2257 loop hole!! Sex explicit Legal no docs!! Thumb TGP owners read
 

I not going to tell anyone what they should do; that's up to you but I am serioulys considering saying fuck all that 2257 shit.

Why?

A legal precedent established by Sundance Assocs. Inc. v. Reno, 139 F.3d 804, 807

Basically this court ruling allows a thumb TGP to display explicit thumbs without 2257 docs.

Please read below and then I will explain further:


http://lw.bna.com/lw/19980407/961501.htm

Sundance publishes five magazines: Odyssey, Odyssey Express, Connexion, Looking Glass, and UnReal People. These magazines print personal or commercial announcements by individuals seeking to contact others with similar sexual interests. The announcements are typically accompanied by pictures, most of which are sexually explicit. The pictures are submitted voluntarily to Sundance by the individuals advertising in the magazines. Sundance, therefore, does not participate in the production of the photographs it publishes in its various magazines.

Facing possible criminal liability as a "secondary producer" under the regulation, Sundance filed a complaint seeking declaratory relief in the district court. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment in the district court.

The court ruled for Sundance, finding 28 C.F.R. § 75.1(c)(4)(iii) to be an invalid implementation of 18 U.S.C. § 2257.See footnote 4 Applying Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984), the district court found the intent of Congress to be clear from the language of the statute and, consequently, did not inquire into the legislative history of the Act. Finding "[t]he plain meaning of this section of the Restoration Act clearly exempts persons whose activities '... 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,'" the court determined the scope of the regulation's coverage to be impermissibly broader than that intended by the statute


Explained:

2257 is not a new law.
It is the enforcement regulations that are new.
The enforement regulations are NOT "law".
The attorney general cannot imposes regs that contradict the law!
This ruling declared the previous new regs contradicted the law in regards to "secondary producers". :winkwink:
This is a precedent that can be quoted to any judge in any court.

Any judge that ruled against you after review of this precedent would basically be a fool. It's an auto-win on appeal because it has already been upheld by a higher court.

*** What is required to be as legal as Sundance?

A thumb TGP that runs a script that either/and/or blindly crawls URLs for thumbs, blindly accepts submitted URLs for thumbs. Sponsor hosted galleries are blindly accepted if only your script views the gallery content.

This is exactly the area that exempts the search engines.

By this standard I am already in full compliance with 2257 except for my banners; which I do not accept blindly.

I run a script (getthumbs.com) that accepts urls and scans for and creates a thumbnail that is blindly posted on my site. I can do this without worry because the script tracks thumb productivity and removes shitty thumbs.

I do publish and distribute my webpage but I have no "contact" with performers("the Restoration Act clearly exempts persons whose activities '... 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")

I am now officialy declaring my site as an online magazine and will state so on my site.


OK...reality! I'm still aware that by the time I can prove my case, if it comes to that, I might be broke etc...but I might go broke anyway with trying to comply with this broad regulation.


So I don't know exaclty what I will do but I have sued on constitutional free speech issues before and won in California so I'm feeling somewhat confident that I can run my thumb TGP and win any legal challenge.

You just now heard of the sundance case? :Oh crap

I believe this is what OCCash is using as the basis for their suit. If you're going to try to run with it, then good luck to you :thumbsup

Weeeeeeeeee! :Oh crap :upsidedow

Old news. But thanks for the link anyway, I guess a lot of people haven't seen it.

No. But I only just now figured how I could use it to my benefit.
You read it and moved on; I read it and thought.

I did not move on, check my other posts.

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2...5/05-10107.htm

Read the comments section Re: Sundance vs Reno. Better luck next time.

and this is what the DOJ agent wanted to post but did not yet.......

"The DOJ just read your post and would like to thank you for posting your domain name. We will be contacting you on June 23rd in person at your place of business to verify your 2257 documentation. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter."

Your response: :helpme :helpme

Those are just comments Jact.
Does not prevent the DOJ from oversteping their boundries and trying anyways.

They're comments from the people who are making the decisions, are you so quick to dismiss the words of the ones who might be banging on your door?

Yes I am. I happen to be compliant either way. I do have attornies and I have no issues with using them, specially on bullshit.

At least you're planning on being compliant either which way, unlike some idiots who will see this thread and go "GREAT! I don't need to do anything!". I commend you for following a law, no matter how wrong the law may be.

There are many many overstepping inconsistancies in the new 2257.

The shits gonna get blown out of the water.

Those are not laws...just DOJ comments basically defending everything they wrote into a reg.

The interesting thing about the Sundance comment is that they admit failure in the 10th circuit and threatens us with the results of another court. Correct me if I'm wrong but the court I would have to attend would be in the region of my local...right???? I don't think I'll be getting to the DC court from Hawaii without extradiction. Unless they find actuall CP...slim fucking chance.

Paranoya will destroy yah!

There are no FBI, DOJ, NSA, CIA, SS, IRS, etc... agents wasting time here on GFY... Get over yourself, they really couldn't give a fuck about you.

yeah... you can use it to your benefit. after you are arrested, charged and sitting in a jail cell awaiting trial, you and your public defender can plan on how to challenge the federal government by citing this case.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

:1orglaugh

I am a primary anyways so I have always had to be compliant. Only change for me really was the cross refferencing and jazz.

how would that help, just curious the reasoning behind it

I've said it before and I'll say it again...The new regs regarding secondary producers doesn't have a leg to stand on. I am not an attorney..this is just my opinion which is based on the original post here among other things.

Thousands of agents are going to be assigned to go looking at porn model ID's all day long while the country is at war and terrorists are all over the place trying to pull the sequel to 9/11.

OK. :1orglaugh

If you have a big trunk of money to fight the government, it you can argue the little points but if you dont you have to follow it whether you like it or not.

this administration needs some good news and fast. raids on 'online perverts' to 'protect children' would give Fox News a huge, raging boner.

Just thought I'd answer this monkey.

This would not be a violent crime.
They serve a warrant which most likely will not be an physical arrest since the jails will already be full and you get a court date for a hearing to determine if a trial should be held where you can squash the case before the judge right then and there. Been there...done that...but thought I'd inform some of the really dumbasses like yourself how the system works.

Idiots watch the news and still learn nothing. Martha Steward never did a day in jail until she was convicted and not becasue she was rich but because this was not violent crime and she was not a flight risk.

Oh the monkeys in this world....

Also you forget Martha had very strong legal representation, in the extreme case they had to post 50 grand bail each and turn in their passports. It also wasnt a violent crime.

um your 100% wrong...

I know for certain f.b.i. have been on gfy as well as s.s.

And several recent court cases mentioned SPECIFICALLY people by gfy usernames

Read "flight risk": Passports and bail fall under "flight risk".

You dont think they dont see us pornographers as a flight risk lol You forget Martha ran a fortune 500 company.

are you kidding me? Martha Stewart? hello Mr GFY Legal Counsel - ever hear a term called "out on bail"?

Lets recap your legal genius with a few highlights.

a sensible business plan according to you:

1) tell the federal government to fuck off and refuse to comply with federal law -

2) but thats ok because its not a violent crime and you "might not" go to jail (whatever the fuck that means)-

3) get charged by the federal government with multiple felonies and face prison time and fines that are so big, you will need your dad to help you do the math

4) hope you can put up your moms house as collateral on a surety bond assuming the judge grants you bail. (won't she be proud of her pornographer son)

5) then try to convice 500.00/hr attorneys that you have the cash and financial resources to mount a 100,000-200,000 criminal defense against federal prosecutors while they fight to make sure their secondary producer requirements hold up in court?

be sure lets us know how it goes fucktard.
:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh be nice

Speak for yourself. I was charged with murder and never even had hand cuffs on. I've been bonded, polygraphed, figer printed and mugshot already, no current passport and I live on a fucking little island in the middle of the sea. :1orglaugh

Ever here the term "own recognizance" : http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/o024.htm

Got BALLs!!! Or just a pussy?

I'm 43 yrs old; mom couldn't give a shit if I die as long as she don't have to pay. :1orglaugh


Fosbinder & Fosbinder: Husband and wife represent me probono and have won me good money in law suits

Don't worry I will. See nigga in Hummer rolling.
Being prosectuted and/or arrested under unconstitutional provisions guarantees montary rewards in law suit. See it's called a civil rights violation. Already been there.

Now enough of this stupid shit. Do what you want and STFU.

The rules are different for obscenity cases.
If you're facing an obscenity charge they can also seize your assets pending the outcome of the trial. Same as with a drug charge or a RICO charge.

This law is diffferent and while you may not get out on O.R. you should be able to get by with a couple grand and a bail bondsman.

:2 cents: