Quote:
Originally Posted by sicone
He makes to much from PPV porn in his hotels. He won't cut off viable income streams for himself.
|
Cable TV and PPV is exempt if;
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2257A
Quote:
(h)
(1) The provisions of this section and section 2257 shall not apply to matter, or any image therein, containing one or more visual depictions of simulated sexually explicit conduct, or actual sexually explicit conduct as described in clause (v) of section 2256(2)(A), if such matter—
(A)
(i) is intended for commercial distribution;
(ii) is created as a part of a commercial enterprise by a person who certifies to the Attorney General that such person regularly and in the normal course of business collects and maintains individually identifiable information regarding all performers, including minor performers, employed by that person, pursuant to Federal and State tax, labor, and other laws, labor agreements, or otherwise pursuant to industry standards, where such information includes the name, address, and date of birth of the performer; and
(iii) is not produced, marketed or made available by the person described in clause (ii) to another in circumstances such than [1] an ordinary person would conclude that the matter contains a visual depiction that is child pornography as defined in section 2256(8); or
|
Cable operators and their distributing customers ( a hotel as a sub seller) are exempted from recordkeeping so long as the get waiver and meet the certification requirements outlined above.
The last 2257 lawsuit never got to the US Supreme Court. Should Trump appoint 2 new Justices his first term --1 is a definite a 2nd appointment is a real possibility -- a new DOJ and AG could work 2257 from a new angle and get this back in court again '
de novo' and take the whole law (probably rewritten some) through the courts. 2257 is a way to harass (by making it difficult to be in lawful compliance) not ban porn.