Quote:
Originally posted by airdick
IANAL, but it seems to me that records have to be made available to investigators designated by the Attorney General for inspection at your place of business. I don't see any requirement to have the actual records linked from the pages containing the content or otherwise available to the general public.
(excerpt from Sec. 75.4 Location of records.)
" Any producer required by this part to maintain records shall make
such records available at the producer's place of business."
(excerpt from Sec. 75.6 Statement describing location of books and records.)
"(3) A street address at which the records required by this part may
be made available. The street address may be an address specified by
the primary producer or, if the secondary producer satisfies the
requirements of Sec. 75.2(b), the address of the secondary producer. A
post office box address does not satisfy this requirement."
(excerpt from Sec. 75.5 Inspection of records)
"(a) Authority to inspect. Investigators designated by the Attorney
General (hereinafter ``investigators'') are authorized to enter without
delay and at reasonable times (as defined in subsection (c)(1)) any
establishment of a producer where records under Sec. 75.2 are
maintained to inspect, within reasonable limits and in a reasonable
manner, for the purpose of determining compliance with the record-
keeping requirements of 18 U.S.C. 2257."
|
IAANAL (I am also not a lawyer) but I agree with your interpretation. Essentially, as far as I can tell, this new regulation extends the responsibilities of "primary producers" (ie, those who make the pikkies and videos) to cover typical paysite, freesite and gallery owner. And it might possibly require even more of said paysite/freesite/gallery owner than it does of the primary producer. It would be impossible for the primary producer to track every url on which the images are used. It will be a royal pain in the ass for us site owners to do. But is it impossible? I'm not sure. It depends on how the regulation is interpreted. It would be a pain in the ass (but not impossible) for me to log all the urls where given content is featured.
But what about banners? Do I need ID for every model in every ad on every site? That would be problematic in the extreme.
I will mention again; I'm not a lawyer (not even a law student) so I really have no clue. What troubles me is that I suspect any given lawyer will have a different interpretation of this regulation, and we won't have a solid definition or interpretation without somebody acting as a test case. Personally, I don't want to be that case, so I'm going to do everything I can to cover my ass.
No, the sky isn't falling - but it's definitely time to break out the umbrellas.