Which Spons are Ready for 2257 Change?

[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.

[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.

[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?