The shitstorm scenario of 2257

[juggernaut]

Originally Posted by docholly

did you see where they caught a guy in the bay area they think has molest 36,000 boys?? was he caught by the DOJ?? fuck no.. he was caught by a mother who found some evidence in her son's (a victim) room and tracked it down..

Molester link

i bet he doesn't have 2257 docs..

Yeah I watched that last night doc. they found his books with names of every kid. They said even if 1% of his book is correct then you still have hundreds of cases. I really cant fathom what is in someones head to look at a child as a sexual being. It will be interesting to see if any of the 2257 comes into this case. Im sure this guy had to use a computer to find most of those kids. Shit 36k worth of kids. I'm 35 that averages out to 3 kids a day for my entire life. Basicly every kid I see I would have had to touch to reach that goal. Just sick.

[Tommy]

I dont see how these surfer/stalkers gonna get the model info

can we please put this to bed

The webmaster has the ids
the surfer doesnt know where the content was bought
the surfer can only get the webmasters address .... not the models

so how does the surfer stalk the model

[Boogie]

Originally Posted by Tommy

I dont see how these surfer/stalkers gonna get the model info

can we please put this to bed

The webmaster has the ids
the surfer doesnt know where the content was bought
the surfer can only get the webmasters address .... not the models

so how does the surfer stalk the model

Three different routes here tommy each a little more difficult than the last.

1) Surfer becomes a webmaster. Creates a few websites. Gets the model info by buying the content or using the free content from the webmaster program he found.

2) Surfer becomes desperate. Finds the 2257 information at the bottom of a website. Shows up at that address. It turns out to be some random affiliate who is making chicken scratch each mother. He makes a deal with this affiliate.

3) Surfer becomes despearte. HE finds that affiliate's ID. Finds out its some shithole appartment with no security. Waits out front for him to go shopping. Breaks in, finds his documents, leaves. Takes a basic understanding of the law to know he's got the documents in his home/place of business.

I would love to put this to bed as you suggest, Tommy. But right now its a very real concern I think. I hope my explination above can help you see that while it may not be very likely it is very possible.

I work from home. You can bet your sweet ass I wont do it without a baseball bat once my address is everywhere.

[lassiter]

Originally Posted by Boogie

3) Surfer becomes despearte. HE finds that affiliate's ID. Finds out its some shithole appartment with no security. Waits out front for him to go shopping. Breaks in, finds his documents, leaves. Takes a basic understanding of the law to know he's got the documents in his home/place of business.

Another likely scenario that doesn't necessarily affect models, but can affect webmasters:

Concerned Christians for Censorship starts crusing the posted addresses of affiliate webmasters. Webmaster wakes up to find 2 dozen pickets outside his house, noisily protesting "pornographers operating in the middle of our neighborhoods." Local zoning authorities show up to fine or remove webmaster from residence for "illegally operating a business in a residentially-zoned area."

[Boogie]

Originally Posted by lassiter

Another likely scenario that doesn't necessarily affect models, but can affect webmasters:

Concerned Christians for Censorship starts crusing the posted addresses of affiliate webmasters. Webmaster wakes up to find 2 dozen pickets outside his house, noisily protesting "pornographers operating in the middle of our neighborhoods." Local zoning authorities show up to fine or remove webmaster from residence for "illegally operating a business in a residentially-zoned area."

Lassitar,

I wanted to point out that for quite some time now it has been illegal to post non-true domain information. If you register a domain you have to put your real name and address on it. This has been a longtime understanding for american webmasters.

It is not the security risk to myself I mind. I knew that when I signed up for this job.

it is the security risk to those who become my wards due to 2257 law.

[lassiter]

Originally Posted by Boogie

If you register a domain you have to put your real name and address on it. This has been a longtime understanding for american webmasters.

You mean like these guys?

Registrant:
Free Speech Coalition
PO Box 10480
Canoga Park, CA 91309
US
818-348-9373


Domain Name: FREESPEECHCOALITION.COM

Administrative Contact:
Director, Executive support@freespeechcoalition.com
PO Box 10480
Canoga Park, CA 91309
US
818-348-9373

[rollergirl]

Originally Posted by Boogie

Lassitar,

I wanted to point out that for quite some time now it has been illegal to post non-true domain information. If you register a domain you have to put your real name and address on it. This has been a longtime understanding for american webmasters.

It is not the security risk to myself I mind. I knew that when I signed up for this job.

it is the security risk to those who become my wards due to 2257 law.

As webmasters..
You can enlist private whois so nosy people are not able to access your domain info. People who want to reach you through your domain are instructed to email you through the registrar. So much safer than posting your HOME ADDRESS your websites.

Plus, you are not required to list your contact information where you work 20 hours a week on your domain. A lawyer, or office addy will suffice.. with these rules.. you can't. That's different.

[Mr. Blue]

Originally Posted by Tommy

I dont see how these surfer/stalkers gonna get the model info

can we please put this to bed

The webmaster has the ids
the surfer doesnt know where the content was bought
the surfer can only get the webmasters address .... not the models

so how does the surfer stalk the model

It must be a NY thing...but I'm of the same opinion as you are. Basically right now all this info is available if you look hard enough for it or have half a brain to find the info...most content providers are giving the info out for the price of a set of photos.

The info on most of the popular models on the net is out there already. Nothing has happened, I'm not saying that nothing will happen, but I have better things to do with my time then to theorize on a worst case scenerio and fear mongering.

Btw, California is going to sink into the ocean with a massive earthquake soon...terrorists are going to attack NYC again and take out the statue of liberty, and Tom Cruise is going to marry Katie Holmes (oh shit, that's actually going to happen...FUCK...we're screwed, end of the world...doomsday!)

Have a beer.
Drink it.
Repeat process until you settle down.

Originally Posted by Mr. Blue

It must be a NY thing...but I'm of the same opinion as you are. Basically right now all this info is available if you look hard enough for it or have half a brain to find the info...most content providers are giving the info out for the price of a set of photos.

The info on most of the popular models on the net is out there already. Nothing has happened, I'm not saying that nothing will happen, but I have better things to do with my time then to theorize on a worst case scenerio and fear mongering.

We give it out to 50 people who we have at least a Credit Card contact, and in most cases more, so why can't sponsors give out IDs to 1,000 people they hve less info on.

Most popular models will have some protection in place, it's the everyday model that's 80% of the content on the Internet I fear for.

Give your IDs to anyone who signs up on your site or via your galleries and then you will understand.

Your logic is astounding.

This is just my non lawyer, non US citizen/resident but been 2257 compliant since 1985 opinino.

This law is a fucked up stupid law put together to try and damage the US Internet porn industry, please the right wing and will fail. It's over burdonsome and unconstitional it will get turned down. Leaves you wondering what all those bright guys over at the DOJ were thinking.

However look at the way we as an industry publish PORN, yes pictures or videos of people havinf sex, getting anal raped, DPed, gagged and worse.

We today can buy from a broker anywhere in the world, who is representing a shooter in another country and who he lists as Custodian of Records. We can then give this content, license permitting, to 100s or even 1,000s of people to publish on the Internet. Some of these people are working from their garage and back bedroom. Two cases come to mind immediately where this is wrong.

A Danish broker was selling pictures from a producer in Germany who was morphing a head of a celebrity onto the body of a naked male.

Web Legal was selling pictures from a Ukraniabn shooter who was forging IDs on girls who clearly looked under age and refusing to give the buyer the IDs.

both incidents happened and both hit the boards and the withholding of the IDs was "Legal" because Sundance made it so.

Today we can get content of a teen girl getting fucked and the IDs can be sitting with the producer in Russia, well we are told thay are there.

Now look at more reality. There are porn sites being pulled in their 1,000s simply because the publisher does not have and cannot get the IDs to prove the content is legal. Sites where who knows if the documents ever existed, well the content shooter told the broker they existed.

This is porn not a garage sale, we are incapable of cleaning up our act and need to be regulated. Pity is this law will not get through the courts to do it.

And lastly, do you think this law will stop the Hustler's, Score's, Vivid's, Wicked's etc. of the porn industry working and publishing? No but in might remove some of the cottage industry element.

[Mr. Blue]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham2

We give it out to 50 people who we have at least a Credit Card contact, and in most cases more, so why can't sponsors give out IDs to 1,000 people they hve less info on.

Most popular models will have some protection in place, it's the everyday model that's 80% of the content on the Internet I fear for.

Give your IDs to anyone who signs up on your site or via your galleries and then you will understand.

Your logic is astounding.

Actually, it's not a numbers game as you make it sound. If a person wants to get to a model, they'll be able to, it's fact. 50 webmasters or 1000 webmasters, the 1 insane one can be found in either group.

You don't do a background check anymore then sponsors...saying because a person has a credit card and they paid $5 doesn't make them a sane person. Ted Bundy, one of America's biggest serial killers, lived a completely ordinary existence...had a job, had credit cards, and the trail of his credit cards was a piece of evidence they used to put him in the locations...too bad it was after he killed 40 people.

So making this invisible security veil of $5 and a credit card is just laughable.

2257 is being used to chill the porn industry in America, but the chill first starts when fear mongering begins based on conjecture and not fact. Adult webmasters that come on boards and scare the shit out of fellow webmasters with conjecture, rumours, and nothing based in fact...that's when the chill begins.

Also you can moralize all you want...but the fact remains that right now you're selling 2257 complaint content. That you could very well be giving a models id to some lunatic. That just because you give it to 50 people instead of a few hundred...doesn't change the fact that you're giving out the id with all the information that's needed to put that model in harms way. So, 50 or 100 or 1000...to me it's all the same flavor of the same topic.

You can disagree all you want, but the fact is the only way you could make your models 100% safe is not to take their pictures and talk them into getting a job at McDonalds instead of posing nude. So, maybe you should stop moralizing and just be honest with yourself that you're a flesh peddler like the rest of us

Very true Mr Blue, what is your real name by the way?

Yes giving it out IDs to one person represents a danger, but less of a danger than giving it out to a thousand. Still the determined insane person will get through. But what about the curious, fans, porn devotees? What about the power you place in the hands of affiliates when they are accused of cheating?

Suddenly the accused has 10, 50, 100 IDs of models on the accusers site. Don't you see the problem here?

Go read the porn surfers boards where they ask for models real names, locations, etc. How long before they start posting her address? Do you really think that is a risk you want to take?

And how do you know what checks I make? You are so clever come on and spill the beans on my checking system.

Actually my minimum order is $20 not $5, so you know very little of how I run my business.

And yes I do worry about my models IDs being stolen and used wrongly, that is why it states in my license that the models IDs and real name cannot be revealed. I'm keeping the door slightly open, your argument is because it's not slammed shut and bolted it should be flung wide open.

[RawAlex]

Tommy, the surfer becomes a "webmaster" and buys the content from the producer. Gets the model release, model IDs, the whole 9 yards. From there the path is pretty short.

Alex

[Linkster]

Tommy - thats the path thats been taken in the past with "stalkers" - since they dont have access to it as a surfer they fraudently join a program to become a "webmaster"

[Linkster]

Oh and one other little tidbit of info - since cyberstalking is a very large concern - there are still 5 states in the US that do not have any laws against cyberstalking and of the others most only protect the under 18 agegroup - there are also only two other countries in the world that have anti-cyberstalking laws - AU is one of them and I cant remember the other - its a shame that we cant even do anything about the stalkers that use hi-tech methods to harrass someone and eventually in at least 2 cases I know of either kill or injure the person being stalked

[mrMagoo]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Tommy, the surfer becomes a "webmaster" and buys the content from the producer. Gets the model release, model IDs, the whole 9 yards. From there the path is pretty short.

Alex

I have hundreds of sets of content with reseller rights. I've wanted to open a content store but haven't gotten around to it yet.

I was thinking this is a good time, since I have unblocked out ids on a good portion of this content.

But instead I think I'll wait until the court reaffirms the bullshit of the secondary producer designation.

Yeah I can sell the content ids and all, but I don't want to be morally responsible for some nut job who buys the stuff from me and then does something terrible.

[juggernaut]

I can tell you from 1st hand experience that this will happen. As most of you know my wife is a cam host. And yes UW a dam hot one lol. Anyway she had a serious and I mean serious nut case following her around from site to site over the past 3 years. Once he finds her he "using a new screen name" gets to talking to her for a few days then blasts her with his old screen name "kruger" and constantly makes her life a living hell. He will sit in her chat, scare away all her customers and then tries to go into a show with her. When she refuses or bans him he reports her to the site. Starts telling her he will find and kill her after he rapes her. He will kill her dog. Oh and he will kill me. I will say if there are any big cam sites here, you really need to look harder at your chats and whats taking place with nut cases like these. Most of the sites side with the customer as they dont want bad PR or just the money. But all it does it make the host leave their site. In my wifes case if they would have looked into the problem just alittle deeper they would still have a host who brings them in $3k a week - the average 50%. I know that this shit head is still looking for her. I can only hope that he finds where we live. Not to hard if you look around. If he shows up at my house you can bet there will be front page news when I shoot him and ever other fucker in my neighborhood when I snap.

[RawAlex]

Phonesexchick: You are exactly who the government has targeted. In order to remain in business, you will need to get an office and move your business into that office. That will require you to pay rent, business license, business taxes, possible health and safety issues, payroll taxes, and any other number of things. Your office will have to be staffed at least 20 hours a week or it isn't your principle place of business.

Your choice is (a) reveal and likely get hassled / attacked / possibly killed or (b) spend a bunch of money and fundamentally change the bottom line of your business.

It's the governments REAL intention on this, and the combination of rules, requirements, and declarations makes these intentions very clear. The type of stalking that Boogie is talking about is real, it's a problem, and it won't go away.

Exposing models to this risk is a lawsuit in the making - for the federal government.

It's going to get ugly.

Alex

[RBC]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Make much of the current content illegal: Be changing the ID requirements and adding in model ID disclosure that would put foreign producers in violation of privacy laws in their countries, the new rules have the effect of killing off huge amounts of existing content. My personal estimate is than 90% of the "low buck content" (such as pixmasters, rock bottom, and others) will be effectively useless, with a lack of model releases and / or legal IDs. It doesn't help that many of these producers seem to see the new 2257 regs as a profit center, charging more than the original costs of the content for model IDs.

I take some offense here since you took the liberty of including my business in your statement. Again you could not be further from the truth.
First off before I continue, until there has been any cases brought forth by the DoJ on obscenity and the new 2257 we can all speculate until the cows come home. What pisses me off is guys like you Alex who are not content providers nor a lawyer but rather a webmaster that owns a site on linking sites and content to be the "expert" on what is the new laws in a country you do not live in nor own a business in. The only fact is you do business with Americans. You are Canadian, a citizen residing in La Belle Provence, not reciding in the US, not a lawyer, not a business lawyer, not an American business lawyer. So please refrain from spewing your personal opinion of misinformation, paranoia and fear amongst the rest of us. Your opinion is just that an opinion. By the way, I was born and raised in Montreal and I have worked and lived in the States for over 10 years. I know enough about this industry to spend the money to hire a US attorney who specializes in this field to help me better understand, comply and interpret American laws especially when it comes to the laws that directly affect my businesses in the adult industry.

BTW, contrary to what you have previously posted in another thread with regard to your lawyer-wanna-be misinformation. It is not the responsibility nor requirement of the primary producer to provide any IDs what-so-ever. It is the responsibility of the purchaser to acquire the proper documentation. In layman's terms. If someone bought content from a producer 2 years ago it is soley up to purchaser to acquire all the ID docs then when they purchased the content. Failure to do so is the irresponsibility of the purchaser. Even with the new 2257 and secondary producers who have obtained the proper info. It is not required for them to give the proper IDs with the content. The responsibility lies with the purchaser. Of course being what it is today if you were to not give the IDs then it would be business suicide.

Please Note: ALL content that is on the new website RockBottomContent.com has ALL legal docs (government issue ID, full legal name, DOB and any known alias') to back up and supply our customers. So please refrain from slandering RockBottomContent with your misinformation. We are not looking to "profit" from customers of the former owners of RBC to provide them with the docs that they should have initially acquired when they purchased the content. Further support and info is available to all customers of Rock Bottom Content be it before or after we acquired the name.

[SirMoby]

Originally Posted by RBC

What pisses me off is guys like you Alex

That's one way to influence all the possible new customers on the board and in only 13 posts. Wow!

[selena]

Okay, I've been re-reading one of my all time favorite books...Atlas Shrugged, by Ayn Rand.

I was struck by a certain passage the other night. It doesn't refer to 2257 of course, but it certainly sounds familiar.

""Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against--then you'll know that this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick, and you'd better get wise to it. There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crimes that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kinds of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted--and you create a nation of law-breakers--and then you cash in on the guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Rearden, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with.""

[Boogie]

Oh and as mentioned above

4) Some jackass webmaster affiliate realizes selling aria giovani's personal information is worth a lot more than selling pictures of aria giovani, if he finds the right buyer.

[Toby]

New regs, section 75.1 (b)
Picture identification card means a document issued by the United States, a State government or a political subdivision thereof, or a United States territory, that bears the photograph and the name of the individual identified, and provides sufficient specific information that it can be accessed from the issuing authority, such as a passport, Permanent Resident Card (commonly known as a ``Green Card''), or other employment authorization document issued by the United States, a driver's license issued by a State or the District of Columbia, or another form of identification issued by a State or the District of Columbia; or, a foreign government-issued equivalent of any of the documents listed above when both the person who is the subject of the picture identification card and the producer maintaining the required records are located outside the United States.

As I read the above it seems to me that US based content providers shooting content outside the US or shooting in the US using foreign models are pretty much SOL selling that content to US webmasters unless the models have US Green Cards or work Visas.

[edit]and that includes all content shot after July 3, 1995[/edit]

Originally Posted by Toby

New regs, section 75.1 (b)
Picture identification card means a document issued by the United States, a State government or a political subdivision thereof, or a United States territory, that bears the photograph and the name of the individual identified, and provides sufficient specific information that it can be accessed from the issuing authority, such as a passport, Permanent Resident Card (commonly known as a ``Green Card''), or other employment authorization document issued by the United States, a driver's license issued by a State or the District of Columbia, or another form of identification issued by a State or the District of Columbia; or, a foreign government-issued equivalent of any of the documents listed above when both the person who is the subject of the picture identification card and the producer maintaining the required records are located outside the United States.

As I read the above it seems to me that US based content providers shooting content outside the US or shooting in the US using foreign models are pretty much SOL selling that content to US webmasters unless the models have US Green Cards or work Visas.

[edit]and that includes all content shot after July 3, 1995[/edit]

Yep RBC was wrong on this one. It means I can sell to the US, but the US shooters can't come here to shoot for themselves. Trips by shooters are already being cancelled.

And I've had this direct from US companies that emply on staff lawyers and my lawyer in the US. I'm the the producer, I'm outside the US.

Otherwise a very good post RBC.

[RawAlex]

Paul, here's the thing. Documents are easy enough to forge, requiring them to be broadcast all over the world will likely lead to more of the same. There isn't anything that is being done that is going to prevent it. If the primary producer wants to be a dick and break the law, there is little that is stopping him or her.

Providing copies of documents isn't going to change that one bit.

It wouldn't be different if the primary prodcers were required to send a certification of the model. It wouldn't be different if they have to provide 1 copy of ID. All the cross referencing and indexing in the world isn't going to stop 1 instance of child porn. It's pointless.

Forcing people to reveal personal info isn't going to stop one instance of CP.

The stated intent of the law and it's actual effects are not at all related.

Alex