content provider/2257 problem

[RawAlex]

It gets down to the same thing: As a business, I understand nobody wants to work for free. As a content provider, the government has stated that primary providers who don't supply the documents to secondary producers will be in violation (read the DOJ blurb).

The choice by these content producers to take this sort of action just makes it much easier to decide who's content I will purchase in the future.

Alex

[Mr. Blue]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

The choice by these content producers to take this sort of action just makes it much easier to decide who's content I will purchase in the future.

Alex

It's funny how they don't think long-term though. You have customers that have bought from you, will probably buy again from you, and instead of trying to nurture that customer loyalty a lot are just screwing people over.

Also, word of mouth advertising is seriously gone...face it, some of the best referrals in adult comes from one webmaster recommending a service to another.

[Linkster]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

. As a content provider, the government has stated that primary providers who don't supply the documents to secondary producers will be in violation (read the DOJ blurb).

Alex

Alex - I dont know where you found that in the regs but if you could point it out Id appreciate it
The only thing I can find is that the secondary producer "may" obtain the documentation from the primary producer - and in fed reg talk which is defined in another reg - "may" means they can but are not required to and would not be in violation if they didnt
Now if they used the word "shall" or "will" then it becomes a reg requirement - again this is all definied in another reg on how to write regs

[SirMoby]

Originally Posted by Linkster

Alex - I dont know where you found that in the regs but if you could point it out Id appreciate it
The only thing I can find is that the secondary producer "may" obtain the documentation from the primary producer - and in fed reg talk which is defined in another reg - "may" means they can but are not required to and would not be in violation if they didnt
Now if they used the word "shall" or "will" then it becomes a reg requirement - again this is all definied in another reg on how to write regs

It was in the comments but not in the actual regulations.