What is the latest on the newest 2257 requirements?
 

Isn't their an injunction against the government from enforcing the newest requirements and the government has appealed? I haven't really been keeping up so what is the current status?

Obama is president, 2257 doesn't matter anymore, everything's changed

Not correct at this point as Obama is not the president and nothing has changed until either the courts or the congress changes it.

So does anyone know what the current status is with the courts?

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh good 1

Got your sig in I see. Anyone with knowledge about the subject here tonight?

Yes, I got my signature in, but that wasn't why I posted.

I posted because I found Matt's sarcasm, and said sarcasm's lack of detection, funny.

I was about to post some beneficial links for you... but I suddenly lost the desire.

... Countdown to someone telling the original poster to consult an attorney.

You assume to much. I of course dectected "Matt's sarcasm" and you apparently did not detect my sarcasm about getting your sig in.

That is to be expected.

Last time I heard 2257 it was over turned in the in the 6th circuit, so the ball was tossed back into the hands of the govt, to decided if and how they would continue.

That judgment only technically counts for Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee, but it's unlikely any cases would be brought forward on 2257 violation or would records be checked elsewhere because of that ruling. This happened about the time Alberto Gonzales got in hot water and was fired.

I assume with him getting his ass kicked out of town and the judgment against them in the 6th circuit that 2257 has been at least temporally sidelined, but of course we will never know until the govt makes the next move. While Obama is surely not going to make the FBI's top priority internet porn like it was with Bush/Gonzales no elected official is ever really a friend of porn.

Just because Obama is less likely to do the same kind of drastic things as the Bush admin, doesn't mean we are safe. The net is the wild wild west and the govt, regardless of whom is involved will want to control it and of course it will be done to protect the children or make us safe.

That sums up what is my current understanding of the status. In other words as it stands now only primary producers have to keep 2257 documents, right?

consult an attorney :2 cents:

Damn that's the same reason they made drugs, gambling, whoring, and <insert fun activity here> illegal too!

Did I ever mention that I hate the motherfucking govt.?

The lawyer in the Isaacs case mentioned this in an article.

"I think the Obscenity Unit is going to be disbanded once Obama takes over," Diamond told AVN.
http://www.avn.com/law/articles/33283.html

Another interesting comment from a casino folks site.

President-elect Obama and his advisers have established a website at change.gov listing their plans for governing after his inauguration. Among the programs and ideas expressed on the site is a pledge to protect the Internet from censorship and government interference, a promise which brightens the prospects for the online gambling industry.
http://www.onlinecasinoadvisory.com/...edom-42294.htm

Another comment from the After Hours Video trial.

Buzzelli(federal prosecutor on loan from the DOJ's obscenity task force) later expressed his disappointment with the ruling, calling the federally maintained database (read 2257) verifying the ages of porn performers "a joke."

"It's one FBI agent, probably based somewhere near Los Angeles, responsible for monitoring thousands," he told the Hook. "I've seen these records. They're photocopies of Portuguese drivers' licenses and Chinese passports that you can barely read. The federal government does not track it. It is an un-enforced law."
http://www.readthehook.com/stories/2...rnTrial-C.aspx

Looks like they are going to try rolling the dice after all rather than let the ruling stand.

The 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals has granted the federal government's request for a rehearing on the 2257 federal record-keeping law struck down as unconstitutional by a 6th Circuit panel last October.
http://www.avn.com/video/articles/29557.html

Not totally true. I do believe that Obama wants to keep the internet free of censorship but something I heard on Rachel Maddow's show last night irked me about the whole 2257 issue. The dems are looking to keep or obtain Lieberman. They are considering taking him off homeland and then possibly giving him priority of creating technology bills. Lieberman is pretty hardcore when it comes to shutting down internet pornogrpahy and banning violent video games. Why the hell would the dems want anything to do with Lieberman at this point is nonsense.

because he votes with Democrats 90% of the time on domestic issues and they need the vote to beat a filibuster...

Come on Obama, I know you're reading this thread. Help us out!