Which Spons are Ready for 2257 Change?

[ardentgent]

Originally Posted by lassiter

That is one of the few relatively clear things about this whole mess. The definition is contained in Sec. 2256:

(2) “sexually explicit conduct” means actual or simulated—
(A) sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex;
(B) bestiality;
(C) masturbation;
(D) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or
(E) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person.

So yeah, spread beaver shots appear to be considered sexually-explicit.

I believe that 2257 states that only A-D apply. E is exempt.

[kalle7]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham2

Plus there is no need to put up on the Net models IDs, this is the problem some do not even understand what the law says.

Give out IDs to everyone and some one will thinks he needs to post is all up on the Internet.

We dont have to put up on the Net models IDs? Do I understand your post correctly?

Sorry for asking perhaps obvious questions, but I am a little these days lol

Originally Posted by lassiter

That is one of the few relatively clear things about this whole mess. The definition is contained in Sec. 2256:

(2) “sexually explicit conduct” means actual or simulated—
(A) sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex;
(B) bestiality;
(C) masturbation;
(D) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or
(E) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person.

So yeah, spread beaver shots appear to be considered sexually-explicit.

Seems a lot of free content just went soft core.

Which sponsor would be interested in buying sets that could be distributed to affilaites with no worries of 2257?

They would be brand new, semi-exclusive, just for affiliates and a reasonable price.

[RawAlex]

You don't have to post the model's IDs online. This is a popular mistake. You don't have to indentify the models. Those items stay IN YOUR RECORDS. You do however have to have those records in your principle place of business, organized as per the new 2257 rules, and you must have a 2257 disclaimer on your sites that lists your principle place of business (and your real name) so that the DOJ can inspect those records.

NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER post model personal information online.

Alex

[ardentgent]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham2

Seems a lot of free content just went soft core.

Which sponsor would be interested in buying sets that could be distributed to affilaites with no worries of 2257?

They would be brand new, semi-exclusive, just for affiliates and a reasonable price.

Paul, is it your opinion that pictures not fitting the definition of sexually explicit as defined in 2257 are not covered by 2257? So if I make a gallery that does not meet the definition of sexually explicit, just nudity at "worse"I do not have to do anything regarding the statute- no exemption statement, nada?

[RawAlex]

Paul, the problem is if they use softcore content to promote a hardcore site with hardcore banners, then their publication contains one or more images of sexual content and then they need 2257 for everything in the publication.

There is little or no way to slip out of this one easily.

Alex

Originally Posted by kalle7

We dont have to put up on the Net models IDs? Do I understand your post correctly?

Sorry for asking perhaps obvious questions, but I am a little these days lol

No you do not have to put up the models ID on the Internet.

What you have to do is go see a lawyer who understands this law and can advise you.

Or get out of porn.

Or risk going to jail for 5 years.

Originally Posted by ardentgent

Paul, is it your opinion that pictures not fitting the definition of sexually explicit as defined in 2257 are not covered by 2257? So if I make a gallery that does not meet the definition of sexually explicit, just nudity at "worse"I do not have to do anything regarding the statute- no exemption statement, nada?

That is my understanding of the law. However a grey area is what the rest of the set contianed and I must get over and read that bit again to see what it says.

Paul, the problem is if they use softcore content to promote a hardcore site with hardcore banners, then their publication contains one or more images of sexual content and then they need 2257 for everything in the publication.

There is little or no way to slip out of this one easily.

Not if you don't use their banner.

A lot of free porn just went soft.

[lassiter]

Originally Posted by ardentgent

I believe that 2257 states that only A-D apply. E is exempt.

That was in the Ashcroft language as proposed, and what was keeping what few free sites I have left up and running. But I don't see an exemption for "E" in the new actual regulations that were issued. Can anyone authoritatively indicate where "E" is exempt under the new regs?

[kalle7]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

You don't have to post the model's IDs online. This is a popular mistake. You don't have to indentify the models. Those items stay IN YOUR RECORDS. You do however have to have those records in your principle place of business, organized as per the new 2257 rules, and you must have a 2257 disclaimer on your sites that lists your principle place of business (and your real name) so that the DOJ can inspect those records.

NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER post model personal information online.

Alex

That is excellent news. Thanks Alex! Made the future much more brighter

[RawAlex]

Paul, I agree that softcore may be a way to go... but I think most webmasters will find that when they are competing against hardcore sites from outside the US, they are pretty much doomed. Further, I am not clear that using softcore material to promote a hardcore site would exempt you from rules - the premise is hardcore, no?

More importantly, model IDs should be required anyway, because nobody wants to have a topless 16 year old on their site.

Just as importantly, even if you material is 100% exempt, I think you still have to declare as a secondary producer, and as such, your name and address is still going to be out there for all to see.

Good fun.

Alex

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Paul, I agree that softcore may be a way to go... but I think most webmasters will find that when they are competing against hardcore sites from outside the US, they are pretty much doomed. Further, I am not clear that using softcore material to promote a hardcore site would exempt you from rules - the premise is hardcore, no?

More importantly, model IDs should be required anyway, because nobody wants to have a topless 16 year old on their site.

Just as importantly, even if you material is 100% exempt, I think you still have to declare as a secondary producer, and as such, your name and address is still going to be out there for all to see.

Good fun.

Alex

Agreed. the future for US affiliates is bought content with IDs, softcore or hosted. Will be a few exceptions but I guess that's it.

And the world will see where you work from.

[airdick]

Originally Posted by lassiter

That was in the Ashcroft language as proposed, and what was keeping what few free sites I have left up and running. But I don't see an exemption for "E" in the new actual regulations that were issued. Can anyone authoritatively indicate where "E" is exempt under the new regs?

In the same place it has always been exempt, at 18 USC Section 2257(h).

What has happened is that the DOJ ammended the regulations (28 CFR 75.1 through 75.8) used to implement 18 USC Section 2257, but the wording of 2257 remains the same.

[ngb1959]

your name and address is still going to be out there for all to see.

Where do we list our name and address ??

Thanks.


Nina

[lassiter]

Originally Posted by airdick

In the same place it has always been exempt, at 18 USC Section 2257(h).

What has happened is that the DOJ ammended the regulations (28 CFR 75.1 through 75.8) used to implement 18 USC Section 2257, but the wording of 2257 remains the same.

Hmmm, ok. But...the only place I can find the complete language of Sec. 2257 is at
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/h...7----000-.html

where, for example, it states that

(i) Whoever violates this section shall be imprisoned for not more than 2 years, and fined in accordance with the provisions of this title, or both. Whoever violates this section after having been convicted of a violation punishable under this section shall be imprisoned for any period of years not more than 5 years but not less than 2 years, and fined in accordance with the provisions of this title, or both.

And yet the 28 CFR Part 75 rule states:

The statute requires the producers of
such matter to ``ascertain, by examination of an identification
document containing such information, the performer's name and date of
birth,'' to ``ascertain any name, other than the performer's present
and correct name, ever used by the performer including maiden name,
alias, nickname, stage, or professional name,'' and to record this
information. 18 U.S.C. 2257(b). Violations of these record-keeping
requirements are criminal offenses punishable by imprisonment for not
more than five years for a first offense and not more than ten years
for subsequent offenses. See 18 U.S.C. 2257(i).

So either Gonzalez is misquoting existing law regarding the first- and second-offense penalties for violation, or else the changes to Part 75 themselves serve to amend existing law, or else the law has been amanded by Congress in the past year without anyone (including Cornell Law School) noticing.

[ardentgent]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Paul, I agree that softcore may be a way to go... but I think most webmasters will find that when they are competing against hardcore sites from outside the US, they are pretty much doomed. Further, I am not clear that using softcore material to promote a hardcore site would exempt you from rules - the premise is hardcore, no?

More importantly, model IDs should be required anyway, because nobody wants to have a topless 16 year old on their site.

Just as importantly, even if you material is 100% exempt, I think you still have to declare as a secondary producer, and as such, your name and address is still going to be out there for all to see.

Good fun.

Alex

The statute applies to producers of sexually explicit matter.

In our discussion of this issue think there is unnecessary confusion because some of us are talking a from the perspective of a paysite owner and others are talking from the perspective of an affiliate.

If I make a tgp gallery with softcore images ( non-sexually explicit per the definition A-D of 2256) I don't think I have to worry about any documentation or record keeping or disclaimers even if I link to a sponsor with sexually explicit pictures on their server. Does this make sense?

[plateman]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham2

Agreed. the future for US affiliates is bought content with IDs, softcore or hosted. Will be a few exceptions but I guess that's it.

And the world will see where you work from.

I bought some markham content and the models reside overseas so is it legal to use by a US webmaster ??

Originally Posted by plateman

I bought some markham content and the models reside overseas so is it legal to use by a US webmaster ??

The law is confusing on this one. But it's been explained to me that I'm the producer so it's legal. They list the IDs that are acceptable so non US models shot by non US people are acceptable.

Just my opinion.

[ed146]

Btw I have some of your teen content Paul. However, since the documents are on pictures am I still vulnerable for providing valid documents or pictures with models showing them documents would suffice? Since the wording on 2257 is ambiguous at this point, I am clueless.

Here is the article
https://www.ynot.com/modules.php?op=...rder=0&thold=0

Originally Posted by ed146

Btw I have some of your teen content Paul. However, since the documents are on pictures am I still vulnerable for providing valid documents or pictures with models showing them documents would suffice? Since the wording on 2257 is ambiguous at this point, I am clueless.

Here is the article
https://www.ynot.com/modules.php?op=...rder=0&thold=0

So print them out to be double sure.

[wolfie]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham2

No you do not have to put up the models ID on the Internet.

What you have to do is go see a lawyer who understands this law and can advise you.

Or get out of porn.

Or risk going to jail for 5 years.

True true!
And hopely all understand this.

It's just crazy to add all online. Models may be in serious danger after that if anybody can read their stuff plus cheaters will just crap IDs from a web.

My opinion for best way to keep records is in your own computer, backups in DVDs or similar.

There's always risk when post that kind information to web, especially if using some free or cheap program to try secure those.

Also I have feeling that there must be law that give you jail if do that.

[RawAlex]

ardentgent, it truly is not clear to me that softcore porn promotions are going to be exempt, and more importantly, I am not clear that they exempt people from the worst part of this law, meeting the requirements to publish a custodian of records, list an office, and so on.

You get into very questionable areas when you are promoting hardcore sites with softcore content, or using hardcore terms around softcore content.

Imagine a "child art" site (I hate the term). They do fall into a legal hole that says "art is good". However, if you mention fucking or anything on that part, it loses it's art status and becomes, well, porn.

Without keeping records and without having proper model identification, how do you prove it isn't child porn as per 2256? How do you prove that the entire work is exempt (IE, the photoshoot wasn't mixed hard and soft material)?

I am really not comfortable with trying to dodge something like this. Your in porn or your not, come on out of the closet.

Alex

[Mr. Blue]

I think everyone needs to settledown a little and take a deep breath. That's exactly what I did and instead of guessing what will happen with all the specifics or hoping for an injuction that will change this (which I think will happen), but I'm moving on dealing with the facts. Here's my personal plan:

1. Continue writing pages and document them so they're 100% compliant with the new regulation.

2. Move off free sponsor content unless the sponsor is going to provide you with the necessary information.

3. Euro content...honestly this for me is a grey area. Each week a different lawyer has a different take on the law. Personally I'm just going to pull the Euro content I used. There's plenty of U.S. content providers that can supply you with the needed documentation...why get cute and chance it? If / When the DOJ comes to inspect my records do I really want to argue the law with them? Umm, no...I'll leave that for other people to do.

http://www.ynot.com/modules.php?op=m...ticle&sid=9465

One lawyer after another keeps coming up with a different take on it.

4. Softcore / Hardcore - Softcore taken from a Hardcore set, lol, whatever...document everything. If you use primarily softcore they'll probably be less likely to investigate you...but again when / if they come for inspection do you really want to be arguing, "But spreading her pussy lips isn't sexually explicit!" Just have the documentation even on the softcore stuff. It takes around 15 minutes to catalog this shit a day.

5. Separate computer with my documentation on it. I assembled a cheap ass comp that can handle basic spreadsheets, that has a big enough HD, and when / if the time comes all my info will be on that comp. Also I'm making duplicate records so if they do need to take away info from my place...I have it all ready for them.
Price of a CD-R: A few pennies
Price of some printed up spreadsheets: Pennies
Getting those fucks out of my house 10 minutes quicker: Priceless

6. Home address...well, this is one of those, put up or shut up moments. It sucks, but no sense in arguing how much it sucks My one suggestion here would be for your 2257 page...make sure you use the noindex meta tag so google doesn't spider that page. Might even be worth writting a robot.txt file to specify that page not be indexed. If you have the money for an office...good for you...if you don't put your house address. If you don't want to put your house address...do mainstream pages I do rather nicely in mainstream.

I think its worth riding this storm out...porn on the net will be different 6 months from now, but more profitable for those that weather the storm.

[RawAlex]

Mr blue, exanding on point 6, you might want to put your contact info as an jpg or gif, with the right sized fonts and all... that will make the content not be indexed, and make it easy to replace if you move or change business offices later.

Alex

[Mr. Blue]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Mr blue, exanding on point 6, you might want to put your contact info as an jpg or gif, with the right sized fonts and all... that will make the content not be indexed, and make it easy to replace if you move or change business offices later.

Alex

Excellent Idea!!!