Greenguy's Board

Greenguy's Board (http://www.greenguysboard.com/board/index.php)
-   General Business Knowledge (http://www.greenguysboard.com/board/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Any News on the "Good News"? (http://www.greenguysboard.com/board/showthread.php?t=21227)

koolkat 2005-06-23 04:13 PM

Any News on the "Good News"?
 
Has anybody heard anything about this supposed "good news"?

It said an announcement would be made at 1:30pm, however it neglected to say which time zone. I figured it would be mountain time, since that is where the suit was filed, but since that has passed, it must be pacific time since that is where the FSC is located.

MadMax 2005-06-23 04:14 PM

From AVN Online:
http://www.avnonline.com/index.php?P...tent_ID=231539

DENVER - A source close to the parties involved confirmed Thursday morning that a deal has been reached between the Free Speech Coalition and the U.S. Department of Justice that will free FSC members from worry about prosecution for violating 18 U.S.C §2257, at least temporarily.

A unnamed source who wished to be identified only as “one of the president’s men” told AVN.com that under a deal brokered by FSC attorneys, FSC members will be protected from inspection or enforcement of the recently revised 2257 regulations until after Free Speech Coalition et al v. Gonzales has gone to court and a decision has been rendered. That process that can take several months.

The FSC sued the DOJ on June 16 in the Tenth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, outlining more than 20 separate claims why the revised regulations should be invalidated and asking the court to issue a temporary restraining order against enforcement of the regulations. The deal means the TRO sought by the lawsuit no longer is necessary.

AVN.com is following this story, and will post details as they become available.

CrazySy 2005-06-23 04:23 PM

And this is the latest from XBiz http://xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=9249

Useless 2005-06-23 04:35 PM

If this alleged 'agreement' does go through, it will show exactly how weak and frivolous the FSC is. They'll have to change their name to 'Hurrah for us - fuck the rest of you'. If you have a precedent set at the 10th circuit court, why would you lessen your powers by pandering for a members-only agreement? Pathetic. Free speech my ass. Hired Speech. Paid Speech. Leased Speech, but certainly not free speech.

Smutferret 2005-06-23 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Useless Warrior
Pathetic. Free speech my ass. Hired Speech. Paid Speech. Leased Speech, but certainly not free speech.

Wow! You said a mouth full UW. I'm truly saddened and dismayed. I had expected better of the FSC.

Regards,
SF

Toby 2005-06-23 05:00 PM

First, let me say that I have sent my money to the FSC over a month ago and I support the cause. But....

Farrell and Gonzo both seem to disagree with me but I still say that any agreement or TRO that only includes "members" of the FSC isn't kosher. It would be no different than a state AG making a deal to have the highway patrol not give tickets to members of AARP. If the DOJ goes out and inspects, then arrests webmaster A instead of webmaster B, because webmaster B is a member of the FSC, then webmaster A has a built in case for dismissal on the grounds of descrimination.

And as I've stated before, unless the FSC gives a member list to the DOJ, which I find very unlikely, how will they know who is and isn't a member? Any agreement, TRO or injunction is going to include all adult webmasters

mrMagoo 2005-06-23 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Useless Warrior
If this alleged 'agreement' does go through, it will show exactly how weak and frivolous the FSC is. They'll have to change their name to 'Hurrah for us - fuck the rest of you'. If you have a precedent set at the 10th circuit court, why would you lessen your powers by pandering for a members-only agreement? Pathetic. Free speech my ass. Hired Speech. Paid Speech. Leased Speech, but certainly not free speech.

I agree 100% with what you said. However they would probably say that they have to do what is in the best interests of their clients.

Unfortunately I guess they think that is not fighting all out against this bull shit.

guitar riff 2005-06-23 05:17 PM

That article listed on Xbiz was posted at 9:55 Et so thats nothing good to go by since hearing wasnt til 1:30 MT .

tiny 2005-06-23 05:28 PM

What a crock of shit big news wheres it at.I wanna hear the big news they said they were gonna tell the world yesterday.You go and broker a deal with DOJ haha ya shoulda said hell no we'll see you in court get the shit thrown out and move on.Oh now that half the damn world is speakin up I don't see anything happenin anytime soon and yeah I can't wait to see what happens to a non member hehe

Lemmy 2005-06-23 05:28 PM

The whole notion of a "brokered" deal where certain individuals get immunity and the rest of us remain fair game smells fishy to me.

MadMax 2005-06-23 05:35 PM

It's quite interesting how the mainstream media (including FORBES for fuck's sake) is finally picking this up. I predict an interesting ride, especially if Canada stands up and says "fuck off" :)

Erick G 2005-06-23 06:02 PM

Once again USA becomes the joke of the week.. week after week after week
Does the gubment realise how idiotic all this bullshit is..
European tv commercials are far more graphic then the average american adult website:)

Pusher 2005-06-23 06:08 PM

What a bunch of SELFISH LOSERS!!!

HEY FSC |fuckyou|

Ramster 2005-06-23 06:21 PM

Total bullshit.

How the fuck will the DOJ know who to check and who not to check? It's BS.

And as Toby said, "then webmaster A has a built in case for dismissal on the grounds of descrimination".

plateman 2005-06-23 06:24 PM

ram if you read they check it agaist the sealed list of members - total BS


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:05 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© Greenguy Marketing Inc