A couple of 2257 questions...

[cashcows]

I understand that 2257 does not apply to content produced before 2009 if it's only solo simulated or lascivious display only as this type of content is exempt.

Meaning no records need to be kept, yet I'm assuming you'd need some records such as model releases and I.D. proving the shoot was done before 2009.

My question is for those that actually have done a lot of research or hired lawyers to create statements or advice them of this situation.

1. What kind of statement do you use?

2. What if you have a photo set that has Exempt and non-exempt content in the same set (meaning softcore exempt but also penetration masturbation but only use the Exempt content. As the secondary producer you only have to be responsible for the content you are using. Where the primary producer would be required to have full 2257 docs for the hardcore images. Is that correct?

3. If some of the I.D. were shot too far away to be clear. Normally under 2257 this would not be in compliance. But on exempt content it should not matter as it's exempt. Is that correct?

The reason for these questions is I'm going over the docs of some content I'm thinking about buying. And not all is 100% compliant as far as the 2257 forms and some of the I.D. being shot too far away.

Any quality informative input would be appreciated. Thanks, in advance.

[marcop]

Originally Posted by cashcows

I understand that 2257 does not apply to content produced before 2009 if it's only solo simulated or lascivious display only as this type of content is exempt.

Really? I keep 2257 records back to 1998 when I first started shooting adult material. I've never heard of the 2009 "rule".

[cashcows]

Originally Posted by marcop

Really? I keep 2257 records back to 1998 when I first started shooting adult material. I've never heard of the 2009 "rule".

You should keep it all.

But as I understand it some pre-2009 content is exempt from 2257. Works produced before
"March 18, 2009 for works covered under this scheme only because they contain depictions of simulations or lascivious depictions of the genitals or pubic area. Such mere genital or pubic depictions were not subject to Section 2257 regulation before that date." - http://xxxlaw.com/articles/primer5.html

I have been looking at the 2257 info from some content companies and much is not in compliance. The are using standard model releases which from what I have been told from some top photographers that it's not in compliance. Now under the exemption it might not matter. But for all post March 18, 2009 content you also have to ask the model for any and all aliases and stage names used or you are not in compliance. There is also a number of other things you need to do.

And the exemption is only for softcore content.

Just a model release and picture of a girl holding the I.D. is not in compliance. And having two I.D. on file is also against the law according to http://xxxlaw.com

[marcop]

Originally Posted by cashcows

3. If some of the I.D. were shot too far away to be clear. Normally under 2257 this would not be in compliance. But on exempt content it should not matter as it's exempt. Is that correct?

I once refused to shoot a girl who had "lost" her ID's, though her agent had copies from another production company (New Sensations, btw). I had a bad feeling about it as I couldn't really see the copied ID's very well, and from what I could see the girl didn't look much like the photo in the ID. Sure enough, a few days later the girl was featured on America's Most Wanted, and she was on the lam with stolen ID's.

You can't be too careful with this stuff.

[marcop]

Originally Posted by cashcows

Works produced before
"March 18, 2009 for works covered under this scheme only because they contain depictions of simulations or lascivious depictions of the genitals or pubic area. Such mere genital or pubic depictions were not subject to Section 2257 regulation before that date." - http://xxxlaw.com/articles/primer5.html

Thanks for the link... that J. D. Obenberger guy knows his stuff.

[Paul Markham]

Cashcows. You're so wrong it's astounding. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2257

Employ a lawyer. 2257 is your protection not annoying paperwork.

[cashcows]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Cashcows. You're so wrong it's astounding. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2257

Employ a lawyer. 2257 is your protection not annoying paperwork.

You clearly do not have the level of knowledge you think you do and are not informed of this LEGAL Exemption on certain types of content I'm referring to that is made before March 18, 2009.

What I stated is correct. If not then tell specifically what is not correct and how you are not understanding the legal code.

I have spent 2 months studying 2257 for my own shooting. I have everything in compliance for my own shoots. And I know 2257 paper work is for my protection.

This is question is related to buying work from other producers and the code states that if it was shot before March 18, 2009 and is only lascivious display and/or simulated then it is exempt from 2257. The reason for this is you can not go back in time and create paper work that was not required back then.

http://www.xxxlaw.com/section-2257/regs.html#75.7

§ 75.7 Exemption statement.

(a) Any producer of any book, magazine, periodical, film, videotape, digitally- or computer-manipulated image, digital image, picture, or other matter may cause to be affixed to every copy of the matter a statement attesting that the matter is not covered by the record-keeping requirements of 18 U.S.C. 2257(a)–(c) or 18 U.S.C. 2257A(a)–(c), as applicable, and of this part if:

(1) The matter contains visual depictions of actual sexually explicit conduct made only before July 3, 1995, or was last produced, manufactured, published, duplicated, reproduced, or reissued before July 3, 1995. Where the matter consists of a compilation of separate primarily produced depictions, the entirety of the conduct depicted was produced prior to July 3, 1995, regardless of the date of secondary production;

(2) The matter contains only visual depictions of simulated sexually explicit conduct or of actual sexually explicit conduct limited to lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person, made before March 18, 2009;

(3) The matter contains only some combination of the visual depictions described in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section.

(b) If the primary producer and the secondary producer are different entities, the primary producer may certify to the secondary producer that the visual depictions in the matter satisfy the standards under paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(3) of this section. The secondary producer may then cause to be affixed to every copy of the matter a statement attesting that the matter is not covered by the record-keeping requirements of 18 U.S.C. 2257(a)–(c) or 18 U.S.C. 2257A(a)–(c), as applicable, and of this part.

Once aging if someone has some actual info regarding this from experience with this exemption I'd like to hear from them.

[cashcows]

And in addition to that:

§ 75.2 Maintenance of records.

(a) Any producer of any book, magazine, periodical, film, videotape, digitally- or computer-manipulated image, digital image, picture, or other matter that is produced in whole or in part with materials that have been mailed or shipped in interstate or foreign commerce, or is shipped, transported, or intended for shipment or transportation in interstate or foreign commerce, and that contains one or more visual depictions of an actual human being engaged in actual sexually explicit conduct (except lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person) made after July 3, 1995, or one or more visual depictions of an actual human being engaged in simulated sexually explicit conduct or in actual sexually explicit conduct limited to lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person made after March 18, 2009, shall, for each performer portrayed in such visual depiction, create and maintain records containing the following:

(1) The legal name and date of birth of each performer, obtained by the producer's examination of a picture identification card prior to production of the depiction. For any performer portrayed in a depiction of an actual human being engaged in actual sexually explicit conduct (except lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person) made after July 3, 1995, or of an actual human being engaged in simulated sexually explicit conduct or in actual sexually explicit conduct limited to lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person made after March 18, 2009, the records shall also include a legible hard copy or legible digitally scanned or other electronic copy of a hard copy of the identification document examined and, if that document does not contain a recent and recognizable picture of the performer, a legible hard copy of a picture identification card. For any performer portrayed in a depiction of an actual human being engaged in actual sexually explicit conduct (except lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person) made after June 23, 2005, or of an actual human being engaged in simulated sexually explicit conduct or in actual sexually explicit conduct limited to lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person made after March 18, 2009, the records shall include a copy of the depiction, and, where the depiction is published on an Internet computer site or service, a copy of any URL associated with the depiction. If no URL is associated with the depiction, the records shall include another uniquely identifying reference associated with the location of the depiction on the Internet. For any performer in a depiction performed live on the Internet, the records shall include a copy of the depiction with running-time sufficient to identify the performer in the depiction and to associate the performer with the records needed to confirm his or her age.

(2) Any name, other than the performer's legal name, ever used by the performer, including the performer's maiden name, alias, nickname, stage name, or professional name. For any performer portrayed in a visual depiction of an actual human being engaged in actual sexually explicit conduct (except lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person) made after July 3, 1995, or of an actual human being engaged in simulated sexually explicit conduct or in actual sexually explicit conduct limited to lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person made after March 18, 2009, such names shall be indexed by the title or identifying number of the book, magazine, film, videotape, digitally- or computer-manipulated image, digital image, picture, URL, or other matter. Producers may rely in good faith on representations by performers regarding accuracy of the names, other than legal names, used by performers.

(3) Records required to be created and maintained under this part shall be organized alphabetically, or numerically where appropriate, by the legal name of the performer (by last or family name, then first or given name), and shall be indexed or cross-referenced to each alias or other name used and to each title or identifying number of the book, magazine, film, videotape, digitally- or computer-manipulated image, digital image, picture, URL, or other matter.

(4) The primary producer shall create a record of the date of original production of the depiction.

(b) A producer who is a secondary producer as defined in §75.1(c) may satisfy the requirements of this part to create and maintain records by accepting from the primary producer, as defined in §75.1(c), copies of the records described in paragraph (a) of this section. Such a secondary producer shall also keep records of the name and address of the primary producer from whom he received copies of the records. The copies of the records may be redacted to eliminate non-essential information, including addresses, phone numbers, social security numbers, and other information not necessary to confirm the name and age of the performer. However, the identification number of the picture identification card presented to confirm the name and age may not be redacted.

(c) The information contained in the records required to be created and maintained by this part need be current only as of the date of original production of the visual depiction to which the records are associated. If the producer subsequently produces an additional book, magazine, film, videotape, digitally- or computer-manipulated image, digital image, or picture, or other matter (including but not limited to an Internet computer site or service) that contains one or more visual depictions of an actual human being engaged in actual or simulated sexually explicit conduct made by a performer for whom he maintains records as required by this part, the producer may add the additional title or identifying number and the names of the performer to the existing records maintained pursuant to §75.2(a)(2). Producers of visual depictions made after July 3, 1995, and before June 23, 2005, may rely on picture identification cards that were valid forms of required identification under the provisions of part 75 in effect during that time period.

(d) For any record of a performer in a visual depiction of actual sexually explicit conduct (except lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person) created or amended after June 23, 2005, or of a performer in a visual depiction of simulated sexually explicit conduct or actual sexually explicit conduct limited to lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person made after March 18, 2009, all such records shall be organized alphabetically, or numerically where appropriate, by the legal name of the performer (by last or family name, then first or given name), and shall be indexed or cross-referenced to each alias or other name used and to each title or identifying number of the book, magazine, film, videotape, digitally- or computer-manipulated image, digital image, or picture, or other matter (including but not limited to an Internet computer site or service). If the producer subsequently produces an additional book, magazine, film, videotape, digitally- or computer-manipulated image, digital image, or picture, or other matter (including but not limited to an Internet computer site or service) that contains one or more visual depictions of an actual human being engaged in actual or simulated sexually explicit conduct made by a performer for whom he maintains records as required by this part, the producer shall add the additional title or identifying number and the names of the performer to the existing records, and such records shall thereafter be maintained in accordance with this paragraph.

(e) Records required to be maintained under this part shall be segregated from all other records, shall not contain any other records, and shall not be contained within any other records.

(f) Records required to be maintained under this part may be kept either in hard copy or in digital form, provided that they include scanned copies of forms of identification and that there is a custodian of the records who can authenticate each digital record.

(g) Records are not required to be maintained by either a primary producer or by a secondary producer for a visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct that consists only of lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of a person, and contains no other sexually explicit conduct, whose original production date was prior to March 18, 2009.

(h) A primary or secondary producer may contract with a non-employee custodian to retain copies of the records that are required under this part. Such custodian must comply with all obligations related to records that are required by this Part, and such a contract does not relieve the producer of his liability under this part.

[Paul Markham]

If you're a lawyer, then studying a law is fine. If you're not a lawyer, go hire one.

2257 is my safe guard. It allows me to insist on a model proving they're of age, also who they say they is, Model Release signature matches the signature in the ID. Taking a picture of a model holding the ID next to their face for every scene is my safe guard they knows it's a professional shoot.

The model release proves the date the content was shot on, something 2257 didn't cover properly.

Also gives me 100% rights to distribute the material produced that day as I wish. With no recall or further payment to the model. It shows they has been paid, I back it up with a receipt signed by them for the money. The model releases gives me the models name, address, nick names and aliases. Because I worked with models whose first language wasn't English, we also had a MR in Czech.

MR and IDs, show the model I'm a pro. They tell them this is work and I have all the i's dotted and t's crossed. They can try suing me, I have them beat.

Of course you're discussing this point with someone who was 2257 compliant before it was a law and has had decades to get it right. And had the police going through his record keeping and being told it was done well.

[cashcows]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

If you're a lawyer, then studying a law is fine. If you're not a lawyer, go hire one.

2257 is my safe guard. It allows me to insist on a model proving they're of age, also who they say they is, Model Release signature matches the signature in the ID. Taking a picture of a model holding the ID next to their face for every scene is my safe guard they knows it's a professional shoot.

The model release proves the date the content was shot on, something 2257 didn't cover properly.

Also gives me 100% rights to distribute the material produced that day as I wish. With no recall or further payment to the model. It shows they has been paid, I back it up with a receipt signed by them for the money. The model releases gives me the models name, address, nick names and aliases. Because I worked with models whose first language wasn't English, we also had a MR in Czech.

MR and IDs, show the model I'm a pro. They tell them this is work and I have all the i's dotted and t's crossed. They can try suing me, I have them beat.

Of course you're discussing this point with someone who was 2257 compliant before it was a law and has had decades to get it right. And had the police going through his record keeping and being told it was done well.

You whole response is un-needed and pointless. I did not ask you if you thought I should talk to a lawyer. You clearly do not know the detailed workings of this law or the exemption that I'm talking about. So why respond?

You're argument that you are compliant and professional means nothing and is not relevant to this discussion. But you original snide remark was un-needed, not helpful and incorrect I AM NOT WRONG! This exemption is exactly as I have pointed out in the law.

So why you are rambling about your practices I have no idea unless maybe you just don't bother to actually read posts fully before you respond.

My entire point of this post is to get input from people that have knowledge of this exemption and clearly you do not. The reason I need this in is the person I'm considering buying from is not what I would call in full compliance. In fact I have seen this from several people that were not in full compliance. But there is an exception to cover this because most people that shot before the law had no way of knowing how to comply.

BTW. A model release is not what is needed for 2257 compliance. According to the law you need a separate document asking for the 2257 information and that information should NOT be filed with or part of any other document. Doubt this read the legal code I posted in my last post. And if you're only using a MR and I.D. you are not 100% in compliance according to the letter of the law. You also need the 2257 info on a separate sheet from the model release according to the law.

[Paul Markham]

OK you're right.

[Joe Obenberger]

Always flattered and delighted to be cited as an authority.

[rocky1234]

Originally Posted by Joe Obenberger

Always flattered and delighted to be cited as an authority.

So are affiliates that have whitelabel sites subject to anything in 2257? or not. or was that already covered?