Quote:
Originally posted by cafeaulait
The point has been missed here. I don't have problem with you posting ID's as long as the personal info. has been blacked out.
All I was saying is that you completely undermined your "potential stalker argument" by doing it.
Questions:
Do you think an ID with the personal details blacked out is an invasion of the models privacy?
Would you be prepared to send me, the webmaster - your customer, an ID with the personal details blacked out for content set I had bought from you?
Don't you think it would be wise to fall into line with the majority of other major content brokers/producers out there and provide an ID with the personal details blacked out to all webmasters who buy your content either during purchase or at the very least on request?
Don't you think if this had been WebLegal's policy in the first place, this entire issue would have been avoided?
And hence don't you think you should change your policy, and announce it here, in doing so avoiding this situation arising again in the future?
I have no doubt that you are entirely justified in questioning some of Newgrade's emails and actions.
I'm just saying changing your policy to providing ID's with personal details blacked out would keep everyone happy, you (anti-stalker argument) and your customer (satisfactory proof of ID).
|
(Smile!) As I explained, the _only_ reason that I did what I did, and that was after removing _all_ ID info, was to simply show that I wasn't engaged in the activities that I was being publically accused of. The problem with accusations, is that if they aren't refuted, people tend to believe them. I've found that it's better to settle the issue than to let people stew on lies.
As far as the "majority" of content producers... No, I cannot agree with that. I deal or have dealt with 408 different content producers over the years, and only a handful have ever felt the need to provide this level of information. The law is quite specific in that such info is NOT needed. Those that are making an issue out of this, are doing so for one reason, in my opinion, and that's because they want to cast their competitors in a bad light, and themselves in a good light.
The vast majority of content producers know that legally speaking, they are not required to provide that info, and in fact, it could be dicey. Even the major film studios that shoot adult video don't provide model info to licensees using their material, they provide 18 USC 2257 certification statements. I have a stack of those from where one of my publishers picked up some film, and left those on file with me. Surely you don't think that the multi-million dollar companies who have attorneys for their CoR's aren't up on this matter?
Honestly, this really is a manufactured issue. The law is very specific on the matter, and the wording is very, very clear.