This whole directnic locking down a domain thing

[tickler]

Originally Posted by Simon IA Cash

He was using FHGs and figured he was in ok shape. He was actually starting the get that 2257 info after they gave him his warning and deadline and locked his sites. Then, before that deadline, they shut them down. I'm not sure I agree with that.

That being said, I'm not a fan of the making-them-look-as-young-as-possible approach, and I don't really mind it maybe shaking some webmasters up into getting those thumbs away. They're really (besides menstruation porn) the only ones that make me cringe.

But I do worry about where the line is drawn like you do, and about what precedents are set. DirectNIC's TOS are probably the same as everyone else's, but that doesn't mean they handled this fairly. They've had the sites running for a long time, and then they get a complaint and shut down the sites in the way they did, asking for current model IDs and not even mentioning 2257? Seems a bit unprofessional to me. Kinda harsh to really mess up the livelihood of someone who was using FHGs that were seemingly 2257 compliant, with an autocropper.

A few different thoughts:
1) Where's their badge, where's their warrant!
- According to FSC chairman Jeffrey Douglas, the request is illegal! Under federal law they have no right to these documents
2) Shooting yourself in the foot!
- They are immune from policing content under the law, but now by doing so they have created liability(not immune). DirectNIC is lawlessly intruding into their business.
3) Sponsor FHGs!
- Many sponsors now only provide FHGs, rather than free content, so that they do not need to pass along the 2257 info to WMs. Now if DN were to go and shut down Google images, which I am pretty sure you can find some actual CP I might be more inclined to go with alongit.