I found correspondence online from our inspector general to a congressman RE: 2257
 

I was messing around with the Google "uncle sam" search feature and searched under title 18 section 2257 and this document came up. Here is just part of what it contains.

" Obscenity Investigations and Prosecutions

The U.S. Attorneys' Manual states:

Prosecution of large scale distributors of obscene material who realize substantial income from their multi-state operations also is encouraged. Prosecution priority should be given to cases in which there is evidence of involvement by known organized crime figures. However, prosecution of cases involving relatively small distributors can have a deterrent effect and would dispel any notion that obscenity distributors are insulated from prosecution if their operations fail to exceed a predetermined size or if they fragment their business into small-scale operations. Therefore, prosecution of such distributors also may be appropriate on a case-by-case basis. 5

The Manual further requires that substantial deference be given to the factors set forth in Miller v. California in determining the viability of potential obscenity cases. Officials within the FBI's Violent Crimes Unit and the Criminal Division's CEOS stated that because Miller v. California requires an assessment of community standards in determining obscenity, the Department relies more on the states and localities to investigate and prosecute obscenity cases involving individuals. The FBI and the CEOS also stated that because much of the obscene material is distributed over the Internet, it is difficult to identify a case's jurisdiction and therefore which community standards should be applied. They stated that the Department focuses its resources on investigating and prosecuting obscenity cases involving major producers and interstate and foreign distributors of obscene material. In addition, they stated that the Department investigates and prosecutes obscenity cases where organized crime or other crimes such as money laundering, extortion, and trafficking in women are involved. According to the FBI, since 1994 it has investigated a total of 58 obscenity cases, 12 of which were related to organized crime. "

It also states:

"Pornographic websites are prolific and international; on-line predators and pornography traffickers can easily mask their location and identity. According to FBI officials, the IINI has experienced difficulties in keeping up with rapidly changing technology that allows criminals to avoid detection. Another problem in these investigations is the lack of a requirement mandating the length of time that an Internet service provider must retain its records. While the larger Internet service providers are cooperative, thousands of smaller Internet service providers, when subpoenaed, report that their records already have been deleted. Perpetrators of child pornography crimes often are savvy to these recordkeeping weaknesses and use smaller Internet service providers with fewer controls. "

Here's the full report This was written by our inspector General Glenn A. Fine to Congressman Frank R. Wolf.

Notice that they only mention Miller v. California and no mention at all of the sundance case! Why do you think that is?

It looks like they'll go after small guys to make a point and scare everyone. Unfortunately this document contains a lot of info about C()*P as well. I don't know why they lump all porn with C()*P. The statistics of cases brought before the court and the number that have been rejected, or cases lost is stagering. I also find the number of guilty pleas where people just gave up interesting.

What do you guys think? Does this give you some insight as to where they are going to go with this?

well that's about prosecuting obsenity cases. 2257 is about record keeping. but in terms of 2257, i think they'll go after small, new guys. they know the big guys are lawyered up and probably compliant. they also know an injunction could be granted, so they just want the headlines of mass inspections and arrests even if those prosecutions are later thrown out in case of an injunction. this is all a fucking game to these pathetic bastards who are trying to show the religious right they are cracking down on porn.

good find though. thanks for posting it.

Right I think that they'll be using the 2257 to help prosecute obscenity because of the dismal statistics stated in this report. It's amazing that about 1/2 of the cases weren't even brought to court because there was no evidence... so in essence.. they went to prosecute some poor innocent people who they had no evidence for!

So with the new 2257... all they need to prosecute is see that a site doesn't have the section 18 warning and they're set.. automatic guilt and automatic reason to investigate them for other stuff.

What's your take?

Link directly to the USDOJ.GOV website where these quotes were obtained from

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia...le9/75mcrm.htm

my take? i think a lot of people are going to have their lives turned upside down for nothing. the hearing for the TRO is on THRUSDAY. the new regs go into effect THURSDAY. i think they are going to launch shock and awe, rack up a bunch of inspections and arrests quick. small time webmasters who have families and full time jobs are going to find themselves in deep shit. that's my take. even if the prosecutions are thrown out if an injunction is issued, think about how being arrested and held will effect people's lives.

i hope to god i'm wrong. i hope this shit is thrown out altogether. i hope nobody is inspected.

so called 'secondary producers' should be able to point to primary producers for records. that's it. end of fucking story.

this country is fucked. a small, vocal minority of religious psychopaths have the power to completely turn people's lives upside down. pathetic.

My thoughts EXACTLY and really well said for a username of DOPEMAN !! LOL

I hope we're both wrong.. but from this departments past it's pretty obvious strike first ask questions later. I'll be glad when our country isn't the laughing stock of the world again.

heh. i don't do drugs. i just happened to be listening to that song when i needed to pick a username. the nwa version, of course.

but yeah, i think everyone is vulnerable in thursday. actually, for stuff that isn't labeled 'june 23rd', they could launch investigations any time. but i think they will go forward on thursday. why start investigations early and freak everyone out and risk not nailing people for the draconian indexing rules for shit published on the web on thursday?

did you read the 2257 handbook Cambia and Roger Wilcox released? it's very thorough, but points out the contradictory nature of some of the regulations and the vague parts that are left to interpretation.

as i said, even if the entire thing is eventually thrown out or a general injunction is granted, i think people are still going to be inspected and arrested later this week. as i said, i pray to god i'm wrong. there are some very good people in this business just trying to support a family.

No .. link?

http://avn.com/2257

bottom link. the PDF.