2257: Food for thought

RawAlex · 2004-08-10, 01:25 PM

As you may (or may not) know, Janet Reno as AG attempted to put in place the exact same "regulatory guideance" that Assclown is currently trying to jam down our throats. The very specific question of a secondary producer came up, and was subject to a sourt decision:

http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/03/96-1501.htm

It should be noted that if you read the regulations carefully, all secondary producers, including anyone in the production chain, would be required to keep records and cross reference and all that crap. That would include third parties who edit videos, produce VHS or DVDs, people who print the box covers, companies that ship said material, etc. Without restriction, this could include (on the web side, by inference) hosting companies, graphic designers, gallery template builders, and such. In each case, they are part of the "publication" of a finished product, and potential under the framework required to retain records.

Thankfully, this has been shot down once before, and, in my opinion will likely be shot down again.

Read the whole thing VERY carefully, the 10th circuit has given you the exact guidance your lawyer will need to go back to court to protect your ass.

Alex

2004-08-10, 01:25 PM	#1
RawAlex Took the hint. Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,597	2257: Food for thought As you may (or may not) know, Janet Reno as AG attempted to put in place the exact same "regulatory guideance" that Assclown is currently trying to jam down our throats. The very specific question of a secondary producer came up, and was subject to a sourt decision: http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/03/96-1501.htm It should be noted that if you read the regulations carefully, all secondary producers, including anyone in the production chain, would be required to keep records and cross reference and all that crap. That would include third parties who edit videos, produce VHS or DVDs, people who print the box covers, companies that ship said material, etc. Without restriction, this could include (on the web side, by inference) hosting companies, graphic designers, gallery template builders, and such. In each case, they are part of the "publication" of a finished product, and potential under the framework required to retain records. Thankfully, this has been shot down once before, and, in my opinion will likely be shot down again. Read the whole thing VERY carefully, the 10th circuit has given you the exact guidance your lawyer will need to go back to court to protect your ass. Alex