2257 - Im about to be real unpopular!

RawAlex · 2005-06-24, 12:54 PM

Tom, you miss the point: had the FSC gone forward and requested an injunction, not only would FSC member be protected, but it would be VERY unlikely that any enforcement actions would be taken because there is pending legal action. While the TRO would not have stopped the DOJ from enforcing the law, it creates a very large legal burden to overcome if they want to move to actual prosecution of a case.

It is very likely that the very terms that they would charge someone under are the ones that would get thrown out in court.

Instead, the FSC made an 11th hour deal with the feds so that there is no TRO, no nothing in any true legal sense until August, just an agreement not to bother FSC members. What it means (conversely) is that the DOJ has a free hand to go out and inspect anyone else they want. The Special Master will determine if this is a FSC member or not, then away the DOJ goes.

The difference is overwhelming.

The reasoning? I suspect that the DOJ made it clear to FSC that certain members of the "adult webmaster community" were not anywhere near compliant. They probably pointed out that there are tens of thousand of sites owned and operated by people who are either not active in the community, or who are specifically non-participants for whatever reason. The DOJ wants a free hand to go out in the next 45 days and literally "fuck these people up". They want action they can take to congress and say "SEE! We are doing our jobs!". A TRO would have made that impossible.

The "return" favor in this? Very likely during the next 45 days a new interpretation of the 2257 rules will be made and published, which is abolish the secondary producer requirements and clarify the ID issues. It will once again permit CORPORATIONS and LLC to appoint a third part custodian of records. It will, however, require that the publisher of a website is listed on it, indicating the sources of the materials (the older list of content providers 2257). There will likely be some new legaleese in content license agreements that will stipulate that the provider is 2257 compliant.

Read the FSC / DOJ agreement carefully, and you will see that the next 45 days isn't for writing legal briefs, but for negotiation to come to a settlement.

Linkster, you are no more or less popular around here as a result of your choices. I know if I lived and worked in the US, I might be sitting on the other side of the fence. I can't say that I agree with what is going on at FSC, and I would have a hard time giving them any more money now or in the future, but that is my personal take.

Do we need an industry trade group? Yup.

Is FSC that group? I think not.

Alex

Mr. Blue · 2005-06-24, 02:20 PM

Excellent discussion here. To continue with what RawAlex said...the DOJ probaby at the moment has a group of webmasters earmarked for inspection. These people won't even pass the old regs, let alone the new regs. The DOJ probably also has some CP webmasters in there as well.

They're going to wage a war for 2257 not in the courts, but the court of public opinion first. They go right now and arrest 100 people for CP and say it was the result of 2257. That gets splashed on the news, that gets to be the focal point, when 2257 has little or nothing to do with CP.

The FSC is making it harder in the long run because every inspection, courtcase, etc, that loses to 2257 will only strengthen 2257. Making it even more difficult to fight 2257 later.

Bill · 2005-06-24, 02:31 PM

I just called the FSC at their new membership number and joined.

I had given money before, when they still had an online donation system. I wanted to wait to join until they had installed a new online credit card system, but I decided to test their new 800 phone number.

The number, for those who don't already have it, is:

1-800-681-0403

A nice lady answered, and the process was painless.

You have to choose between individual, company, and corporation. Individual is $50. Most of us can afford that easily.

She wanted name, address, email address, and a website url if you have one. And the basic dredit card info.

She asked if I wanted to add any comments- I gave her two:

1. Improve the website, particularly adding a system to take money and memberships online.

2. Don't make deals, fight the new regulations in court.

So, the new 800 number works. You can join for $50 as an individual, no questions asked.

I'm totally with Linkster on this. FSC is the closest thing to a professional organization we have. We can fight to change it's attitudes and faults from the inside.

Call now, before 5pm pacific time, and join.

Bill · 2005-06-24, 02:42 PM

Alex, love ya man, but I think you are wrong on this issue.

I think our best option here in the US is to all join the FSC, and hammer at it untill it acts the way we want it to act.

There is no other organization ready to act politically and legally on our behalf.

FSC has it's faults, but they can be worked on. If they don't improve, we dump them and start again with some other organization.

But, folks, we are at the beginning of a fight that will last many, many years.

We need an offensive weapon. The ACLU is a defensive weapon. Join both the ACLU and the FSC, because we are in for a fight for the right to stay in business.

$50 as an individual, $100 as a business, $300 as a corporation. These are small amounts of money.

Criticise and educate and change the FSC from the inside.

2005-06-24, 12:54 PM	#1
RawAlex Took the hint. Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,597	Tom, you miss the point: had the FSC gone forward and requested an injunction, not only would FSC member be protected, but it would be VERY unlikely that any enforcement actions would be taken because there is pending legal action. While the TRO would not have stopped the DOJ from enforcing the law, it creates a very large legal burden to overcome if they want to move to actual prosecution of a case. It is very likely that the very terms that they would charge someone under are the ones that would get thrown out in court. Instead, the FSC made an 11th hour deal with the feds so that there is no TRO, no nothing in any true legal sense until August, just an agreement not to bother FSC members. What it means (conversely) is that the DOJ has a free hand to go out and inspect anyone else they want. The Special Master will determine if this is a FSC member or not, then away the DOJ goes. The difference is overwhelming. The reasoning? I suspect that the DOJ made it clear to FSC that certain members of the "adult webmaster community" were not anywhere near compliant. They probably pointed out that there are tens of thousand of sites owned and operated by people who are either not active in the community, or who are specifically non-participants for whatever reason. The DOJ wants a free hand to go out in the next 45 days and literally "fuck these people up". They want action they can take to congress and say "SEE! We are doing our jobs!". A TRO would have made that impossible. The "return" favor in this? Very likely during the next 45 days a new interpretation of the 2257 rules will be made and published, which is abolish the secondary producer requirements and clarify the ID issues. It will once again permit CORPORATIONS and LLC to appoint a third part custodian of records. It will, however, require that the publisher of a website is listed on it, indicating the sources of the materials (the older list of content providers 2257). There will likely be some new legaleese in content license agreements that will stipulate that the provider is 2257 compliant. Read the FSC / DOJ agreement carefully, and you will see that the next 45 days isn't for writing legal briefs, but for negotiation to come to a settlement. Linkster, you are no more or less popular around here as a result of your choices. I know if I lived and worked in the US, I might be sitting on the other side of the fence. I can't say that I agree with what is going on at FSC, and I would have a hard time giving them any more money now or in the future, but that is my personal take. Do we need an industry trade group? Yup. Is FSC that group? I think not. Alex

2005-06-24, 02:20 PM	#2
Mr. Blue Searching for Jimmy Hoffa Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 771	Excellent discussion here. To continue with what RawAlex said...the DOJ probaby at the moment has a group of webmasters earmarked for inspection. These people won't even pass the old regs, let alone the new regs. The DOJ probably also has some CP webmasters in there as well. They're going to wage a war for 2257 not in the courts, but the court of public opinion first. They go right now and arrest 100 people for CP and say it was the result of 2257. That gets splashed on the news, that gets to be the focal point, when 2257 has little or nothing to do with CP. The FSC is making it harder in the long run because every inspection, courtcase, etc, that loses to 2257 will only strengthen 2257. Making it even more difficult to fight 2257 later.

2005-06-24, 02:31 PM	#3
Bill Selling porn allows me to stay in a constant state of Bliss - ain't that a trip! Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,914	I just called the FSC at their new membership number and joined. I had given money before, when they still had an online donation system. I wanted to wait to join until they had installed a new online credit card system, but I decided to test their new 800 phone number. The number, for those who don't already have it, is: 1-800-681-0403 A nice lady answered, and the process was painless. You have to choose between individual, company, and corporation. Individual is $50. Most of us can afford that easily. She wanted name, address, email address, and a website url if you have one. And the basic dredit card info. She asked if I wanted to add any comments- I gave her two: 1. Improve the website, particularly adding a system to take money and memberships online. 2. Don't make deals, fight the new regulations in court. So, the new 800 number works. You can join for $50 as an individual, no questions asked. I'm totally with Linkster on this. FSC is the closest thing to a professional organization we have. We can fight to change it's attitudes and faults from the inside. Call now, before 5pm pacific time, and join.

2005-06-24, 02:42 PM	#4
Bill Selling porn allows me to stay in a constant state of Bliss - ain't that a trip! Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,914	Alex, love ya man, but I think you are wrong on this issue. I think our best option here in the US is to all join the FSC, and hammer at it untill it acts the way we want it to act. There is no other organization ready to act politically and legally on our behalf. FSC has it's faults, but they can be worked on. If they don't improve, we dump them and start again with some other organization. But, folks, we are at the beginning of a fight that will last many, many years. We need an offensive weapon. The ACLU is a defensive weapon. Join both the ACLU and the FSC, because we are in for a fight for the right to stay in business. $50 as an individual, $100 as a business, $300 as a corporation. These are small amounts of money. Criticise and educate and change the FSC from the inside.