The New 2257 Rulings - What now?

[Ramster]

Looks to me that things are getting tougher overall. Secondary producer comes into play like the primary as Linkster said.

I am against this of course but if you think about it for a minute.....I have content that was given to me by NS Cash to promote one of the sites and have them on MY server so then it stands to reason I should have the docs to prove age. Doesn't make sense that I could say "hey those aren't mine, I got them from nscash. Go see them".

I'm showing them on my server no matter where I got them I need proof of age. right???

[kane]

Originally Posted by Ramster

Looks to me that things are getting tougher overall. Secondary producer comes into play like the primary as Linkster said.

I am against this of course but if you think about it for a minute.....I have content that was given to me by NS Cash to promote one of the sites and have them on MY server so then it stands to reason I should have the docs to prove age. Doesn't make sense that I could say "hey those aren't mine, I got them from nscash. Go see them".

I'm showing them on my server no matter where I got them I need proof of age. right???

A lot of it makes sense. The problems I think we will run into is that, at least right this moment, there is no really clear explanation as to how the index and cross reference needs to be handled. I'm making a spreadsheet with the urls of all images/videos I have hosted on my sites so that I can easily see the image url, what sponsor it came from (if it is sponsor supplied content) and where the records are. I also bought a single domain that will only host my 2257 info and I'm linking all my sites to it.

I do however wonder what programs just won't give out the docs. There are some that will let me download an encrypted doc then I have to call them for a password to open it if I get inspected, but there have been others that have flat said they won't give the docs out.

One good thing is that it looks like the government will allow them to give out "sanitized" IDs which can black out everything but the picture and the birth date. Still though I wonder who won't give any docs out period. For people like that I will have to pull any sites I have for them or change the content to some that I own that I have the docs for.

This could turn into a huge pain in the ass but it has to be done.

[Toby]

Originally Posted by Ramster

I'm showing them on my server no matter where I got them I need proof of age. right???

Yes, that's the Fed's postion on the issue. Kinda strikes me as guilty until proven innocent.

Assuming that nothing changes in the next month there are limited number of options. In no particular order:

1. Keep all the records as mandated.
2. Use only non-explicit content to be exempt from 2257.
3. Move to another country. Technically you may still need to comply if you host in the US or use other US based resources, but the chances of a 2257 inspection on foreign soil is next to nil.
4. Totally ignore 2257 and carry on without records.
5. Fold your tent and go play in another sandbox.

[Bill]

The FSC phone has been busy all afternoon - I'm hitting the redial every ten-twenty minutes or so - no dice.

[Linkster]

Toby - unfortunately using non-explicit, if it is just simulated sex still requires these docs- which is where the major motion picture industry is getting an exemption that you see in some of those later paragraphs - but that exemption is only for them - not for websites

[Maj. Stress]

Originally Posted by Linkster

the major motion picture industry is getting an exemption that you see in some of those later paragraphs - but that exemption is only for them - not for websites

Is that legal?

[Linkster]

Maj Stress - it is legal because it is written in the law The movie industry has some powerful lobbyists

[sabin]

Originally Posted by Linkster

Maj Stress - it is legal because it is written in the law The movie industry has some powerful lobbyists

We need some of those. I got $5 on it!

[bluemoney]

Originally Posted by Linkster

Maj Stress - it is legal because it is written in the law The movie industry has some powerful lobbyists

My 5 dollars say's that won’t stand.

It seems to me to be a direct violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution as it denies certain individuals due process & equal protection under the law.

Course I’m drunk so . . . hey