Quote:
Originally Posted by nate
So let me get this straight. If content is legal by virtue of compliance with the 2257 statutes, it can still be considered illegal under the 2257 statutes? Is that what you are saying.
The law is plain. If the performer is 18 or older, and you can provide documentation she is 18 or older, then you can post naked pictures of her involved in explicit sex acts or lasciviously exposing her genitalia. The law isn't concerned with pony tails, bedspreads, stuffed animals or makeup. As the point was made earlier, that is "mind police" territory.
Further, this thread has always been about content that is in compliance with the federal statutes, that is until you came in and changed the subject.
If you can show anywhere in any of the statutes where the intent of a producer to make a documented 18 year old look younger makes the content illegal, post the bit that says that. I'd like to see it. Since I "obviously have no clue" and you seem to think you do, do us a favor and point it out.
Also, I suggest you refrain from personal attacks against people that have done you no wrong.
|
What I'm saying is you obviously haven't read the law. It is illegal to portray anyone, regardless of their real age, in a manner that makes them look younger that the age of 18. Hollywood lobbied, and won an exception but independent producers are not exempt.
So - such contend IS NOT in compliance with federal statutes - both IMO and in the professional opinion of my attorney - who just happens to represent dozens of adult producers.
So get a fuckin clue and read the law before you start assuming something is legal or not.