The shitstorm scenario of 2257

[PhoneSexChick]

Hi everyone,

::official delurk::

I've been reading the threads on 2257 for quite some time, and finally decided it's time to offer a different perspective.

I started out back in about 97 or 98 doing BDSM sites, for fun, because I'm into it in real life. It was more or less a blog, before blogs existed, with info about BDSM, etc. Then I threw up a gallery of pics (I thought "public domain" but now I realize they were just plain stolen and swapped around) and somehow one of the links lists found them, and my traffic went nuts. (I was using Tripod, LOL) So I threw up some Amazon books and made a few bucks. Then added a couple of sponsors and made more. It was just pocket money, but I saw the potential.

In my other life, I am self employed and make a fair living, though occasionally there are dry spots. This adult sideline began to fill in the gaps, plus give me a little seed money. I bought some domains, and even started a bondage pay site. It did pretty well, but since it was just a sideline thing, it never grew into my main source of income. It was just me and my computer, and I was buying content legally.

Then the new Visa rules hit, things had slowed down some, and I didn't want to shell out 3 grand to the processors. At that time, I accidentally stumbled into the phone sex world. It's been a cash cow for me, though it's still not my main source of income. In reality, I could probably give up my other work, do phone sex full time and at least triple my income. But I like my other work, so it's still part time.

Now I'm using my domains to promote my phone sex. Since I keep my regular life and phone sex life separate, I use bought content for my characters. It's my voice, but model pics.

It's all been pretty smooth sailing, plus it's fun to do! Along the way, I've met (virtually) a number of other phone sex workers who are fantastic people.

So that's my background...now onto my perspective on 2257:

My content is legal, and I've got all the paperwork and even the IDs (the content I've bought has always come with it). The record keeping that the feds seem to want is a huge pain in the ass, with cross referencing and all of that.

The problem is this: putting my real name and home address on my 2257 statements. It's total bullshit and there is no possible way I'll be doing that. Here's why:

Some of these phone sex guys think it's a dating service and they want to hook up in real life. Some of them think they're in love. A tiny minority of them are stalker types. I've had two guys so far fall into a spooky area. They've checked the whois info on my domains (where I used a PO box of a male friend - his box was an old one he rarely used, and was located about 1500 miles from me) and said things like "Where in Maine do you live?" I've since switched to private registrations. Another guy tried to surprise me by flying to the fake town in which I supposedly lived and wanted to buy me an expensive gift. I've gotten other gifts, but most are paid cash through the system. The few real items, I've taken steps to hide my location. This guy started out claiming he was going to have the gift shipped to my "home," but it became apparent he wanted to purchase the gift at a department store and I should go pick it up. It was obvious that he thought I would be stupid enough to go to that store, and then he'd surprise me. Uh huh. (I got the gift, but only because I badgered him into sending me the CASH through the system)

I'm already tied to my websites through my phone sex characters, because I sell galleries of "me" to the guys, and they go to the sites to view the pics. Even if I stop that and use another system to sell the galleries, a lot of guys know my sites. Imagine the one or two nutballs if I put my friggin home address (not to mention real name) on the site. Good god.

Most of the guys are decent and know it's all fantasy, but there are always a couple of them that think it's real life, and that because they've spent some money, you belong to them. It's that handful of guys that makes it impossible to put my personal info on my sites. Period.

(Sorry this is turning into such a long post...I'm making up for all the reading and not posting I've done.)

Now, my hope is that there will be an injunction issued, but the reality is that this administration is hellbent on stamping out porn. La-di-da. Even if a TRO is issued, changes are here, and the feds will adapt. My first instinct was to yank everything down. (I didn't, but I thought about it) What I'm doing is going softcore. The one problem I have is that I like doing free galleries to drive some traffic, and because I know BDSM, that's what I do. (My phone sex characters are into BDSM as well and that's how I market them.) I don't do any other niches, just BDSM. Obviously this kind of stuff is problematic, so I haven't come up with a solution yet, other than softcore stuff in a lot of leather and latex. Then I can do a 2257 statement on why I'm exempt.

The other problem with real name/address....the last thing I need is for someone to google my real name and come up with my adult sites. Jesus. My two lives are totally separate. But what a great way for the feds to try and drive a number of people out of business by forcing them to go public with what they do on the side (or those who do it full time, but the church and family don't know)! There are a lot of phone sex workers just like me who keep it secret.

I know it's been said a million times already, but the new regs totally blow. And not in the good way.

PhoneSexChick

[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.

[rollergirl]

Correct, and when the 'liberal courts' deem this unconstitutional the current administration can stand up and say.. "See.. the liberals want your children to be able to access porn". Every possible scenerio will play into the far right wing's game plan.

On the shitstorm issues....I mentioned this earlier but let's not forget about the possibility of selling Maps of the Pornstars on places like EBay. It takes one fragged out webmaster with an ax to grind to release information. We're all assuming surfers are going to be the perps, but there was a pornstar missing a year or so ago and they charged her photographer for the murder.

How many times has anyone in this biz been scammed by another webmaster or 'company'? There are unsavory people in all aspects of business and the law of averages says that if a content provider has to turn over model's personal info over to the countless web masters who''ve ever purchased.. not everyone will be trustworthy. And really, what kind of screening could a person do online to verify if a webmaster is not going to misuse the ids' now or ever. If screening was a perfect solution, none of us would have a "I was ripped off" story to tell. I'll bet you adult webmasters aren't the only ones who have bought adult content.. what about all those pornstar pics that end up in the backs of magazines or on flyers for 900 services. Maybe some of them bought content too. There's too big of a margin for anyone to feel that this will go well.

"Dude, guess what? I got Jenna's home address...wanna see it!!"

Could we predict that no webmasters would ever say that?

Let's just add to the shit storm of loss of privacy of just being able to live your life normally. Worried that the work you do will have you looking over your shoulder every day of your life.

Think about webgirls who've already had their lives ruined, their families humilated, job's lost just because someone recoginzed them. Wouldn't the media love to do a story about the 'PORNOGRAPHERS ON YOUR BLOCK'. I don't know any webgirl who hasn't had at least one incident.

BTW.. one of the id's I got was a model's social security card. There's a whole nother problem brewing there-identity theft maybe???
Not every photographer made the right decision when accepting id's. One drivers license, and one credit card. I've got them in my possesion along with a Sam's club card and a library card as Id. One photographer told me, he let the id's go because he wanted to fuck the model and he always fucks the models after the shoot.

We've got all kinds of issues...

[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

[tickler]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham2

Eventually got his address and got his door knocked on by a friend. Scared the shit out of him.

Got a few friends like that.

One used to be in the nasty section of the special forces, and setting next to him in a restaurant while he teases the local SWAT team from the cop shop across the street can be nerve racking.

[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]

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.

[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.

[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.

[RBC]

Alex,
With all due respect, the mere fact that you are not an attorney, nor own a US based business, nor do you even live in the US does not make you the right person to be spouting off on 2257 regs. I am hard pressed to point out that you are doing a disservice to others here on this board. You think you are being helpful and in some regards you may very well be, but mostly on the 2257 issue you are the perfect spokesperson represented on all the adult forums that spreads misinformation and fear.

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Don't you understand the point of the new 2257 rules?

They are designed to have the porn business drive itself out of business. It is done by using a few different provisions to make it hard to take legal content, hard for individuals to be in business, make much of the existing content illegal, and making it difficult to get new performers.

You are not entirely correct. The intent of the DoJ is yes to drive out the illegitimate businesses but it will also help legitimize the businesses that have their house in order. If you have a part time adult biz and make extra income to supplement your main source of revenue then you may second guess the adult game since it will mean you may have to have a business address, plus possible legal retainer thus adding additional expenses on top of the record keeping. A big part of the issue to change the 2257 rules is to try and curtail minors from engaging in obscene sexual conduct. That is one reason why frontal or partial nudity is exempt to the new 2257. I think its half assed backwards. That if a minor tries to pass themself off as an adult with fake IDs then they too should bear both financial and legal responsibility for their actions.

Most of the existing content that was produced prior to June 23rd, 2005 is legit provided a gov't issue photo ID is included and a disclaimer on websites new 2257 page, similar to the disclaimer that any content produced prior to July 3rd, 1995 is exempt. The exception is the way the information is documented. Content produced on or after 06/23/05 will have a stricter quideline to follow with reference to record keeping. The new 2257 distinguishes the guidelines for content pre June 23rd vs. post June 23rd.

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Hard to take legal content: If the primary producer is in the US, they require US IDs for everyone. No visitors or others without a green card can work. It also means that a US primary producer can no longer take talent and shoot overseas, as they would still require US ids for all performers.

Sorry you are completely wrong here. Primary producers who reside in the US are not required to have US ONLY IDs, be it a drivers license, identification card, passport, military ID and/or green card. The new 2257 regs indicate a government issue ID, this includes a foreign passport or god forbid, a foreign drivers license with a photo. The new 2257 regs stipulate that a government issue ID with a photo, full legal name and DOB are required. No reference to it having to be US only.
By the way, it is not up to the photographer/producer to have a model prove that she is entitled to work legally in the US. That is not part of the 2257 regs. A model release is not the same as a Work For Hire contract. Even though some would have you believe. A US based business can go overseas and shoot to their hearts content and sell that content in the US provided they have the proper legal documentation and in this case it would be a foreign passport or foreign drivers license, military ID etc... It would be like saying I cannot photograph the Eiffel Tower and sell any of photos in the US of the Eiffel Tower which is bullshit.

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Hard for individuals to be in business: Forcing individual free site / paysite webmasters to reveal their home addresses or forcing them to spend additional money for an office creates a hardship that will drive them from the business. Additionally, this requirement will have the effect of driving individual amateur sites almost completely off the net.

Yes it will be harder to be in business. Meaning an outsource of funds to acquire an office instead of your home computer. Which I agree is unfair and will disable some but it will also wean out some of the illegitimate businesses. If you are a small amateur site and you are the primary model then you know you are compliant and you will survive. The new 2257 inconvenience will have little impact on the small amateur owner if they maintain ownership to the content.

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.

No where in the new 2257 does it state that an address and or phone number of the model must be included with the provided documentation. It clearly states that the Photo ID must be government issue and be legible to be able to trace to the model so as to be able to contact her. The IDs do not have to be "Sanitized" or unaltered. For example: a foreign passport does not have a models address or phone number and it is 100% compliant since it has the legal name, DOB and a passport number that a government officer can trace. A US drivers license with a blocked out partial address is acceptable under the new regs. For example: the entire driver's license is intact with the exception of the street number and street name. The DL# is intact for traceablity. There is no need to provide any SSN cards with IDs since they are obsolete. Only gov't issue photo IDs. To rebutt your claim that foreign producers in violation of privacy laws should not be an issue provided the models phone number and home address is not on any of the submitted docs. This is a fine line and no one knows for certain until prosecution is under way.

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Harder to get new performers: Unless the content is specifically licensed to a single site with major resale restrictions, many models will be uninterested in being part of the adult industry. If content is sold to 100 webmasters, that model's info is out there to 100 people. If it is used by a sponsor as "free sponsor content" then it might be out there to thousands of people. Models will be way more hesitant to get involved, which will make content harder to come by. That will drive up the costs, making it harder to make a profit.

At the end of the day, the intentions of the new 2257 laws are to put a chill on the adult industry, to literally drive the mom & pop type operations off the web, and to cut way down on the amount of "porn moms" out there running individual amateur sites. The rest of us will be faced with increased content costs and increased business documentation costs.

No one single less CP will make it onto the net as a result, but the rights and the freedoms to run an honest adult business will be removed as a result.

That's what it is all about.

Alex

Yes you are correct here as it will make a model think twice, especially if she is aware of the new laws. Also producers will add a clause in the model release to protect themselves from any possible legal issues arising out of the privacy issue and shared information. We will see what the financial cost are soon enough. My personal opinion is it will elliminate alot of illegitamite websites and create a lot more work for the legitamite ones. But in the end (not counting the bible thumpers) it will give more credibility to the industry we so dearly love!

[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.

[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]

[tickler]

Originally Posted by RBC

Alex,
With all due respect, the mere fact that you are not an attorney, nor own a US based business, nor do you even live in the US does not make you the right person to be spouting off on 2257 regs.

Guess I fall in that IANAL category also and Alex helps in trying to get caught up on this BS.

I personnally get stuck with trying to interpret and apply too many US Regs. within my own field. So, being a Canuck, over the last 20 years I have instigated about 30 regulatory changes in the US because the a**holes that write them don't even make the effort of a first year law student to check for conflicting laws and regulations.

BTW, we have won every one.

...also help legitimize the businesses that have their house in order.

RBC it seems that when talking the DOJ has this take that as a producer you must also maintain a DB of where every secondary producer uses your images.
http://www.greenguysboard.com/board/...ad.php?t=20992
Is your house still in order?

If you have a part time adult biz...

I make well into six digits working about 8 months a year at my day job. It will take me awhile before I have a large enough, stable income in the adult biz to drop the day job. And I don't pump gas or flip burgers.

I think its half assed backwards. That if a minor tries to pass themself off as an adult with fake IDs then they too should bear both financial and legal responsibility for their actions.

And that would be why they are trying for a "Traci Lords law".

Most of the existing content that was produced prior to June 23rd, 2005 is legit provided a gov't issue photo ID is included

"Gov ID" is a new restriction this time around and it appears that they wish to back date the requirement.

[RBC]

Originally Posted by tickler

RBC it seems that when talking the DOJ has this take that as a producer you must also maintain a DB of where every secondary producer uses your images.
http://www.greenguysboard.com/board/...ad.php?t=20992
Is your house still in order?

For every order placed since we took over the website we have a database on the website for every set sold.

Any orders prior to us purchasing the web presence and content is not our responsibility.

I will however go over the thread posted by emanuelle with my attorney and see if there is additional concern.

[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 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.

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.

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by RBC

Alex,
With all due respect, the mere fact that you are not an attorney, nor own a US based business, nor do you even live in the US does not make you the right person to be spouting off on 2257 regs. I am hard pressed to point out that you are doing a disservice to others here on this board. You think you are being helpful and in some regards you may very well be, but mostly on the 2257 issue you are the perfect spokesperson represented on all the adult forums that spreads misinformation and fear.

My location makes no difference, makes me no less informed, and makes me no less concerned. If you have to start a discussion by belittling the other person, you already are way off on the wrong foot, no?

Originally Posted by RBC

You are not entirely correct. The intent of the DoJ is yes to drive out the illegitimate businesses but it will also help legitimize the businesses that have their house in order. If you have a part time adult biz and make extra income to supplement your main source of revenue then you may second guess the adult game since it will mean you may have to have a business address, plus possible legal retainer thus adding additional expenses on top of the record keeping.

Again, you failing to see the people this affects. Single amateur girls, small webmasters, and others who run profitable home based businesses (or choose to exercise their right to free speech in posting images of themselves) suddenly are required to reveal themselves inside their communities. Someone working alone on a business shouldn't be required to spend additional money, to be forced to incorporate / form an LLC, or take other steps to maintain their privacy. The "public shaming" and "additional risks" to solo amateur site operators is a direct attempt to get them to leave the business.

Originally Posted by RBC

A big part of the issue to change the 2257 rules is to try and curtail minors from engaging in obscene sexual conduct.

I still have not seen how all this duplicate, triplicate, and beyond copies of the same paperwork is going to make this any different. CP producers didn't have paperwork to start with, what's the difference? This is called the disguise, the compelling situation that the government has to address with these new laws. It's bullshit, you know it... not a single less CP image will be produced because you and I have to keep more records.

Originally Posted by RBC

Sorry you are completely wrong here. Primary producers who reside in the US are not required to have US ONLY IDs, be it a drivers license, identification card, passport, military ID and/or green card. The new 2257 regs indicate a government issue ID, this includes a foreign passport or god forbid, a foreign drivers license with a photo.

The rules are clear. As someone mentioned above, the rules are VERY clear. You can accept foreign documents if you are a SECONDARY producer. As a US primary producer, you need US documents. You can only accept these documents if the IDs are held by the primary producer outside of the Us: 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

Most improtantly, this means that no foreign nationals travelling to the US can appear in US produced porn. No more "import" girls.

Originally Posted by RBC

If you are a small amateur site and you are the primary model then you know you are compliant and you will survive.

Sorry, but the issue these people have has nothing to do with records, and everything to do with being forced to reveal their personal information online. Getting an office is not enough, because unless you sit in it for at least 20 hours a week, it won't qualify as the primary place of business. Many of these people will leave the business rather than risk having some sicko showup at their door looking for them.

Originally Posted by RBC

No where in the new 2257 does it state that an address and or phone number of the model must be included with the provided documentation.

You give me someone's real name, their state of residence, etc... and more than likely they can be tracked down. It is still not clear (in the rules) that the government will tolerate sanitized or otherwise "blacked out" information on the documents provided. That has yet to be tested. A name and a state will often be enough to track a model down, especially if you have to leave items like drivers license or passport number in the clear.

Originally Posted by RBC

To rebutt your claim that foreign producers in violation of privacy laws should not be an issue provided the models phone number and home address is not on any of the submitted docs. This is a fine line and no one knows for certain until prosecution is under way.

I live in Canada, and I can assure you without a doubt that releasing ANY information on models without permission (even name, passport number, DL, or other identity info) would be a violation of privacy laws. That would require specific permission from the model (new model releases will certainly include this).

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

At the end of it all, I honestly recommend you spend a little more time with a lawyer that is completely and totally fluent on 2257. I honestly feel that the legal advice you have received to date is less than accurate, and in the case of the model ID issue, you have been completely mis-informed. I know that this will likely make all that Eastern European sourced content somewhat less than legal, but that's life. It will help to legitimize the business we all love!

Alex

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]

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