What are you going to do about this 2257 shit?

[xxxjay]

The new 2257 regulations go in effect in less than a month. My question is: What are your plans to comply?

[Cleo]

Some
Then I'll watch everyone run around in circles.
Then more
Then I'll watch the dust settle.
More
Then I'll think about what I need to do after I've watched what everyone else did.
Then a little more
Then I'll think about what if anything I need to do.
Time for some

[Surfn]

Originally posted by Cleo
Some
Then I'll watch everyone run around in circles.
Then more
Then I'll watch the dust settle.
More
Then I'll think about what I need to do after I've watched what everyone else did.
Then a little more
Then I'll think about what if anything I need to do.
Time for some

I'll watch you. lol

[DangerDave]

I will be borrowing Urb's foil helmet for the duration |shocking|

DD

[xxxjay]

Originally posted by Cleo
Some
Then I'll watch everyone run around in circles.
Then more
Then I'll watch the dust settle.
More
Then I'll think about what I need to do after I've watched what everyone else did.
Then a little more
Then I'll think about what if anything I need to do.
Time for some

What if the person they come down on is you?

[Cleo]

What if a meteorite hits me in the head?

Seeing as the new rules are all but impossible to completely comply with subject to how they are interpreted I don't see any reason to change how I have been complying.

If I should have the bad luck to be the victim of our religious right wing zealots on their witch hunt I don't see any benefit to have tried to comply more then I always have.

I'm only an imperfect being living in an imperfect world who keeps imperfect records. Knowing this I take comfort in the fact that no matter how hard I might try I would never be able to live up to the angelic perfection of these religious right wing zealot's values.

[Surfn]

Well said Cleo

[xxxjay]

Originally posted by Cleo


I'm only an imperfect being living in an imperfect world who keeps imperfect records. Knowing this I take comfort in the fact that no matter how hard I might try I would never be able to live up to the angelic perfection of these religious right wing zealot's values.

Try that speech on a jury - the judge might go easier on you.

[Surfn]

Originally posted by xxxjay
Try that speech on a jury - the judge might go easier on you.

Where did you get your legal training?

Where do you practice if you have any?

[Cleo]

So Jay since you seem to be loved by those who wear blue about as much as they love me what are you planing on doing?

[BigJohn]

Well maybe I'm interpreting things incorrectly but from what I saw, anything PRIOR to the magic date is grandfathered unless you have to update that models file for any reason. If I update ANY info on a model then I must make that models records compliant (which basically means I purchased more of their content or shot them again in which case I'll easily be able to get the info).

The only tedious part that I see from my sites perspective is that when I update a models records I now need to provide a URL in her records to every place on my sites where her explicit pictures exist. Hopefully I'm interpreting the exact url thing incorrectly and only need to provide a base url but hopefully that will become clearer. While this is tedious, time consuming and a royal pain in the ass..... it's far from impossible. The ones that will get hit hard on this one are the folks who produce and sell content. It will be nearly impossible for them to keep track of the all the URL's since it's doubtful that the purchaser will report back every gallery, free site, banner, etc that they use it on.

Keeping track of all the models stage names is going to be difficult as well. If I shoot a model today and she's using Casey and someone else shoots her a 4 months from now and she calls herself something else, or she moves away and gets married there's no way to know that information. Hell I've had models I shot one week and when I called them back for another shoot the next week they had moved and were unreachable! I plan to be as up to date with this as possible but I'm not going to worry about it. If my records are as straight as they can be, I'm not going to fret about now knowing that some model got married and didn't tell me, can't worry about things I can't do anything about.

[T Pat]

I'm in a wait and see mode and not sweating it and not doing sqwat.

I only shoot soft core
The girls I photograph are all card carrying Mexican Sex workers working in Brothels, The Brothel Owners aren't going to risk prison for employing girls under 18

If I feel forced to comply I'm giveing my Whore sites to my favorite hooker and going to work for her. (I did it with my Escort site)

All the girls will give you a quick glimpse at there sex worker cards but there is no way in hell I'm going to get them all to let me photograph there ID's
because there are two things you can bank on when it comes to Mexican Whores,
1, there using a fake name
2, there lieing about there age

[Horny Dude]

TJPat...that is scary because we have run into alot of girls over there who are 14+ and will do anything and tell you anything to earn money.

My records are about the best I can hope for. I have my forms in order and that is about the best I can do. If they come to me and want to start something then fine, I'll deal with it then. I can't run around screaming, it won't help. If you keep good records like you are supposed to then you shouldn't have to worry. If most of your content is from KaZaa and newsgroups then you are fucked and should be shut down.

My two bits!

[RawAlex]

TP: Basically, your content is not 2257 compliant at all. Being based in San diego, it applies to you - as soon as you take a picture of the girl full nude, you need 2257.

How do you know the girls are 18? You have no proof - if Assclown or one of his merry band ask you, you won't have it.

That is NOT a good way to do business.

Alex

[xxxjay]

Originally posted by RawAlex
TP: Basically, your content is not 2257 compliant at all. Being based in San diego, it applies to you - as soon as you take a picture of the girl full nude, you need 2257.

How do you know the girls are 18? You have no proof - if Assclown or one of his merry band ask you, you won't have it.

That is NOT a good way to do business.

Alex

I agree with that.

[RawAlex]

Oh yeah,giving the business to one of the girls after the feds show up doesn't get you out of the KP charges.

Alex

[xxxjay]

Originally posted by Cleo
So Jay since you seem to be loved by those who wear blue about as much as they love me what are you planing on doing?

LOL - yes they do, yes they do.

I still haven't decided 100%. I have been talking to lawyers a good bit and researching. I just hired the lawyer who got Max Hardcore off the hook and am meeting with him 8/9. I would rather be more proactive than reactive about this becasue I am probably a good target for them. How do you think they are finding all of this free xxx and porn?

http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...oe=UTF-8&q=xxx

I started this thread to see where everybody stood on this thing.

[airdick]

I don't pretend to be a lawyer or an expert, but if you print out 28 CFR part 75, 18 USC 2257, 18 USC 2256, and the proposed changes and sit down at desk with a highlighting pen you have a good chance of getting a pretty good idea about what is already law, and the changes that will take effect 60 days after the final draft of the changes is published.

Here are a two points that seem important to me when I look at the regs:

This law already applies to any "visual depictions made after November 1, 1990 of actual sexually explicit conduct"

Mere nudity is exempt. The only content that is subject to 2257 is "''actual sexually explicit conduct'' (but not simulated conduct) as defined in subparagraphs (A) through (D) of paragraph (2) of section 2256:

(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;


As has been mentioned before, the big changes are that adult webmasters will be considered to be "secondary producers", fewer forms of ID will be permited, and they have clarified where the notice regarding a custodian of records must be placed on websites.

I am not currently interested in acting as a custodian of records, so I'll stick to using only exempt content if the changes go through as-is.

It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out. Once the dust settles it will be easier to make plans going forward rather than dealing with all of this uncertainty.

[eman]

I'm thinking of moving to the US so that I can feel your pain.

Ironic that the nation which spawned internet porn should now be facing controls which threaten to remove it from the arena.

Of course it will never happen ...

[Cleo]

Just about all the content that I have I've bought from the larger content suppliers and I keep good records both for this and for taxes and all the other fun bits of paper that we are required by our government to keep.

Now if I was TijuanaPat I would be worried, but I would have been worried even before this.

[Surfn]

We can all run around crying the sky is falling. I doubt that will solve anything. This thing will be sorted out in the courts, not here on the boards.

If you think these things will harm your way of doing bossiness get out. Go flip burgers, pump gas, pluck chickens. Those are all safe occupations If this is not what you want why rant and rave?

I do not presume to tell anyone how they should operate. If someone wants my opinion I give it. There are ulterior motives at play with all the alarmist reactions. I have no hidden agenda. I operate out in the open.

Pat has the right to his opinions like any of us. He's an adult and is aware of the consequences of his actions. Don't treat him like he's feeble minded.

[RawAlex]

Airdick, I got bad news for you, please look up the definition of sexually explicit conduct:

''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;

E is the important one. Basically, if you can see the pink, it's sexual. Unless you are taking softcore images where the model doesn't show the coochie, doesn't touch her breasts, and doesn't similuate any sexual conduct, you are no exempt.

Girl sitting FULLY clothed simiulating masturbation needs the 2257 documentation.

A girl lying nude on a bed with her legs spread requires 2257 documentation.

Basically, if you are using it for promotion of adult materials, if you even suggest sex at any time in your website or other materials, you better have 2257 documentation.

There is no clear way to sneak out of it.

Alex

[Linkster]

Since I have no way of complying - all of the sponsors banners will need documentation if they fit those categories - I will continue doing what was already required, although I always have had the required documentation for any content I bought and used. I don't see a single sponsor running around worrying about how they are going to cover all of the free hosted galleries, free content or their promo material and I think they would be a much bigger target than any of us small WMs that just do free sites and LLs/TGPs. I also don't see the gov't going after us small fry, when for many years they haven't gone after one primary producer for documentation of 2257. As far as I am concerned, right now it is being hyped by the people that are going to try and profit from the paranoia - till a test case happens, I won't worry - and if I happen to end up being a test case, there's not much I can do about it - there are a lot of other things on the books they could already hit us for if they really wanted to.
In the meantime, Im sure the people that stand to gain the most "money" will keep up the ranting and fear mongering till they've made their bucks.

[Cleo]

Well I'm doing something about it right now.

[RawAlex]

Linkster, so far with the exception of a very few, most of the people bringing up the subject are trying to sell tracking software or DRM type arrangements for content. There has been a ton of "the sky is falling" stuff.

Personally, I think the new "rule clarifications" are not that, but in fact new laws and amendments to laws, which, when taken to a court of law, will be thrown out because these new laws were not passed by the house, the senate, and signed by POTUS. While they can calify rules with these adminstrative orders, they cannot create new offences where none previously existed, nor can they create retroactive paperwork requirements for individuals and companies that were previously exempt.

A few will get nailed, but like Acacia, someone will take them to court and things will settle back down.

1 more reason for Americans to vote Bush and his bullies out of office.

Alex