Quote:
Originally posted by Paul Markham2
I hive not seen anywhere that it says the documents are to be shown to surfers. Did I read it wrong?
|
Well, it depends on the interpretation of the language.
Proposed 28 CFR 75.2(a)(1) would require computer site or service producers to maintain a ``hard'' physical or electronic copy of the actual depiction with the identification and age files, along with and linked to all accession information, such as each URL used for that depiction. This ensures that all of the data about all of the people in the depictions can be accessed to ensure that none of the people in the depictions are minors.
A copy of the "actual depiction", linked to "each url used for that depiction" to ensure that "all of the data" about "all of the people in the depictions" can be "accessed."
First question is probably "accessed by whom?" The answer to that determines whether the "link" to "all the data" needs to be clickable from "each URL."
This obviously needs to be clarified, and quickly by the Justice Dept. Even if my lawyer told me I don't have to provide a link to "all" the model's data from "every URL" in which her images appear, if my lawyer's interpretation turns out to differ from the Justice Dept.' s interpretation, I could still face 5 years in jail for not letting my surfers find out my models' real names and addresses (remember it says ALL the data - no exceptions stated for addresses, etc.).
Knowing the Ashcroft boys, this sort of ambiguity and confusion is exactly their intention, though, so no clarification is likely to be made before someone is charged by the feds as a test case.