How Strict Are You With 2257 Links?

[hashbury]

I never had any problems using a sponsor 2257 link. Accept when it had links to porn. I think (but not totally sure) that the 2257 is to save your own ass not the linklist owner. Im not sure how many sponsors u use, but i put all my sponsor 2257 info on one page on my domain, And i just use that with all my freesites.

[balls_deep]

Originally Posted by hashbury

Im not sure how many sponsors u use, but i put all my sponsor 2257 info on one page on my domain, And i just use that with all my freesites.

Well I understand that many people do this, but if you have ever read the law or talked to a lawyer... That is not legal.

I was just wondering if anyone enforced the law as a rules for submission.

I require the 2257 link to protect me not the submitter,

[hashbury]

If you cant use the sponsors 2257 info, what are we supposed to do?
Contact the sponsor for there records of the girls and keep them on file for ourselves? I was told to use the sponsors 2257 info on my own domain by a couple of other members here. Ive never had any problems getting my freesites listed. BUT
You have opened my eyes a little bit and i think i need to do some more reading on the 2257 law.

[Mr Spock]

Contact the sponsor for there records of the girls and keep them on file for ourselves? I was told to use the sponsors 2257 info on my own domain by a couple of other members here.

Makes it rather impractical - even if sponsors provide you with this info and merely keeping these docs on file doesn't mean you comply with the law. You need to cross reference with every other scene the model has acted in , note all other working names etc. Absolutely impossible for a webmaster to do all this. Most infringements of 2257 are not that records are not kept , but that they aren't properly cross-referenced.

[LD]

Originally Posted by Mr Spock

You need to cross reference with every other scene the model has acted in , note all other working names etc.

Isn't that for a "primary" producer, not a webmaster who uses and distributes content made by someone else?

And from the list owner's perspective, isn't a link which a list owner list on his/her linklist very different from actual content?

[Mr Spock]

Originally Posted by LusciousDelight

And from the list owner's perspective, isn't a link which a list owner list on his/her linklist very different from actual content?

Certainly , a link list is in a similar position to Google - they don't have any 2257 duties nor do they police porn sites that are indexed. It would be ridiculous to have LL providing a policing function as suggested in this thread.

[horndog]

I don't run a linklist but as a submitter when I use sponser content I have been linking to the sponsers 2257 info. I didn't know I had been doing this all wrong! So when you say use the sponsers 2257 info on your own domain are you basically saying copy the producers that the sponser has listed on their 2257 page but host it on your own domain instead of making it another outgoing link?
Just want to make sure I'm doing this correct way.

[LD]

Originally Posted by Mr Spock

Certainly , a link list is in a similar position to Google - they don't have any 2257 duties nor do they police porn sites that are indexed. It would be ridiculous to have LL providing a policing function as suggested in this thread.

And that gets to the heart of the question I think...is a link really content? And if it is not, how far do we have to go in being 2257 compliance officers?

[balls_deep]

Originally Posted by LusciousDelight

Isn't that for a "primary" producer, not a webmaster who uses and distributes content made by someone else?

The law states that by publishing the work you (as a webmaster) become the primary producer, so according to the law... yes you need the docs on file.

But enough about the intricacies of a dumb law, thank you all for the feedback.

[Greenguy]

Originally Posted by hashbury

...I was told to use the sponsors 2257 info on my own domain by a couple of other members here...

1st off, never get legal advice from a message board (unless you've hacked into a lawyer message board)

2nd, to my knowledge, I can't think of any Link Lists that require a 2257 link (but then again, I don't get out much)

3rd, I wouldn't submit to any Link Lists that holds legit "legal info" links against you (meaning those that count it as an ad link or something stupid like that)

4th....I've got no more pearls of wisdom for this thread

[hashbury]

Originally Posted by Greenie

1st off, never get legal advice from a message board (unless you've hacked into a lawyer message board)

I wasnt really asking for legal advise, I was just trying to keep my freesites from being denied at couple of smaller linklist. I wasnt really to worried about the 2257 law because i thought the sponsors 2257 info would be enough to cover my ass. (thats what i get for skimming over the 2257 law) I buy most of my content now and only use sponsor content on a few niches thats hard to get affordable content on. I have all the documentaion on the content i have now.(but i wonder if thats enough) I wont stop making freesites BUT
This was a nice eye opening thread for me.