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)
-   -   Flickr, 2257, and the DoJ (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=829152)

TarPy 05-18-2008 02:14 AM

Flickr, 2257, and the DoJ
 
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3224/...58108f58_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3224/...58108f58_o.jpg


What obligation does flickr have to maintain some sort of records for this shit?

Does anyone think it would be possible to get the DoJ to bother Yahoo!?

Given their current corporate take over problems, I think a DoJ statement would be less than helpful.

I don't really have a point here, I just saw this and thought that Yahoo! was walking an interesting line here. :2 cents:

After Shock Media 05-18-2008 02:17 AM

User submitted right?
Welcome to the blankie, please leave a corner for others.

Thurbs 05-18-2008 02:31 AM

no use in the DOJ going after hard targets, when it comes to porn, any conviction looks good to them

After Shock Media 05-18-2008 02:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thurbs - NichedSites (Post 14202589)
no use in the DOJ going after hard targets, when it comes to porn, any conviction looks good to them

Cough John Stagliano Cough.

TarPy 05-18-2008 02:47 AM

It is user submitted, HOWEVER, unlike sundance, they DO re-size the images on their servers, so they have modified the image....

I'm could be wrong on sundace, I'm not up on my 2257 like I should be, as a few of you know my legal focus has been elsewhere lately.

TarPy 05-18-2008 02:48 AM

Anyone wanna complain to the DoJ and see what they say?

[email protected]

Sands 05-18-2008 02:48 AM

If I'm not mistaken, entities that merely host content are not subject to the record keeping regulations of 2257. Furthermore, if Flickr has an acceptable use policy that forbids their users from uploading adult content and they actively enforce this, then they have nothing to worry about.

Edit: looks like they allow adult content.

DWB 05-18-2008 03:26 AM

Nobody cares. They won't go after them. They will go after a few pay site companies to set examples and then go away for a while. IF they do anything at all.

TarPy 05-18-2008 03:54 AM

I'm pretty sure hosting it on your website, opens you to compliance...

I really wish as a citizen we could press charges on Flickr or something, make them get that law tossed out on their bill.

Eh, 2257 is shit anyhow, but I don't think Yahoo! should be exempt from laws just because they have money, if there is anyone that should be held accountable for cumbersome record keeping requirements it SHOULD be those with the budget to do so...

I guess the US has fallen entirely into OJ law. If you got money, laws and shit don't really apply.

bobby666 05-18-2008 04:15 AM

only 18+ can take a cock like she

fallenmuffin 05-18-2008 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TarPy
..but I don't think _anyone_ should be exempt from laws just because they have money...

Are you new to America?

Matt 26z 05-18-2008 04:38 AM

The intended use of 2257 is adult materials in commerce. As soon as you expand beyond that, regular people trading nudies through email or some other service get swept up into it and that obviously doesn't work.

TarPy 05-18-2008 04:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fallenmuffin (Post 14202713)
Are you new to America?

no just getting fucking tired of it.

fluffygrrl 05-18-2008 04:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TarPy (Post 14202687)
I really wish as a citizen we could press charges on Flickr or something, make them get that law tossed out on their bill.

Actually, you can. Read up on it.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:20 PM.

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