What is GFY doing about 2257?
 

I just thought of this as I was looking through the new threads.

People posts pics in various threads here all the time and most of the time they are just random porn pics or party pics or whatever.

Are the new regulations going to have any effect on this behavior? Do this forum have to comply with the regulations or is there some kind of loophole?

Just curious.

:warning

GFY is a service provider, and the rules are different.

Does that apply to all forums on the internet, or only certain forums?

a slight change in the terms and conditions and voila, they aint responsible... if they ever were.

really? hmmm

Under DMCA, service providers are exempt from being hit with copyright infringement issues because they don't control what is being displayed on their system.

So all those images that people post up, are copyrighted to someone else, and not licensed to be displayed on the GFY domain.. if it weren't for DMCA, GFY would be liable.


now for 2257, the new regulations define the secondary record keeper as one that makes editorial decisions about what is displayed, thus the responsibilty to have 2257 records and not using underaged models.


This is where attorneys will love to debate.. that whether you can use DMCA as a defense against 2257.

Adult dating sites are facing 2257 issues because they don't make editorial decisions on what people post, but do have concerns about how 2257 applies to them (i don't know the facts on how it would apply or not).


Google could be a target by DOJ because it allows children easy access to porn that is sexually explicit.....


Pic post sites or blind-accept TGP (with thumbs) could try this same angle of saying they are a service provider and don't make decisions as to what goes up on their site.

It's an interesting angle, and one that anyone who feels they going to use the service provider angle will definitely have consulted with 2257 attorney about it.

-brandon

GFY don't use visa, why it needs to comply 2257?

Interesting . . . especially the Google scenario

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

2257 and Visa have nothing to do with each other . . . .it is amazing the misunderstanding out there

THANK YOU LENSMAN !!!! :thumbsup :thumbsup

TGP/MGP oners please take note !!

I think Lens has for certain done his homework on this, and he knows what he is talking about! The sky is NOT falling, and you need to stop making absurd requests that gallery submitters submit 2257 informations! :thumbsup

uhh...tgp owners choose what to list, therefore they have editorial decisions... Have a lawyer much?

Probably not a good conclusion to make.

most TGP and MGP that put up thumb images make an "editorial decision" as to what gets posted.

If the images are sexually explicit, then you do need to deal with 2257.

If you blindly accept images to be posted on your site, then you could try to claim a DMCA-like response to 2257, but it's your business and your azz in jail for 5 years if you are wrong.

Lensman's answer was based on his business, GFY isn't a TGP/MGP so your conclusion is mixing apples and oranges.

-brandon

excuse me . . . can you read? there is a little difference between making an editiorial decision to post something (ie: reviewing galleries that are submitted) and letting people post freely on a bbs.

However, I guess if it is a board that moderates and approves every thread, it would be a different story

see you in jail buddy!

Thanks for this info lens ! :thumbsup

Why can't tgps be considered as service providers ?

You need to stop making absurd comments when you haven't read a line about 2257.

Actually I am one of the few people who actually HAVE gone over it with a lawyer. I know exactly how 2257 affects me.

But thanks for adding to this thread. Did it make you feel as important as you had hoped it would? :Graucho

This board having (do you even recall how many Joe?) moderators which have full editorial priviledge, puts it in exact same category as a TGP/MGP.

But Lens has done his homework, and yes he is correct in stating that DMCA does cover him.


NEXT ??

What are you doing that's going to land you there?:glugglug

i got a 2257 tat today

Lensman never stated anything about DMCA, i brought that up.

Lensman is probably referring to this paragraph:

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; ISPs [[Page 35549]] merely provide individuals with access to the Internet.


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





which is somewhat similar language as DMCA.. DMCA also includes the term "Online Service Provider", for which eBay is protected from copyright infringements.

In the case of Perfect10 vs. CCBill, etc.. P10 was trying to content that CC processors could not be protected under DMCA, because they didn't provide access to the internet, etc..

The judge ruled against P10 (i read the ruling, interesting stuff).

The issue of whether a message board can be considered an OSP, like google, is debateable. As the above poster pointed out, the Mods do make editorial decisions on what to delete.

The difference here is that lens has a bunch of attorneys looking out for his business (much like his legal team that's fighting acacia), so he's got his back covered.

Anyone out there trying to be clever or creative in trying to get around 2257 is doing so without an attorney, and without a net.



-brandon

heh, looks like i opened a big ol' can of worms :1orglaugh

what did ya expect? when you go fishing, you need bait.

:1orglaugh


-brandon

Defining GFY as an ISP is iffy. ISPs would, in my opinion, be hosting companies (Mindspring, AOL) or hosts. Since GFY is moderated, it can be argued that GFY is not an ISP.

None the less, GFY is not a likely target.

Get Bush out of here and lets end the nonsense.

I am curious how msn and yahoo groups fit into this. To tell you the truth if GFY went picture less it would be a good thing , it would get rid of the surfers rather quickly.

You mean besides starting 6 threads a day about it for the past 2 months?

i check this forum out every 2-3 days and i look through the first 3-4 pages before posting.

some people have these new inventions called "lives" and therefore can't spend 24 hours a day reading every single thread on this forum.

you might want to pick one up for yourself :winkwink:

because they review and accept or reject the galleries submitted to them

having and exercising are two different things. there are boards that all posts must be reviewed by a moderator before it is posted, if GFY was like that, they would be subject to the same 2257 regs as a TGP . . . . at least that is what I get out of it