Interesting article about 2257 inspections at AVN - the FBI's opinions

Bill · 2007-06-26, 08:37 PM

""Very poor, with a couple of exceptions."

That's how Chuck Joyner, the FBI supervisory special agent in charge of the ongoing Section 2257 inspections in southern California, sums up the quality of the record keeping he's seen so far across the 19 companies inspected during the course of the past year. "

http://avn.com/index.php?Primary_Nav...tent_ID=291280

"In terms of the future, Joyner said FBI intends to conduct "at least one inspection every two weeks, if not more" for the foreseeable future. The names of about 1,200 companies are in the FBI's current database, he added.

"Right now we have 1,200 companies, but I don't think that's anywhere near the number that exists because we really haven't gotten that far into the Internet companies," Joyner said.

Future inspections will not be limited to southern California.

"I would say that, within a month, we'll start doing some companies outside of California," Joyner said."

Bobc01 · 2007-06-26, 08:57 PM

Are there companies that would really risk using underage models or is there more to it than that?

Toby · 2007-06-26, 09:02 PM

This seems to contradict statements made in reports on individual inspections. Most of those have been quite positive in regards to being in compliance.

Bill · 2007-06-26, 09:30 PM

I thought the same thing, Toby.

What a surprise, the government says one thing at one time, then another at another time.

pumpman · 2007-06-26, 11:51 PM

Thanks for the post. Very interesting. Nothing mentioned in the article concerning the secondary producers and free sites. Looks like they inspected only producers of the content. What say you?

993TT · 2007-06-27, 11:18 PM

I bought some dvds from a company for bonus content and the ids were really bad, just like the article says ink blots. I never put up the content and am still waiting for my refund

They said it passed their own 2257 compliance department LOL and that most of their ids are legible. Wow thats not something I would be proud of

SirMoby · 2007-06-28, 10:19 AM

I have a boat load of content that is sitting here on backup because I don't trust the IDs. One company even sent quality IDs but they were for different models. The thing is that I have the model IDs for all female performers and know the release date of the videos so the girls were legal and the guys all look 40. It's just that the video producers don't make electronic copies or in Europe they just didn't keep good records.

Either way, you can't touch that shit.

tickler · 2007-06-28, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirMoby

The thing is that I have the model IDs for all female performers and know the release date of the videos so the girls were legal....

I wanted to use some production stills from a video to make a tour, but, the sponsor only had the 2257 for the videos.

BOONESTOONS · 2007-06-28, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill

""Very poor, with a couple of exceptions."

That's how Chuck Joyner, the FBI supervisory special agent in charge of the ongoing Section 2257 inspections in southern California, sums up the quality of the record keeping he's seen so far across the 19 companies inspected during the course of the past year. "

http://avn.com/index.php?Primary_Nav...tent_ID=291280

"In terms of the future, Joyner said FBI intends to conduct "at least one inspection every two weeks, if not more" for the foreseeable future. The names of about 1,200 companies are in the FBI's current database, he added.

"Right now we have 1,200 companies, but I don't think that's anywhere near the number that exists because we really haven't gotten that far into the Internet companies," Joyner said.

Future inspections will not be limited to southern California.

"I would say that, within a month, we'll start doing some companies outside of California," Joyner said."

See, that's why I was always reticent to promote affiliate programs. Reason being sloppy record keeping. In this case what if an affiliate you're promoting fucks up and uses someone underage? Well now you've got that affiliates shit all over your site and voila! A sweeping indictment and all your shit confiscated. In regard to the rules of who and what can confiscate what, believe you me, on just rumor alone.

It behooves you to do your due diligence when promoting another company. You can cry 'unawares' but the bottom line is you have to take responsibility and given the often greedy backstabbing assholes in this business you wonder just when the cops will come after them, they'll punk out as usual and then try to get the cops to pin something on you instead.

Jeez, I'm glad I do toons. No 2257 shit to deal with nor labor strikes, ex boyfriends...

BOONESTOONS · 2007-06-28, 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirMoby

I have a boat load of content that is sitting here on backup because I don't trust the IDs. One company even sent quality IDs but they were for different models. The thing is that I have the model IDs for all female performers and know the release date of the videos so the girls were legal and the guys all look 40. It's just that the video producers don't make electronic copies or in Europe they just didn't keep good records.

Either way, you can't touch that shit.

Right the heck on! That's very brilliant exec thinking.

You never know what asshat will try to undermine you.

EmporerEJ · 2007-06-30, 04:30 AM

Before we go to far into roasting the FBI Guys for what they said, let's look at it from another perspective:

Being on the "porn detail" at the FBI is considered a pretty shitty job from what I hear. All joking aside.
What if, and I'm just spit balling here,........what if the FBI guy said that, so the boys back in Washington would read it this way:

(A look into Mr Far right senator's mind-imagine a thought cloud here, green guy doesn't have the graphic)
Mr senator says to his addled mind:"Well, I knew it! We needed the FBI out there checking on those evil doing porn guys. And look, they found almost exactly what we thought they would. But NOW, we have scared them into straightening up their shit, so we can pronounce victory, that things are improving, we can tell the bible thumpers we are doing something! Boy, that FBI guy is right on the ball, I see good things for his future! Now, let's get off this, since we fixed the problem, and we look good to our constituents. Now, we can get back to more important things, like finding loopholes for the lobbyists, while it looks like we are prosecuting them! We'll keep a token operation going on over there at the FBI, so it looks like things are better 'cause our boys are sitting on those porn mongers, just waiting for them to slip up!"

Now, isn't that a possible version of what happened here? They were NEVER gonna say we were doing OK. They were ALWAYS gonna keep going until they can find an example to make. Spending money, gotta have results!

EmporerEJ · 2007-06-30, 04:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirMoby

I have a boat load of content that is sitting here on backup because I don't trust the IDs............Either way, you can't touch that shit.

Anti porn groups=1, free speech=0

Not blaming you individually, blaming the bullshit circumstances that cause you to have to do that, as a prudent businessman.

2007-06-26, 08:37 PM	#1
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	Interesting article about 2257 inspections at AVN - the FBI's opinions ""Very poor, with a couple of exceptions." That's how Chuck Joyner, the FBI supervisory special agent in charge of the ongoing Section 2257 inspections in southern California, sums up the quality of the record keeping he's seen so far across the 19 companies inspected during the course of the past year. " http://avn.com/index.php?Primary_Nav...tent_ID=291280 "In terms of the future, Joyner said FBI intends to conduct "at least one inspection every two weeks, if not more" for the foreseeable future. The names of about 1,200 companies are in the FBI's current database, he added. "Right now we have 1,200 companies, but I don't think that's anywhere near the number that exists because we really haven't gotten that far into the Internet companies," Joyner said. Future inspections will not be limited to southern California. "I would say that, within a month, we'll start doing some companies outside of California," Joyner said."

2007-06-26, 09:02 PM	#3
Toby Lonewolf Internet Sales Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Houston Posts: 4,826	This seems to contradict statements made in reports on individual inspections. Most of those have been quite positive in regards to being in compliance. __________________ Latex Vixens Babes In Boots Well Heeled Women Dressing For Sex Stocking Vixens

2007-06-27, 11:18 PM	#6
993TT Aw, Dad, you've done a lot of great things, but you're a very old man, and old people are useless Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 20	I bought some dvds from a company for bonus content and the ids were really bad, just like the article says ink blots. I never put up the content and am still waiting for my refund They said it passed their own 2257 compliance department LOL and that most of their ids are legible. Wow thats not something I would be proud of __________________ NUBILES.net/webmasters Icq 143674274

2007-06-30, 04:30 AM	#11
EmporerEJ They have the Internet on computers, now? Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Political subdivision United States, Continent North America, Planet Earth, Sol System, Milky Way Galaxy Posts: 149	Before we go to far into roasting the FBI Guys for what they said, let's look at it from another perspective: Being on the "porn detail" at the FBI is considered a pretty shitty job from what I hear. All joking aside. What if, and I'm just spit balling here,........what if the FBI guy said that, so the boys back in Washington would read it this way: (A look into Mr Far right senator's mind-imagine a thought cloud here, green guy doesn't have the graphic) Mr senator says to his addled mind:"Well, I knew it! We needed the FBI out there checking on those evil doing porn guys. And look, they found almost exactly what we thought they would. But NOW, we have scared them into straightening up their shit, so we can pronounce victory, that things are improving, we can tell the bible thumpers we are doing something! Boy, that FBI guy is right on the ball, I see good things for his future! Now, let's get off this, since we fixed the problem, and we look good to our constituents. Now, we can get back to more important things, like finding loopholes for the lobbyists, while it looks like we are prosecuting them! We'll keep a token operation going on over there at the FBI, so it looks like things are better 'cause our boys are sitting on those porn mongers, just waiting for them to slip up!" Now, isn't that a possible version of what happened here? They were NEVER gonna say we were doing OK. They were ALWAYS gonna keep going until they can find an example to make. Spending money, gotta have results! __________________ Eric J. White Virtual Sex Machine

2007-06-26, 08:57 PM	#2
Bobc01 Banned Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Hell Posts: 817	Are there companies that would really risk using underage models or is there more to it than that?

2007-06-26, 09:30 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	I thought the same thing, Toby. What a surprise, the government says one thing at one time, then another at another time.

2007-06-26, 11:51 PM	#5
pumpman Rock stars ... is there anything they don't know? Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 18	Thanks for the post. Very interesting. Nothing mentioned in the article concerning the secondary producers and free sites. Looks like they inspected only producers of the content. What say you?

2007-06-28, 10:19 AM	#7
SirMoby Jim? I heard he's a dirty pornographer. Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Washington, DC Posts: 2,706	I have a boat load of content that is sitting here on backup because I don't trust the IDs. One company even sent quality IDs but they were for different models. The thing is that I have the model IDs for all female performers and know the release date of the videos so the girls were legal and the guys all look 40. It's just that the video producers don't make electronic copies or in Europe they just didn't keep good records. Either way, you can't touch that shit.