Lastest info on 2257 anyone?
 

Anyone up on 2257 that can point me to some no legalese explanations.

Especially regarding the non explicit exemption and Also if I have a review site that is not hosting any content but only has screen captures of the sites home page. 133x100 pixels, do I still need to maintain records?

If you have NOTHING sexually explicit on your site, you don't need to maintain records.

What if I have hotlinked images that are displayed on my site but hosted on another site?

Read the 2257 again.
 

I have read through the new 2257 law a few times and too many people are quoting it wrong ...

The creators of adult content are the ones who need to make the records available by giving their "custodian of record" info on where to find the personal information on the "actors" ... namely their business address...

The actors personal information is protected under US law(s)... Now if the manufactures of adult content just make this protect personal information available just to anyone then there will be big time legal issues...

In the new 2257 law states if an individual has no control on the content then there is no requirement to keep the 2257 info... ( read it ! )

The manufactor has control on their content and therefor is required to provide the "custodian of record" information....


There are two parts of the 2257 record.

1.) A statement saying the "actors" are at least 18 years of age
2.) The "custodian of records"... This is the street address on where to find the "actors" personal info... this is for those legal types as to check to confirm such actors are of age...

A very big miss understanding is who has the legal right to keep "actors" personal information on hand... we are not talking about just a mailing address but rather the real names of the actors plus their home address as well as their ages and other private information.

The 2257 record is just a statement on where to find the required address to check the "actors" personal info... The real issues is who is to keep the actual "actors" personal info... and that is the manufactor...

Those who sell adult content must provide the "actors" personal information and must be linked to and to be made available by the webmaster who are using such content.



.

Good question with good answers!

You continue to misinterpret the wording of 2257 regulations. Publishers, and I repreat, publishers must maintain records. If you run a website that publishes a sexually explicit image, as defined by 2257 records, you must maintain records for inspection. It doesn't matter if the images are hotlinked, or if you are the content producer or not.

The best advice, though, is to talk to a lawyer.

Perhaps you should read what I wrote one again and read the 2257. This I must repeat !!!!!

Fucking retard.

I did, many times over. Here is what you've said:

"The 2257 record is just a statement on where to find the required address to check the "actors" personal info... The real issues is who is to keep the actual "actors" personal info... and that is the manufactor..."

You are wrong. Publishers of sexually explicit content, as defined by the 2257 regulations, must maintain records. If you can't get that through your pea-sized brain, then I'm sorry. The worst part about it is that you don't even live in the US, and you're giving bad information to those who do and are responsible for 2257 regulations.

Before you start calling me a "fucking retard", maybe you should borrow a quarter and buy a godamn clue. I'm done with you.

Here's some information from the Free Speech Coalition's website, you know, the lawyers who are actually grappling with 2257.

1. As a secondary producer, what records should I have in place to be in compliance as a result of this decision and from what point in time do I need them?
Secondary producers were required by Congress to have records (photocopy of passport, DMV-issued ID, military ID or ?Green Card? as well as personal information form) for materials acquired after July 27, 2006. The regulations detailing how compliance is to occur were supposed to be issued in January of 2007. They are now scheduled for release in June.

And this is even before the proposed regulations where they plan to erase the definition of "secondary producer". Do you understand now, you thick-headed pole smoker? Secondary producers, as defined, aren't even content producers, and THEY'RE STILL REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN RECORDS!

The next time you decide to call someone a fucking retard, make sure you aren't one yourself. Loser.

Re-read the 2257 again Sands
 

Ok Sands,

You are telling me every webmaster is required by US law as to have each and every adult record on their ages, home address and other misc contact information that is protected under US law(s) ?

If you had read what I have posted instead of trying to troll you would have read that the issue is not really the 2257 but who has the legal right to the private records of the actors... The 2257 law states very clearly that if there is no actual control over the content that such parties are not required to keep the 2257 record. I still think keeping the 2257 record pointing to the actual records is a good thing but that is not what I have been stating... The "actors" records are protected under US law...

When you purchase adult content as to sell... yea of course you will need the actual records of your actors... however the associate programs that most webmasters use have full control over the rights to their content and the associates have no control...

If I'm not mistaken... the paragraph is about 3/4 way down the new 2257...


Am I going to fast for you... should I type this in slower for you ?

.

No, dickless, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that every webmaster who publishes sexually explicit content, as definied by 2257, must maintain records. Those records, according to the new 2257 regulations, can be redacted to the point where sensitive information is hidden (such as address), but pertinent information used to identify the person, such as name and driver's license ID (obviously) must remain in the records.

The question of whether or not it's protected under US law is a very fucking big one, and a major point of contention with 2257. It's a big reason why the proposed regulations are very bad: because they violate the privacy of performers who will have copies of their ID's in the hands of thousands of webmasters, and of those mom and pop webmasters will may have to publish their names/addresses on their websites.

Not having control over the content is an issue for content producers, meaning that if a content producer creates a scene, and sells it to a webmaster, and the webmaster publishes it on his own personal site, then the content producer does not need to maintain records of that URL since he does not own that site and it is not in his control. Therefore, using the very basic logic that most 5th graders are capable of, we can surmise that webmasters who publish explicit content on their sites, having full control of this content, must maintain records.

It's not about control over the rights of the content, it's about control OVER WHERE IT IS PUBLISHED. This is the point I keep trying to get you to understand. Obviously if you produce a scene, sell it to a webmaster who uses it on his own paysite, you as the content producer will not be held responsible for keeping records on his usage! It's not about who owns it. It's about who publishes it! Therefore, associates do have control over it since they are publishing on their sites.

Understand that.

Your such a troll... but your still wrong !
 

You are so fucking dense... Next your going to say I need, under US law, a 2257 record and must also have every "actors" home address, full name, phone number(s), picture and what they had for dinner...

You should get legal advice before stating to others facts... If you cannot comprehend technical issues then hire some legal help.

I still think your a fucking retard NOOB who does not have much of an education never mind understanding basic legal requirements...

Fucking loser troll ... ^^

.

Right, I'm a troll because I'm trying to clear something up that could potentially bring legal culpability for another person through your idiocy.

Let's see what other people have to say about it: fucking-around-and-business-discussion/754520-little-help.html

Sands first of all I'm Canadian and I don't have to follow US laws furthermore you are a troll... It does not matter if you get a billion people to agree with you such wont stop you from being a TROLL.

Your link is a real joke... I was expecting to have a few hundreds of NOOBS, however I did not even get one... how sad.. ^^

That's exactly the problem. You really don't have a sincere interest in this problem. You're not subject to 2257 laws, and if you're wrong about it, then it's "oh well, not my problem." That's what makes you a sincere asshole.

Have fun labeling me as a troll. I'm sure it makes you feel better, you know, being the tough guy that you are with your "closed door" martial arts training and your little SEO scams. Have a nice life, skidmark. :1orglaugh

Does this help you any... ^^
 

" Can I Get A Little Help Here?
Please see this thread: webmaster-q-and-fuckin-a/752686-lastest-info-2257-a.html

It's an argument about 2257. I know it's still sort of a murky area, but someone let me know if I'm somehow off base, or if this Balalsubturfyooj is just a stupid prick. Much appreciated. "


Well yea you dumb fuck you are off base... you stupid shit... :1orglaugh

.

Sands... you will be the "skidmark". ^^