Quote:
Originally Posted by Bossman
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 -
|
thats what you seem to be missing , we both agree thats what 2257 is for and thats what courts and laws and police are for... I am all for a FAIR process thats laid out such as..
If a complaint is filed on an american based site to a registrar and the site has no 2257 info displayed , its cutoff , thats fair .. as long as everyone knows the rules..
A complaint would be made directnic would be forced to investigate and inform the authoraties and they would issue a warrant to directnic to have the site shutdown.. this way directnic has nothing to do with it.. the LAW does.. this gets things solved.. arbitrarily shutting down sites based on allegations with no merit don't
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bossman
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.
|
Thats where your wrong , according to directnic if a complaint is filed they HAVE to investigate. if you dont prove yourself innocent of any allegations it appears your site gets shutoff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bossman
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.
|
Again your way off base.. Alot of people love directnic but are concerned about our rights being trampled on.. we want a CLEAR set of guidlines to follow..
not . if someone somewhere decides your shit might be underage your shit gets canned and busniess trashed..