Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Linkster
I hate to piss in your wheaties here - but 2257 has nothing whatsoever with keeping kids away from porn sites on the net - that is a completely different legislation that was killed by the supreme court a few years back
And actually I think you will find most WMs do use the PICs label on their larger sites that would normally get into search engines etc
So I guess Im a little confused about what the hell all of this talk about PICs labels and joining the ASACP has anything to do with filing the 2257 TRO (not injunction as the thread states) Im not trying to be a jerk as I think they are both worthy causes and deserve their place in seperate threads
|
I understand what it's about. I also have a right to privacy by not disclosing my personal info. I am a webmaster and a producer of my own images. I also have an affiliate program. So it is not that I am unaware of what this is all about. I am directly affected and will not give out my ID. It is also my contention that the burden of making sure a model is of age has been grossly misplaced. Ultimately a producer can make a fake ID, the model can give a fake ID. How am I supposed to know what I am looking at. So if passed to me, all might look just spiffy, when in reality it may not be a legitimate document. So if it is not real am I still going to jail? Furthermore, unless you are taking the pics you will be hard pressed to stop use of under age models. Suppose the reason the FSC is pursuing this issue is because they feel similarly. And in the end the adult webmaster should not bear the burden of verifying the legitimacy of a models age or documents as they can well be bogus. Instead, we should concentrate on what we can change like making sure under age surfers can't access our sites. The 2257 needs a good swift rethinking. On one had you have the right to privacy, what it's all about. And then the same supreme power that maintains you have this right, is trying to take it away. Place the burden of 2257 back where it belongs and let us worry about keeping minors out of our sites. If a shaddy producer is shaddy, then what would it matter to them what the age of the model is, or if they are providing us with credible documentation. This is why I say 2257 is putting the burden quite wrongly on people that have nothing to do with it. Focus on what is in our control, like ICRA lableing. And stop trying to violate my rights. Additionally FSC feels that thier rights are being discriminated against. So as citizens, we all have the same rights. So now the FSC is discriminating against anyone not supporting them. It's all a totally double edged sword. And all of us can be 2257 compliant to the nines, and it will not stop the use of under age models, becuase the crimianls doing it are no where near this board or 2257. Unless you are holding the camera you should not have to prove models ages. What you can do is make sure minors do not enter your sites. And of course use reasonible discretion and record keeping to ensure you are not knowingly distributing pics of minors. The ultimate responsibilty is the producers not mine. Thanks and have a great day.
