|
2006-07-25, 05:06 PM | #1 |
You can now put whatever you want in this space :)
|
ADVISORY TO FREE SPEECH COALITION MEMBERS
As you may already know, an inspection for 2257 records was conducted on Monday on a prominent FSC member company. (See AVN.com story for further details.) FSC members are advised that additional inspections are expected. With that possibility in mind, we offer the following advice to our members:
STATEMENT TO FSC MEMBERS: If your business is a secondary producer ONLY, and not a primary producer (please confirm with your lawyer) you may print the following information and present it to would-be 2257 inspectors. Be advised that misinforming a federal official about your status pertaining to 2257 inspections could result in criminal prosecution, so please confirm your status with your lawyer. --------------------------------------------- STATEMENT TO 2257 INSPECTORS: All businesses operating at this address are "secondary producers" within the meaning of the term in the preliminary injunction in the matter entitled Free Speech Coalition, et al. -vs- Alberto Gonzales, Case No. 05cv1126 -WDM (U.S.D.C., D., Colo). As members of the Free Speech Coalition, the businesses located here are not subject to inspection by the any agent of the Department of Justice pursuant to the preliminary injunction issued in that above matter. If there are any questions, please call attorney NAME OF YOUR LAWYER - PHONE NUMBER.
__________________
Circle Of Violence |
2006-07-25, 07:20 PM | #2 |
Searching for Jimmy Hoffa
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 771
|
Printing now...
ty for the update |
2006-07-26, 09:43 AM | #3 |
NO! Im not a female - but being a dragon, I do eat them.
|
Why are people so surprised by this - these primary producers have been subject to these inspections for 10 years - just because the DOJ hasnt done any inspections shouldnt all of a sudden trigger any new widespread panic - damn I hate people that take advantage of peoples fears
|
2006-07-26, 10:12 AM | #4 | |
You can now put whatever you want in this space :)
|
Quote:
For better or worse the FSC is giving some people a clear course of action to follow and thats kind of comforting spaz |
|
2006-07-26, 10:23 AM | #5 |
NO! Im not a female - but being a dragon, I do eat them.
|
spazlabz - the point I was making is that the inspection requirement has been in effect for over 10 years - this isnt something based on the changes they made last year - the inspections have just not made the news till now - if they even did any since the first law came out. The reason there was such a big reaction last year was they were trying to change that inspection rule to include secondary producers - the primary producers like the 10 they are inspecting have always been under those requirements and Id say based on their films and dvds - they have always met those requirements. This isnt the first inspection ever done under 2257 - its just been publicized this time - and in my mind to start a little more scare "fun"
|
2006-07-26, 10:29 AM | #6 | |
Certified Nice Person
|
Quote:
EDIT - Maybe they could create a system of compliance for European producers so they could legally sell us content produced overseas, while not forcing us to perform the record keeping. They can't inspect records abroad, so I guess they are forced to inspect secondary users of foreign content.
__________________
Click here to purchase a bridge I'm selling. Last edited by Useless; 2006-07-26 at 10:33 AM.. |
|
2006-07-26, 11:18 AM | #7 | |
You can now put whatever you want in this space :)
|
Quote:
well, ok, except to say that you and i are addressing two entirely different but related topics and that I quoted you in error and obviously misunderstood your point spaz |
|
2006-07-26, 02:11 PM | #8 | |
Oh no, I'm sweating like Roger Ebert
|
Quote:
|
|
2006-07-26, 03:57 PM | #9 | |
Certified Nice Person
|
Quote:
I'm not afraid of anyone busting in my door. Hell, it might just fall off the hinges on it's own. I'm not too sure which would be worse; having the local media embarass my wife and children, or having to lead well-paid federal agents through this shit hole I live in.
__________________
Click here to purchase a bridge I'm selling. |
|
2006-07-26, 04:34 PM | #10 | |
Eighteen 'til I Die
|
Quote:
IMO. Since most of us here are secondary procducers, our concern should not be on inspection. However, if you are not up to snuff on 2257 and are a secondary producer you might want to take a close look at HR 4472 in which Congress is attempting to do an end run around the courts. If Bush signs 4472 into law, secondary producers are back to square one on federal record-keeping requirements. The bottom line is if you are in this business your are going to keep 2257 records. Is it a pain in the ass but so is keeping records for IRS especially knowing that a national sale tax could destroy that agency. "Evening ladies, welcome to Wal Mart" or "Would you like to upsize that?" |
|
2006-07-26, 05:10 PM | #11 | |
Are you sure this is the Sci-Fi Convention? It's full of nerds!
|
Quote:
until that time, there is always consular status. XXXJay, what significance do you see this precedent setting? Or was it a premonition to those who participate in FSC?
__________________
Become part of the future of pornography....promote the first stages of VIRTUAL REALITY|shocking| |
|
2006-07-26, 05:43 PM | #12 | |
Oh no, I'm sweating like Roger Ebert
|
Quote:
|
|
2006-07-26, 07:48 PM | #13 | |
I'm normally not a praying man, but if you're up there, please save me Superman!
|
Quote:
|
|
2006-07-26, 07:51 PM | #14 | |
I'm normally not a praying man, but if you're up there, please save me Superman!
|
Quote:
|
|
2006-07-26, 08:27 PM | #15 | |
Oh no, I'm sweating like Roger Ebert
|
Quote:
|
|
2006-07-26, 08:58 PM | #16 | |
Certified Nice Person
|
Quote:
Why would anyone destroy documentation on an underage model? If they know that she or he is underage, they aren't going to document them. So, any documentation could only server to prove that the model committed fraud. And yes, as foolish as I think your assertion is, I do believe it would keep a producer from "hastily destroying" any documentation. I doubt that the FBI shows up and says, "Hey, we need to inspect your documents. We're going to go get some coffee first, so don't do anything foolish while we're gone. See ya in 20 minutes!"
__________________
Click here to purchase a bridge I'm selling. |
|
2006-07-26, 10:40 PM | #17 | |
You can now put whatever you want in this space :)
|
Quote:
__________________
Circle Of Violence |
|
2006-07-27, 09:51 PM | #18 | |
Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most.
|
XXX Jay, given this article http://xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=16215 which states in part
Quote:
__________________
Our 3D Comics and Props on Renderotica |
|
2006-07-28, 02:24 PM | #19 |
You can now put whatever you want in this space :)
|
ok now that 4472 is a reality does that mean that secondary producers now have to have docs for everything they have?
like immediately? spaz |
2006-07-28, 02:27 PM | #20 |
NO! Im not a female - but being a dragon, I do eat them.
|
spaz - normally after a law is signed it has a waiting period before it is published in the Federal Register (90 days is what I remember - but dont quote me on it)
Once its published then it becomes law unless injunctions are filed and approved by a judge to prevent enforcement |
2006-07-28, 03:11 PM | #21 | ||
You can now put whatever you want in this space :)
|
Quote:
Quote:
of course everyone can check out his website here http://www.xxxlaw.net/ spaz |
||
2006-07-28, 03:51 PM | #22 |
NO! Im not a female - but being a dragon, I do eat them.
|
Well - I dont know what the effective date is - but the added section (503) which adds in the simulated sex requirements has this statement:
"The provisions of this section shall not become effective until 90 days after the final regulations implementing this section are published in the Federal Register. The provisions of this section shall not apply to any matter, or image therein, produced, in whole or in part, prior to the effective date of this section" |
2006-07-28, 05:16 PM | #23 |
Selling porn allows me to stay in a constant state of Bliss - ain't that a trip!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,914
|
Has anyone come across anything like a plain language explanation of what the secondary producers will have to do to comply, written for secondary producers, and not for lawyers?
I haven't. |
2006-07-28, 05:50 PM | #24 | |
Lonewolf Internet Sales
|
Quote:
They just keep making 2257 an even bigger mess. It's going to take some time and lots of money for lawyers, but I don't see much chance for most of this law, as it pertains to 2257, holding up under legal challenge. I think we'll see an injunction against this new part too. I'd guess that it will be the major topic of discussion at the legal seminar during Internext. |
|
2006-07-28, 07:10 PM | #25 |
Selling porn allows me to stay in a constant state of Bliss - ain't that a trip!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,914
|
That doesn't really answer the questions a secondary producer has to ask...
Is it retroactive? What is the effective date? Are there any differences between the records requirements of 2257 and 4472? Any special specifications for record keeping added by 4472? Will there be any changes in the types of records content producers provide? |
|
|