GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   DOJ who will they go after? (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=485070)

bigdog 06-25-2005 04:48 AM

DOJ who will they go after?
 
who do you think the DOJ will be going after? random people or the guys with the young looking girl and extreme sites.

jollyperv 06-25-2005 05:19 AM

If I ran a teen thumb tgp or a teen paysite, I'd be a little worried.

broke 06-25-2005 05:19 AM

I wouldn't want to be teen revenue right now.






This post in no way implies they don't have their shit together. Dealing with the hassle of an inspection in and of itself is going to suck.

Worldnet 06-25-2005 05:48 AM

I would not want to be the owner of this site:
http://www.dixietrailertrash.com/autorank/toplist.html

xclusive 06-25-2005 06:16 AM

They will probably start with the extreme teen sites first not going to be fun whoever they decide to go after

Matt 26z 06-25-2005 06:21 AM

Pedo sites. They'll use 2257 to stack the deck against them on top of their CP charges. Then when a plea deal is offered, it's something like "We'll drop the 2257 charges if you agree to plead guilty to the CP production." Now the plea doesn't cut into the main charge.

I will be shocked if any legit adult companies are ever checked.

fusionx 06-25-2005 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt 26z
Pedo sites. They'll use 2257 to stack the deck against them on top of their CP charges. Then when a plea deal is offered, it's something like "We'll drop the 2257 charges if you agree to plead guilty to the CP production." Now the plea doesn't cut into the main charge.

I will be shocked if any legit adult companies are ever checked.

I'd modify this to pedo and "obscenity", but this is almost exactly how I think it will be used in the real world. It's a tool to bypass normal protections under the law, allowing the DOJ to investigate and prosecute obscenity and CP without having to follow the normal rules concerning search and siezure.

here's an interesting clip from this article from 11-29-2004: http://www.avn.com/index.php?Primary...tent_ID=207208

Continuing the trend to obfuscate legal issues pertaining to adult entertainment by associating it with child pornography, the government reports that the ?number of child exploitation and adult obscenity investigations and prosecutions increased by more than 300% since 2001.?

Cambria notes that the DOJ is exaggerating their ability to prosecute adult material by lumping it together with child pornography. ?When you track down their convictions, most of them are to pleas to child porn. Some of them have to do with extreme types of adult entertainment: bestiality, or really hardcore depictions of rape or situations like that,? Cambria said. ?That is not mainstream product, I have not seen any mainstream adult products prosecuted.

mardigras 06-25-2005 09:32 AM

The DOJ doesn't have to initiate cases against mainstream adult products when you have people like Sam Brownback promising to use every new tool they give him to do the job for them :2 cents:

Bama 06-25-2005 09:37 AM

Damn it's good to see other voices of reason on this topic.

I can't stand to see the "they'll put us all in jail" - "all of our liberties are in jeopardy" cries. I swear to God they ought to teach common sense in high school cause there are alot of folks here that don't have any!

mardigras 06-25-2005 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mardigras
The DOJ doesn't have to initiate cases against mainstream adult products when you have people like Sam Brownback promising to use every new tool they give him to do the job for them :2 cents:

I meant to say Pat Trueman but Sam Brownback is as bad.

eroswebmaster 06-25-2005 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt 26z
Pedo sites. They'll use 2257 to stack the deck against them on top of their CP charges. Then when a plea deal is offered, it's something like "We'll drop the 2257 charges if you agree to plead guilty to the CP production." Now the plea doesn't cut into the main charge.

I will be shocked if any legit adult companies are ever checked.

I would think the deal would go the other way.

They don't usually plea bargain up to harsher cases, but down to less harsh cases.

If I were a teen site owner and they said plead guilty to CP production I'd say fuck that shit..take me to court and prosecute.

More than likely it would be that you would plead to violation of 2257 regs for a lesser penalty because they couldn't necessarily prove the CP part just because you were missing one sheet of paper.

Unless you were talking about actual CP sites..Illegal sites...they'll go after them regardless. 2257 is not the tool they'll use if there are clear violations.

mardigras 06-25-2005 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bama
Damn it's good to see other voices of reason on this topic.

I can't stand to see the "they'll put us all in jail" - "all of our liberties are in jeopardy" cries. I swear to God they ought to teach common sense in high school cause there are alot of folks here that don't have any!

Let me spoon feed this to you:
CLICK HERE

wtfent 06-25-2005 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bama
Damn it's good to see other voices of reason on this topic.

I swear to God they ought to teach common sense in high school cause there are alot of folks here that don't have any!

Isnt that the truth. :thumbsup

Dirty Dane 06-25-2005 09:59 AM

The answer to this is pre-investigation and collection of data.

Remember it says in the 2257 that they can take copys of the datas and that way they will have a huge database themself. Can't really see why they should waste their time on a compliant site B, if they already checked legal site A with same models/sponsors.

mardigras 06-25-2005 10:05 AM

BTW, in reference the link to the thread I posted above, http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=479170
Don't just read the first few posts, scroll down and read ALL the information & links in regards to Mr. Trueman's activities and testimonies. There will be probably more prosecutions based on 2257 in the first year initiated by Mr. Trueman's organization than the DOJ will ever initiate themselves. :2 cents:

Rochard 06-25-2005 12:00 PM

Keep in mind that the DOJ has never done a 2257 inspection, and the only conviction they've ever gotton on a 2257 charge was a plea bargin.

Dirty Dane 06-25-2005 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RocHard
Keep in mind that the DOJ has never done a 2257 inspection, and the only conviction they've ever gotton on a 2257 charge was a plea bargin.

Don't be so certain. Don't know if someone has gone to jail yet, but I know about one case going on in US right now, for violation of the old 2257. Pretty sure it is not CP, but over 20 missing records.

dopeman 06-25-2005 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane
Don't be so certain. Don't know if someone has gone to jail yet, but I know about one case going on in US right now, for violation of the old 2257. Pretty sure it is not CP, but over 20 missing records.

what kind of case is this? webmaster? primary producer?

bigdog 06-25-2005 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RocHard
Keep in mind that the DOJ has never done a 2257 inspection, and the only conviction they've ever gotton on a 2257 charge was a plea bargin.


these days a lot of people have single girl sites these days where the girls look real young, maybe the goverment will rattle some cages now

Dirty Dane 06-25-2005 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dopeman
what kind of case is this? webmaster? primary producer?

Don't know the exact circumstances around that case, but they are (were) primary producers and paysite(s).

I also know about a NN producer that had inspection. Nothing illegal, and the girl was 18+, but he WAS inspected.

Thing is that we won't hear about it, except if it is in the news or they choose to tell it. Why should someone make it public, when it can hurt your business, even if you are innocent? Just look at Michael Jackson :upsidedow

kernelpanic 06-25-2005 12:40 PM

Americans :1orglaugh

Big Red Machine 06-25-2005 12:51 PM

I am proud member of the F.S.C. atleast they gave us some breathing room.

Heywood Jablome 06-25-2005 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bama
Damn it's good to see other voices of reason on this topic.

I can't stand to see the "they'll put us all in jail" - "all of our liberties are in jeopardy" cries. I swear to God they ought to teach common sense in high school cause there are alot of folks here that don't have any!

Agreed!

The other thing that gets on my nerves is this sheep mentality that thinks that all republican voters are bible-thumping anti-porn zealots. I live in the heart of the 'bible belt', I know first hand that many republicans love porn! What they hate is having it shoved in everyone's face, whether they want to see it or not (hence can-spam, superbowl nudity, kid sites redirecting to porn sites, etc).

bigdog 06-27-2005 02:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane
Don't know the exact circumstances around that case, but they are (were) primary producers and paysite(s).

I also know about a NN producer that had inspection. Nothing illegal, and the girl was 18+, but he WAS inspected.

Thing is that we won't hear about it, except if it is in the news or they choose to tell it. Why should someone make it public, when it can hurt your business, even if you are innocent? Just look at Michael Jackson :upsidedow

the NN guy that had got inspected was his site where the model looks real young?

reynold 06-27-2005 02:25 AM

Fishermen always look for bigger catch.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:04 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123