Which Spons are Ready for 2257 Change?

[domweb]

Originally Posted by guitar riff

And if they want to pass a law make one where the registered sex offenders in this country can't own or posess a computer. They take away their Viagra now Take away their Computers The sick FUCKS dont need them anyhow.

Sure...if you are a sex offender to children, I could see limiting computer access.

But keep in mind, that if YOU get busted for not having your 2257 records perfect...YOU are a sex offender.

If you played doctor with the next door neighbor when you where ten years old and got busted (happens these days) YOU are a sex offender.

If someone falsely accuses you of grabbing ass at a bar and you get convicted, YOU are a sex offender.

If you order in a call girl and get busted, YOU are a sex offender.

If you moon a passing car and get arrested, YOU are a sex offender.

Careful what you wish for. You might discover yourself on the cross of public opinion. Ask the Salem 'witches' about it.

[guitar riff]

Originally Posted by domweb

Sure...if you are a sex offender to children, I could see limiting computer access.

Thats what I was referring to.

[MadMax]

There are a lot of ways to look at this, like any complex issue. There are literally dozens of causes for injunction and appeal in these regulations, and while the DOJ may be overzealous they're not stupid. They know exactly what was released, and what the likely results are. Odds are they want to go back to Congress and say "look, we're trying to do something here but the courts are tying our hands," then they'll do some actual enforcement on the current 2257 rules. This is just speculation, but it's worth mentioning.

It's also worth mentioning that when I buy "2257 compliant" hardcore content I rarely (if ever) get docs on the male model(s). It's like some big blind spot created by the Traci Lords incident, but I assure you the DOJ will not only be looking for docs on the female models. The rules are not gender specific, and enforcement won't be either.

Unless someone secures an injunction (read: FSC) we'll likely see free sponsor content go the way of the Dodo. They won't be allowed by these rules to release softcore pics from a hardcore set to skirt document release because of the wording of the rules. We'll also likely see hardcore banners disappearing, because under a strict interpretation you'd have to have docs for the pics the banners were created from.

In any case, I'll wait a bit before allowing panic to take hold. I've always felt there was too much "please" and not enough "tease" anyway. If we end up with a system where most or all of the free hardcore is only available on sponsor tours I think all our bottom lines will fatten up. My primary revenue stream comes from Fetish Philes, which doesn't host any hardcore images anyway. If I had to pull every one of my free sites and galleries I would be pissed, certainly, but it wouldn't be the end of the world. They've all made me money already and I would be upset to have to start over on FS and gals with a slightly different program...but it wouldn't be a total disaster.

I'm compliant with the current 2257 rules and I'm waiting to see what happens next.

This is just one more round of harassment from the DOJ. I'd personally prefer that airport security were better than before 9/11, but it isn't...the lines are just longer. The joke here is that all this chaos and confusion is designed to prevent the occasional use of a 17 YO model in an industry where 99.9% of the content producers wouldn't touch one with a 10 foot pole. Actual CPers don't run mainstream porn paysites. They trade their sickness across an underground network and don't give a flying fuck about 2257. How 'bout the DOJ actually go after them? Why isn't the media asking this question? Are we more worried about the occasional 17 YO like Traci Lords who secures fake identification because she wants to be in porn or the actual vicitims...the 8, 9, 10 YOlds who are getting abused every day? You'll never find their pics mixed in with a bunch of MILF Bukkake photos, so why bother looking?

I'd be happy to support any actual effort to remove CP from the internet, but at the end of the day that just isn't what's happening here.

Regardless, we'll find our way through this. And, as Paul said, a "culling of the herd" won't hurt those of us that are serious about business permanently...it will just slim down our wallets while we reorganize.

[MrYum]

Very well said MadMax

Yea, this is a pain in the ass. But, even IF this comes to fruition and we have to comply as the regs currently stand...it's not the end of the world. Yea, I'd most likely pull some domains until I can bring them up to speed. Yea, I'll lose use of about half my content...maybe more. But, this business and the folks that are serious about it are pretty resilient.

Also, there is no way in hell these regs will do a damn thing to stop CP. You're absolutely right...sponsors...ESPECIALLY US sponsors don't touch that crap anyway.

I'm sitting tight until we know more about what will be NECESSARY to comply with...cuz it appears pretty obvious that these regs are far too reaching. When the time comes, I'll either swap out free site images based on niche...with content I have all the docs on. Or, I'll yank the domains...most of em are old and pull very little traffic anyway...no big loss.

Speaking of which...time to get back to work! No matter how all this shakes out...I'm in this for the long term...and I need mo traffic! Here surfer surfer

[domweb]

Originally Posted by MadMax

If we end up with a system where most or all of the free hardcore is only available on sponsor tours I think all our bottom lines will fatten up. My primary revenue stream comes from Fetish Philes, which doesn't host any hardcore images anyway

Max...I agree in principle to what you are saying. But consider one thing.

A big reason that Fetish Philes and other big link lists are successful (besides you busting your ass) is that you have ALOT of folks submitting sites to you.

If this law is not junked in the courts, I am betting your submissions will dry up fast. Unless I misunderstand your business model, most link list surfers come in for the free porn, find what they like and get upsold to the paysite.

So if the free sites go away...why would the vast majority of the public come to a link list for the first time? A Google or Yahoo search will turn up as many paysites.

True, your site covers an interesting variety of niches, not avialable in many places...but for the majority of link list owners I forsee problems with attracting new customers.

But hey, what the hell do I know? It'll be interesting to see it all shake out. Perhaps the link list is a much more resilient animal than I understand.

[Linkster]

domweb - most of us in the LL biz (at least the ones that have been around for a bit) already filter down the number of submitters due to overused sponsor content - and some do not accept any sponsor content.
The good submitters we have will continue on with their bought content that is documented (and Ive noticed over the last year that most of the submitters already have a 2257 link on their free sites) and only the submitters that we would have declined anyway will go out of biz.
I dont think the LL biz will be affected at all except for some minor annoyances when it comes to the advertising material we use (banners etc)

[Chop Smith]

Originally Posted by domweb

...So if the free sites go away...why would the vast majority of the public come to a link list for the first time? A Google or Yahoo search will turn up as many paysites.

My opinion -
1. Sponsors will step up the production of hosted free sites and free hosted galleries. (Solves the hold damn issue)
2. Sponsors will make special deals with trusted webmasters to provide documentation for sponsor provided content. (Hell, I know about 20 or so LL and TGP owners that I would open my entire catalog to if they would actively promote my sites)
3. LL and TGP owners will increase their own production of free sites and galleries and submit to their "inter-circle". (Someone told me that 'networking' was important in this business.)

[MadMax]

Originally Posted by domweb

It'll be interesting to see it all shake out. Perhaps the link list is a much more resilient animal than I understand.

Linkster covered a couple of the major points, so I'll hit a couple more. The LL model is quite resilient for several reasons. Only about half of my submissions come from the US, the rest come from around the globe. I'd say about 50% of my submitters always use paid content, and the foreign webmasters will continue to use any hardcore free content they can get their hands on from the sponsors. They'll have a better chance of getting this content listed as well if US webmasters can't touch it anymore.

I think Chop was right on point when he said that we'll see a lot more HFS from sponsors, as well as a lot more FHG. They're going to need to make up for the promotion they'll lose from affiliates who can no longer use the free content they supply, so that in itself will provide a steady stream of fresh sites for LL owners to list.

Depending on how the "Secondary Producer" issue shakes out in the end, I think the biggest shakeup for LL owners will be that we'll have to drop a good number of our listings because submitters will be pulling the sites, and that will happen across the board. From that point on new submissions will have much more paid content, and those webmasters who are unable or unwilling to buy content will fade away.

Sponsors will be forced to offer more non-hardcore banners, and until they come up with them my advertising options will suffer, but I was about to revamp all my advertising anyway

The good submitters who buy content will continue unaffected, sponsors will have to cater even more to LL and TGP owners, and there will be less free hardcore overall. This, I believe, will be a benefit to LL owners in the long run. We'll also probably see a couple new ideas born of necessity.

Amusingly enough, I think the biggest change that will be brought on if these new rules fly is that there will be much more domestic porn production since the only acceptable forms of ID would be US issued identification.

Nice Job Gonzalez, I'm sure the Moral (sic) Majority will be very proud of you and your boss for making sure MORE porn gets produced in the US

Some good posts here. Just one point Max, overseas IDs are acceptable.

There is a need for some law to tighten up the Adult Internet, this one just went way to far and will be struck down IMO.

There are sites out there with models looking 15+ and some of them have too many for it to be a coincidence. Most from what I see are in Russia/Ukraine. The models look very unhappy.

Cutting down these sites abilities to hide behind a curtain is needed, this act will not hurt them IMO.

But the future is good for those who stay the course. Free content was already losing it's appeal and more will be buying content. Any business relies on a strong supply basis of it's content and contrary to what some think this is not the traffic business.

Free hard-core content will be tough to find, because you will need to get the models approval to give out her documents to anyone who asks. In the US where lawyers are looking for people and reasons to sue this could be an opportunity to make money. So forget about old content being 2257 compliant, it isn’t. Unless you have taken the model release to an attorney and he said it is.

All of a sudden the hardcore content available for free has taken a nosedive. Now think of all the pirate sites. None have documents. Tell them to remove the content or you report them for being non-compliant with a law that puts them in prison for 5 years.

I suspect someone like Frukster will get the first visit they can only go to hot link access and that's it. Reduction of peer to peer, google will have to change it's tack, unless I'm wrong this means less free porn.

Less kids working from their bedroom or dorm, less part timers and not a surfer less. Might even help to make surfing the adult net a more enjoyable experience.

I'm not shutting up shop. In fact I'm employing another full time picture corrector/video editor to help us cope with demand.

[Linkster]

domweb - just so there is no misunderstanding - if free content goes away - which I think it will - submissions wont dry up for LLs - it will just make less work for us having to dredge through the BS submits to get to the paid content submits which is about all we list.

You also asked why a surfer would go to a LL when looking at Google or Yahoo - the main reason is that the LLs pretty much hold the top positions for most words and phrases searched for on the adult side of the Search engines - with the TGPs coming in second - its very rare to see a paysite listed in the top listings except for their specific name of the site because they dont have a lot of crawlable content (outside the members protected area that Google can get to).
And I dont believe that will ever change.

I dont see the serious free site makers changing their biz too much - they are mostly already compliant and even among the serious submitters we have too many sites to list every day

Madmax - I dont think many sponsors will be coming out with any more softcore banners as they would still have to meet the 2257 for the source pics they use - and the ones that were really concerned back when COPA became an issue again have already made up their softcore banners and tours but will still have to meet all of the requirements of this new rule

[BrianXXX]

I read all this, and in the end I still don't know what the fucking gov't says, as a freesite builder, I exactly have to do! Anyone have example, description? I am so dizzy from it all I am feeling like I'm trippin'.

Basically, what, for free sites, would be MINIMUM compliance?

Point me to it if I missed it, but in normal english, not gov'ment-law'yer-ize.

Originally Posted by BrianXXX

I read all this, and in the end I still don't know what the fucking gov't says, as a freesite builder, I exactly have to do! Anyone have example, description? I am so dizzy from it all I am feeling like I'm trippin'.

Basically, what, for free sites, would be MINIMUM compliance?

Point me to it if I missed it, but in normal english, not gov'ment-law'yer-ize.

Assuming you're in America go see a lawyer or risk 5 years in prison, .

That's the best advice you will get.

[Toby]

Originally Posted by BrianXXX

...Basically, what, for free sites, would be MINIMUM compliance?

Limiting the scope to free site galleries and assuming you reside in the US. For every photo set you use to build a free site you must Maintain a file with:

1. Copies of the model's photo ID's. Two forms of ID are now required, and must be issued by a U.S. City, State or Federal gov't agency. These copies must include the model's full name and enough other info that law enforcement can access the original records from the issuing agency.

2. Some document, usually a standard model release, that establishes when the original photos were taken.

3. All known stage names and aliases used by the model.

4. A record of all URL's on your sites that any image, thumbnail, banner, etc. appears on (anything made from images from that set of photos).

If there are multiple models in a set, you need separate files for each.

If the same model appears in a different photo set used for another free site, you need a totally separate file of records.

That's about as minimal as I can make it, and I've probably left out a few things. I'm sure that others will fill in any gaps that I missed.

In my opinion they've deliberately made the record keeping so complex that there is no way that you can be 100% compliant and still have enough time left to do your regular webmaster work.

As Paul suggested, advice from a lawyer knowledgable in this area would be a very good idea.

[plateman]

I emailed cybernet and tony said they will not release the docs so its hot link to there images or try and find the unique content they have or take about 12 to 15 sites down and I was making a little every month from them - sucks every bit helped..

[Pusher]

I agree with Paul...a likely result of the new 2257 regs will be a decline in the amount of free porn (especially hardcore) on the net.

That means surfers will have to PAY to get the hardcore stuff!

LONG LIVE GONZALEZ

[lassiter]

Originally Posted by Pusher

I agree with Paul...a likely result of the new 2257 regs will be a decline in the amount of free porn (especially hardcore) on the net.

That means surfers will have to PAY to get the hardcore stuff!

LONG LIVE GONZALEZ

That seems pretty much wrong to me, and here's why.

There is plenty of free porn available from non-US sites. Scads of Russian and East European sites feature tons of non-2257-compliant hardcore, often with models that are clearly under US legal age.

As smaller US affiliate webmasters are driven out of the market by the burden of 2257, or switch to softcore-only free sites and galleries, the surfers will not somehow magically be motivated to pay for hardcore content, but will rather get their "free" hardcore fix from Euro and Asian-based sites that will happily move in to fill the vacuum left behind, and the overall amount of porn featuring models of questionable legal age will likely increase rather than decrease thanks to 2257.

Aside from the illogic of the argument, a pornographer supporting the policies of crazed fundamentalist porn-haters just seems outright irrational and foolish to me.
I'm pretty damn sure that the Bush/Gonzalez policies on porn are not intended to increase the bottom line profits of webmasters.

[RawAlex]

As Linkster said, link sites are for the most part already filtering out repeated and overused sponsor content, while rewarding the presence of fresh sponsor content, fresh paid content, and unique content created by amateurs to promote themselves. I recently moved to block certain sponsor content, and I am much more fussy these days about the actual content.

That being said, trusted submitters who have shown good taste will always be able to get good sponsor content listed, those posted I trust to use good content and use it well.

As for IMLIVE, let me just point out that they are not in the US:

Sobonito Investments Ltd.
1 Griva Digheni St.
Stavros Pittas court. 4th floor
Limassol 3030
CY

For them as such, this isn't a direct issue, but rather an issue for people who use their content and ads as a secondary producer. They have stated an opinion (and one that in legal terms I think is actually correct), and they are choosing how they will do business. It will be up to individual affiliates and partners to decide how they will handle promoting their program as a result.

Canadian citizenship is now open.

Alex

[Toby]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

...Canadian citizenship is now open.

Ummmm, can we move Canada south a bit first, like about 1500 miles? I'm not a big fan of snow.

[RawAlex]

We tried... a couple of times Canada has tried to get one or more of the carribean islands to become part of Canada, but each time it failed. Too bad, if that happened, you would know EXACTLY where all the Canadian porn would come from!

Alex

[Sinistress]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

We tried... a couple of times Canada has tried to get one or more of the carribean islands to become part of Canada, but each time it failed. Too bad, if that happened, you would know EXACTLY where all the Canadian porn would come from!

Alex

Actually that's not entirely accurate, because there was an offer to the Canadian government not too long ago from some small island in the Caribbean, and our government turned it down. I'll see if I can find you a link...

[Sinistress]

Okay yeah its a string of about 40 islands it looks like "Turks & Caicos" in the Caribbean, and the idea of the "region" becoming Canada's 11th Province has been presented to our federal government twice before now, and shot down both times. Its in the works of being presented again, with some interested politicians on both sides, (lower level politicians that have yet to present the idea to Parliament)

[pornrex]

Originally Posted by Sinistress

Okay yeah its a string of about 40 islands it looks like "Turks & Caicos" in the Caribbean, and the idea of the "region" becoming Canada's 11th Province has been presented to our federal government twice before now, and shot down both times. Its in the works of being presented again, with some interested politicians on both sides, (lower level politicians that have yet to present the idea to Parliament)

I for one sure hope that this does come to fruition. IT would be nice for Canadians to have a place to go to where its warm during the cold winter months and have the dollar at par full time. And besides, Turks & Caicos are absolutely gorgeous destinations. Can you just imagine how many Canadians would rush to secure some form of residency down there should this process be accepted? WOW!
Count me in if that happens!!

[tickler]

I'll be on the first flight down when it happens!

For Paul, I figure you are doing the right thing based on several points!

1) Since I have worked in systems for a long time, most people do not realize there are rules laid out for information that is gathered. Like when you fill out a personnel form, that information can only be used for the purpose gathered like checks, and benefits, etc. The company can not turn around and sell it to some vacuum cleaner company.

So I hope all your models info have a statement permitting you to disclose the information to other parties.

2) Been doing some reading up on this latest bit of BS. Particulaly with regards to Canada which has some of the toughest privacy laws in the world. Providing personal data without authority can result in fines from $10,000-$100,000 depending on how the charges are laid(read misdemeanor or felony for the US crowd).

There was already a somewhat similar case in Canada which probably lays some ground work for any 2257 challenge. It basically laid out that personal information on Canadians can not be disclosed to the US DOJ, even if requested under the US PATRIOT Act, which would have likely get a more favorable reception!

Oh well!

Finally, some of you may not know that it is legal for women to go topless in Canada. Just wish a bunch had shown up to say hello to Bush when he was here! |shocking|

One final point.
Several people have mentioned Traci Lords. As a lawyer said on another board, she did have the 2 required pieces of ID. This newest regulation says nothing about the producer having to be able to distinguish fake IDs. What's a passport from Zambia look like?

Originally Posted by tickler

One final point.
Several people have mentioned Traci Lords. As a lawyer said on another board, she did have the 2 required pieces of ID. This newest regulation says nothing about the producer having to be able to distinguish fake IDs. What's a passport from Zambia look like?

No she only had one, to my knowledge.

[ponygirl]

Originally Posted by tickler

There was already a somewhat similar case in Canada which probably lays some ground work for any 2257 challenge. It basically laid out that personal information on Canadians can not be disclosed to the US DOJ, even if requested under the US PATRIOT Act, which would have likely get a more favorable reception!

Tickler - do you have any other info about this, I would be interested in looking it up, thx

Ponygirl

ps - I have yet to see (or be lol) a topless woman walking down the street in my town, altho the precident was set not too far from here