2257 regs published in full

[LindaMight]

Originally Posted by Tommy

maybe GG&J should consider making a 2257 section
I think theres gonna be a huge amount of topics on this

like sponsors posting info on their content and hosted gallerys
what webmasters are doing to comply etc etc
this is an important issue and webmasters should have easy access to infomation

anybody else like the idea

I think that is a most excellent idea!

[LindaMight]

Ok...so the way I figure it is:

I run my own site with my own content, namely myself and George are the models. I have two other people that are on the site in just a few updates and I have their Driver's licenses and signed waivers. Right now the records are kept at my corporate attorney's office because I work out of my home also.

So, if I am reading this right, I need to make sure the two people that I have info on have corresponding URL's where their images can be seen. AND, instead of the attorneys holding these MEASLY two files, now I have to do so and they have to be onsite. Now the onsite address is no longer the attorney, but either our home or we rent an office space and put a filing cabinet in there with two files in it? Or, four counting me and George. AM I GETTING THIS RIGHT?

|shocking| Linda

[Barron]

Originally Posted by LindaMight

Ok...so the way I figure it is:

I run my own site with my own content, namely myself and George are the models. I have two other people that are on the site in just a few updates and I have their Driver's licenses and signed waivers. Right now the records are kept at my corporate attorney's office because I work out of my home also.

So, if I am reading this right, I need to make sure the two people that I have info on have corresponding URL's where their images can be seen. AND, instead of the attorneys holding these MEASLY two files, now I have to do so and they have to be onsite. Now the onsite address is no longer the attorney, but either our home or we rent an office space and put a filing cabinet in there with two files in it? Or, four counting me and George. AM I GETTING THIS RIGHT?

|shocking| Linda

Your almost correct...

You need two forms of ID, one of them has to be picture id from a US government source(drivers license will do). But, you have to have a copy of each depiction attached to a list of every url the depiction is on, attached to the age docs. And, you have to have the date of the shoot, date of publication and you have to have all that cross-referenced with any names the models might have used, including maiden names.

Oh, dont forget to have the url for all the thumbs, banners and the large pics. And dont forget that you have to store the webcam presentations as well.

Bottom line, its more than just two little files. Also, dont listen to me, contact your lawyer, I may be wrong.

-

[LindaMight]

Originally Posted by Barron

Your almost correct...

You need two forms of ID, one of them has to be picture id from a US government source(drivers license will do). But, you have to have a copy of each depiction attached to a list of every url the depiction is on, attached to the age docs. And, you have to have the date of the shoot, date of publication and you have to have all that cross-referenced with any names the models might have used, including maiden names.

Oh, dont forget to have the url for all the thumbs, banners and the large pics. And dont forget that you have to store the webcam presentations as well.

Bottom line, its more than just two little files. Also, dont listen to me, contact your lawyer, I may be wrong.

-

So, if I just dump the pics and vids of the two other people and leave the site solely presenting just George and I, that means that every single image pertains to only us, including URL's and banners and thumbnails and videos. So since it's just us, do we have to link our names to every single image when we are the owners? And webcam can just go away I guess.
? |shocking|

Thanks for any help. I guess we're looking for office space.

Linda

[HornyHeather]

What are they considering explicit content? if anyone knows...??? Just sexual acts? or nudity also?

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by HornyHeather

What are they considering explicit content? if anyone knows...??? Just sexual acts? or nudity also?

"sexually explicit conduct” means actual or simulated—
(A) sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex;
(B) bestiality;
(C) masturbation;
(D) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or
(E) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person;"

Please note E... basically, show the fur (or area that would have the fur) and you are pretty much there. Masturbation is wide open, it could even involve just squeezing a breast and going "ooooo".

I dunno.

Alex

[Barron]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

"sexually explicit conduct” means actual or simulated—
(A) sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex;
(B) bestiality;
(C) masturbation;
(D) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or
(E) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person;"

Please note E... basically, show the fur (or area that would have the fur) and you are pretty much there. Masturbation is wide open, it could even involve just squeezing a breast and going "ooooo".

I dunno.

Alex

I think this a good example of why all this needs to be in court. The word simulated was mentioned in the changes. And that brought to mind the exemption of HBO and the others because they are showing simulated, they are in the clear.

Sec. 75.7 Exemption statement.

(a) Any producer of any book, magazine, periodical, film,
videotape, digitally- or computer-manipulated image, digital image,
picture, or other matter may cause to be affixed to every copy of the
matter a statement attesting that the matter is not covered by the
record-keeping requirements of 18 U.S.C. 2257(a)-(c) and of this part
if:
(1) The matter contains only visual depictions of actual sexually
explicit conduct made before July 3, 1995, or is produced,
manufactured, published, duplicated, reproduced, or reissued before
July 3, 1995;
(2) The matter contains only visual depictions of simulated
sexually explicit conduct; or,

[airdick]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

"sexually explicit conduct” means actual or simulated—
(A) sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex;
(B) bestiality;
(C) masturbation;
(D) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or
(E) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person;"

Please note E... basically, show the fur (or area that would have the fur) and you are pretty much there. Masturbation is wide open, it could even involve just squeezing a breast and going "ooooo".

I dunno.

Alex

I seem to remember looking at all of this stuff in a thread from a few months ago. The part that read "(E) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person" and simulated sexual conduct is *NOT* covered by 2257. You are quoting all of paragraph (2) of section Title 18 2256 for your definition, however "actual sexually explicit conduct" is defined in Title 18 2257 (h)(1) as a subset of Title 18 2256 paragraph (2) that excludes simulated sexual conduct and (E):

Title 18 2257 (h) As used in this section—
(1) the term “actual sexually explicit conduct” means actual but not simulated conduct as defined in subparagraphs (A) through (D) of paragraph (2) of section 2256 of this title;


The new rules are going to be bad enough as it is for webmasters in the USA, let's not make it any worse by reading extra stuff into the law that is not there.

Of course, the usual IANAL disclaimer applies here. Don't take my word for any of this, please seek the advice of an attorney to plan your compliance program.

[Barron]

Originally Posted by LindaMight

So, if I just dump the pics and vids of the two other people and leave the site solely presenting just George and I, that means that every single image pertains to only us, including URL's and banners and thumbnails and videos. So since it's just us, do we have to link our names to every single image when we are the owners? And webcam can just go away I guess.
? |shocking|

Thanks for any help. I guess we're looking for office space.

Linda

If its just you and George? I think this is a gray area that you need to discuss with your lawyer.

The stuff I read today didnt make allowances for the producer and the performer being the same person. It only talked about the producer and secondary producer being the same person.

If I was a performer and the producer of depictions for my own website, I would cover my bases and have all the info they require. Spending 5 years in jail is more of a chance than I personally would want to take on the subject of a gray area.

Again, I would speak to my attorney about this.