DOJ starting to back off 2257?
 

Nice info...
http://xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=9885

good news for .us webmasters

"Websites containing no depictions of ?actual sexually explicit conduct? but that provide hyperlinks to third party websites which do contain such material have no record-keeping obligations."

TGPs will love this.

now thats great news!

nothing wrong with mere nudity baby!

personals sites are saved!

getting smart at last

good news indeed!!!

What I'm still unsure of is they mention the content before I think it was June 2005 as being free from the new record keeping requirements. So does that mean you can still use sexually explicit content from before that date and only link back to the primary producers 2257?

Also if you have no sexually explicit content but you do show naked pictures do you still need a 2257 statement? I mean if non sexually explicit content is exempt that would mean you are exempt from 2257 all together right? (I really don't think so but, that the way it seems like this reads)

Its definately a step in the right direction.

What I was thinking as well.

I can't really see what the "back off" should be?
Isn't this just clarifications of what we already knew, if you did not misread the regulations?

- The term ?actual sexually explicit conduct? does not include ?lascivious exhibitions of the genitals;? (i.e., mere nudity).; Has mere nudity ever been sexually explicit?

- Websites containing no depictions of ?actual sexually explicit conduct? but that provide hyperlinks to third party websites which do contain such material have no record-keeping obligations.; This does not help sites like thumbed TGPs much? A thumb is not a hyperlink alone....its also a picture. And 2257 never has, or do now apply to textlinks, but 2251 does, so if you feel "safe", you're fooling yourself.

- The foreign IDs... that is quite logic from the first place, but what does this help if you violate laws like EU data protection laws by giving out non-authorized IDs?

Only difference I see is the "before June 23, 2005", which for me just look like more work, because you need to be sure what is produced before and after. Besides its just delaying things, because after some time you will have a lot of newer content (if you want to stay fresh and make the good money).

Clarifications are no back off, its not even a compromise.

The main objective has already been accomplished. Webmasters and program owners now have much clearer respect for the law.

well thumb TGP's don't have to be explicit.