff is delivered with all necessary papers without any discussion and we do not charge a single cent on top for that.
:)

Hmmm...Not a bad idea actually. After all...Time is money and sine there is no law in affect or proposed that would require these docs...contrary to popular belief......

If somebody wants to waste my time to do that then perhaps they should be billed for it.

Now if there were any sort of law that required this....That would be a differet story. :glugglug

Because the license is none of your fucking business. It's a document between the model and the producer that has NOTHING to do with you.

What you would need under the proposed regulations is 2257 information and docs...THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE A RELEASE.

Put me at the top of that list. :thumbsup

Correction....This is assuming that Cory meant release and not license....and it's the release that is none of your business.

No Aaron, I did mean the License and any pertinent document required by law.

The guy purchased a decent amount from him, likely more than the guy gets normally.

The $10 charge amounted to $2000 all said and done to get the guy compliant.

At least from my understanding.

I will say his name again .. SOBE GIRL. As far as I know he is the only one doing this. No wonder he is banned.

And Aaron.. I agree. Release does not need leave producers hands.. its between producer and model. Unless content sold exclusive.

If you're talking about the one I think, he had the IDs scanned in his own site, just grab them ;) Now, charging you 10 bucks for something he already has is not very smart on his part, but well, a few bucks now and nothing for tomorrow, I guess :(

We always provide with everything. Furthermore, we always ask our customers if they have some special request when it comes to docs and forms. Of course, we only shoot exclusive, but all producers have the ID, is not a big deal for them to send those Ids by mail or put then in an accesible page. Just my :2 cents:

I have never purchased content form him, nor would I. I have people I deal with.

All said, my friend did, he posted in this thread, but rarely post. It just kind of threw me for a loop that a content provider would try that.

AaronM
pretty much summed it up...

we will cross that bridge when we get there... as for the "proposed amendments" it would require an ID to prove age.. not model releases.

but time is money.. and the original contract (if you read it).. clearly covered what was provided at the time of transaction...

if the laws change.. lots of time and money is required to pull ids... xerox or electronic scan them... etc..

if your state adds a new law saying your car has to be "ultra low" emmisions.. and you cannot get it inspected without it complying..

can you go to the car dealer and have them fix or change the emmisions for free???

I"M NOT saying that we would charge for them.. but just pointing out a simple argument... for any content provider that may see the need to charge a small fee... :)

I understand your business logic, but at the end of the day, I want people to know who is charging the fees and how much.

Many providers, such as many in this thread, would not charge good customers for the sufficient docs.

Just my :2 cents:

The problem is sorting out a good customer from a potential threat to a model.

Show me a current law OR a proposed regulation that states that I must provide docs to any of my past clients.

The only people that get docs of this nature are my exclusive clients who request them. Once the new regulation goes into affect, I will happily supply the needed docs to any client that the law requires.....But NOT to those ones that it does not require.

Why do I not give them to everybody currently? Because I don't trust most of you people and the law does not require me to do so.

That makes sense.

My whole thing revolves around documentation required, I think most content providers are readily capable of assisting clientel in that respect.

I also think this new law is a big opening for the stalkers on these girls, that info really should stay between the content producer and the girl.

Continually updated FAQ at:
http://www.2257lookup.com/2257ForWebmasters.html

Recent entry regarding Model ID info:


I have finally figured out the way to do the records.

I have talked to some content producers who are part of 2257lookup (like Norman from Matrix) to ask them if they could provide me with the digitized copy of the Model ID and Release.

I will take the .jpg images and covert them into an .AVI file which will then be encoded with DRM.

These files will be sent back to the content producer so they can hand them out with their image sets.

On the issue of blackened ID... some content producers block out everytying except the birthdate and the photo.

Others leave the real name and birthdate and photo.

Showing the real name is a serious privacy issue for the model and i think that any kind of blacked out ID could be considered "tampered" by the government.

I am conferring with our General Counsel, but I think we are going to suggest our content producers to include the blackened ID only revealing the birthdate AND have the DRM file as an alternate record.

Webmasters who subscribe to the 2257lookup service will get scanned to create the cross index report, and will also get all the DRM model info as well.

In the event that the DOJ comes knocking on your door and asks the question "who is the primary record keeper of THIS specific image" and then the directive "show me her model info"...

The webmaster will find the name of the file on their website, open up the 2257lookup report, move their finger over to the column that shows who is the content producer, along with which set the image came from along with the filename of the model DRM file.

The webmaster will go to a web page to request a license key (that might include the DOJ agent name, number, etc) and then get a timed license that will unlock the file and they can view the "movie" that shows the digital ID and release.

There is no charge to content producers to be apart of 2257lookup and a modest fee for webmasters to gain access to this service that will greatly assist secondary record keeping requirements.

The subscriptions to the service will ensure that the DRM server is always up and running so that the file can be unlocked.

This approach might be overkill and maybe never used, but it's one that will surely comply with any 2257 statues, current, proposed, or future...and content producers are interested and doing the work necessary to add this new functionality to 2257lookup.


-brandon

I'm glad to see I am not the only one worried about both the privacy and safety of models. I can understand the gov't wanting to make sure everyone is 18 or older, but I think what they are doing is overkill.

I hope if a law comes to pass it takes the models into consideration and makes sure their real name and address are not available to anyone and everyone.

The proposed 2257 regulations won't need to be passed, they'll just be amended to the statute under executive order given to them by Congress.

Ash-o-crafty could actually make things even stricter, given influence from religious PAC's.

Many attorneys are looking to write their own opinions to present to the DOJ and so on...

I am looking at things from a technology perspective, about how can technology, a little common sense, and understanding of how the biz works, to solve the problem.

Revealing model real name, etc is just wrong. While attorneys can argue and debate about what is the proper presentation of identification, I have taken a more pragmatic approach that encompasses the spirit and intentions of the law in using technology to assist in compliance with the law.

-brandon

I just checked with Tim, my son, at Contentjunky.com about this subject. He said that the I.D's and license will be replaced free of charge at anytime should you misplace your paper work. You need not be concerned with being charged again as long as you show that your are a subcriber to our website and purchased the material from us. We have a lot of material listed, but A LOT MORE to be added.

We are located in Porn Valley, Chatsworth, California and are working closely with the studios.

Tom