Freedom Isn't Free! Fuck the FSC!

[SlickRick]

Originally Posted by sam

I feel the same way Rick...however, I hope your right about it getting thrown out in do time.

ya well I am keeping my fingers crossed. I am not an attorney and dont know what was said in the court room. I'd like to read the court room transscrips though.

stranger things have happend, this is just a bad case of "BIG BROTHER" getting into everyones personal life and business.

[sue-fl]

Well this is just great... I've been off the computer most of the day thinking everthing was going to work out. Ha was I wrong! No I didn't join the FSC and glad I didn't now. How can shit like this happen? I know you don't have to tell me his name is Bush! Well I didn't vote for him what else can I do but just get angry which is not healthy.

God this is just getting worse and it sucks!!

[Lemmy]

This "deal" is no less unconstitutional than the 2257 regs themselves. I would normally just laugh and shrug, but with the other news today about the Supreme Court ruling in the Connecticut eminent domain case and DoD creating databases of all teenagers it looks like the values that once made America unique are being flushed down the toilet. Anything is possible, maybe the sky is falling...

[fudge]

Every couple of years I feel the need to post something, I'm feeling the need again

I think the subject of this post reflects my feelings. The FSC can no longer claim to represent the adult entertainment industry.
If the DOJ thought they would defeat the motion for the TRO they wouldn't have cut this deal. It's no more complicated than that.

FSC have said their phone has been ringing off the hook with people wanting to join. The industry as a whole has been let down, and I know several FSC members who are unhappy with the situation.

I have had misgivings about the FSC for a long time, hence I decided not to join, although it did seem for a while there that they were doing ok. I am now going to go and join the ACLU, something I should have done a long time ago, they seem like our best hope for a wide ranging long term fix.
I find it very telling that the FSC described this as great news.

[Greenguy]

Originally Posted by Useless Warrior

Avatar placement.

If I wasn't married, I'd call T Pat & ask about getting me set up south of the border

[koolkat]

I am seriously looking at offshore dealings for my main site. Not that I have anything to hide, and the costs are much more, but it makes me sick to see stuff like this in our country. With the internet being worldwide, it makes me what to share some with the rest of the world!

[SlickRick]

Originally Posted by koolkat

I am seriously looking at offshore dealings for my main site. Not that I have anything to hide, and the costs are much more, but it makes me sick to see stuff like this in our country. With the internet being worldwide, it makes me what to share some with the rest of the world!

there inlies the problem koolkat.
if you reside in the US you can not be exepmt from this by moving to a hosting company thats not in the US. The only way is to move to that country. At least thats what I was told from my attorney.

[koolkat]

I was looking at the works... hosting, banking, billing, etc all out of the US

[Toby]

Originally Posted by koolkat

I was looking at the works... hosting, banking, billing, etc all out of the US

None of that makes any difference if you yourself still reside in the U.S.

[PhoneSexChick]

Originally Posted by koolkat

I was looking at the works... hosting, banking, billing, etc all out of the US

I don't think it matters. What matters is where YOU live. My hosting has been in Canada for years, and it wouldn't be that hard to set up a PO box and bank account there.

But my ass is right here in the USA, and I've read those regs again and again trying to find *something*

I think the only way around it would be to transfer everything - domain registrations, payment, etc. - to a friend in Canada or somewhere and have them write you personal checks. Probably illegal as hell, and you'd have to really trust the person on the other end, but I suppose that might work. (But I'm not going to try it...was just a thought I had and then said nah)

[Chop Smith]

Originally Posted by Linkster

Actually I was just thinking that the ACLU would love a piece of this one - against the FSC and DOJ as co-Defendents

I am not a joiner or a crusader but I just joined the ACLU. Now to figure out how to suggest they file against FSC and DOJ for selective enforcement which violates the 14th amendment.

[docholly]

Originally Posted by Chop Smith

I am not a joiner or a crusader but I just joined the ACLU. Now to figure out how to suggest they file against FSC and DOJ for selective enforcement which violates the 14th amendment.

way to go chop..

[Toby]

The Equal Protection provisions of the 14th Amendment only apply to the States, not to the Federal government. However, there would still be some major due process issues if the DOJ were to try and prosecute any "non-members" during the terms of this agreement with the FSC.

[Chop Smith]

Originally Posted by Toby

The Equal Protection provisions of the 14th Amendment only apply to the States, not to the Federal government. However, there would still be some major due process issues if the DOJ were to try and prosecute any "non-members" during the terms of this agreement with the FSC.

Just relying on what my lawyer said. Of course we met in his office which is under a shade tree.

[RawAlex]

Why do I think a T-shirt with this logo would be a good thing to wear in Miami?

Just a thought.

Alex

[Toby]

Originally Posted by Chop Smith

Just relying on what my lawyer said. Of course we met in his office which is under a shade tree.

My kind of office.

www.law.cornell.edu/...
The last paragraph has the pertinent info.

[Lunatic]

Maybe this is the only way the FSC can do anything. The members are identified and verified and so can be protected temporarily until the courts hash things out. But everything the FSC accomplishes from an injunction on will apply towards everyone won't it?

[domweb]

Originally Posted by Lunatic

Maybe this is the only way the FSC can do anything. The members are identified and verified and so can be protected temporarily until the courts hash things out. But everything the FSC accomplishes from an injunction on will apply towards everyone won't it?

That's what everyone thought the first time around.

Shall we go double or nothing?

[Tubey]

This whole thing should be thrown out and some more thought put into it. The FSC can shove it....This is an extortion tactic to get us signed up as members. I'll wait to see what they come up with. Is there some kind of icon they are putting on members sites to keep the DOJ off them?? I haven't seen one yet..... so how do they know if we are members or not.....they may give all that info to the DOJ hitlist as being people needing protection from the 2257 laws........something to think about.

[Tubey]

and after thinking about it...why can't they make this easier on everyone...the content producer keep a list of all sites using the content and the website showing which content producer is being used. The producer keeps all records within his building and the DOJ doesn't have to visit 30,000 of us seems simple enough to me.

[xxxjay]

Oh lord, you guys...you could do 2 things, the way I see it:

1. Get a lawyer and file your own injunction (much more than $300)

2. Get 100% 2257 compliant and pray they don't come knocking

It is Gonzolez vs. The Free Speach Coalition not Gonzolez vs. The Earth!

Do you think all of the people that want porn gone to be part of the injunction? Nope.

Grow up people...$300 ain't shit and if you can't afford it -- this obviously hasn't been working out for you and you should consider another job.

[lassiter]

Originally Posted by cosmiccat

If John Kerry had been elected president instead of George W, would we still be talking about this 2257 bullshit? Thought so!

Yep, we sure would. The move started under Ashcroft in Dubya's first term, and Kerry isn't the type who would want to be seen as halting any so-called "anti-CP" initiative, so matter how phony.

And don't forget that Kerry not only voted for Scalia's nomination to the Supreme Court, but actually made a speech on the floor of the Senate praising "his good friend." He's no friend of civil liberties.

[Useless]

Originally Posted by xxxjay

Grow up people...$300 ain't shit and if you can't afford it -- this obviously hasn't been working out for you and you should consider another job.

OK, I'm convinced - I quit.

Everyone please stop submitting to me and pull all of my links. I'm too immature, too ignorant, and don't have any tattoos or piercings, so I can no longer remain in this industry. As of noon today, my domains will be used for selling bibles.

[Useless]

And another fucking thing,

Originally Posted by xxxjay

Oh lord, you guys...you could do 2 things, the way I see it:

1. Get a lawyer and file your own injunction (much more than $300)

2. Get 100% 2257 compliant and pray they don't come knocking

It is Gonzolez vs. The Free Speach Coalition not Gonzolez vs. The Earth!

Do you think all of the people that want porn gone to be part of the injunction? Nope.

Maybe the ignorant cock that wrote the 2257 announcement for OC Cash should have mentioned that only FSC members are safe from justice before OC Cash told us to pretty much not worry about complying. What'ya think there, tough guy?

[Linkster]

I dont know where ya'll are getting your history on 2257 - but it started being written under the first Bush and went through under Clinton - its been around for a long time - just nobody payed any attention to it including the DOJ