Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear
Otherwise every adult website is susceptible to be shutoff without warning based on no evidence and the onus is on you to "prove" your innocence every time an allegation is made.
|
Isnīt that the whole point of the 2257 rules? That the burden of proof is with the website owner? And that the lack of 2257 is evidence something is wrong - especially if the website theme is borderline CP, and even have links to other CP sites?
Also it is not "every adult site", which have to worry... no one is going to check if some granny porn star is of legal age. Sure they might check, but the risk of someone wanting to check the IDs is alot higher with teen sites.
The problem got out of hand, when Slick posted it here on GFY, and a few people started to spin it, and attacked DN with it. DN had just asked for the IDs. The same happens with domains accused of spamming, if a registrar receives a few complaints, then he will ask the owner. Of course the risk of getting closed down grows with the risk the registrar have to take. It is simply business. If the registrar receives alot of spam complaints, then they will just close the domain, and when Slick went public, then the risk the registrar had to take grew tremendously that someone outside the company would use it to attack them.
And what would have happende to Slick and his family, if suddenly there were a report at the FBI for CP? The system is not unbiased - just the last year of cases in the adult industry should teach people that.
Bottomline - a few people do not like DN or they were shocked to learn about a registrar who actual responded to a CP complaint, and they used Slick to attack DN, but in doing so they made the risk go up for both Slick and DN.