2257 Question - GoFuckYourself.com

tombarr · 08-04-2004, 07:38 PM

I am wondering how the new proposed 2257 changes will affect adult retail websites that post pictures of box covers of videos that require 2257 information.

Hard to imagine a website with thousands of videos on the site, being able to comply with this.

freeadultcontent · 08-04-2004, 07:40 PM

Most box cover fronts are censored now anyways.

Imageauction · 08-05-2004, 08:05 AM

Censoring does nothing to change whether the underlying conduct is actual sexually explicit conduct.

tombarr brings up a good point. In my letter to the DOJ I argue that the inclusion of webmasters is wrong and that "managing the content of a website" no more makes one a producer than managing the contents of your video store.

see my draft at http://www.2257.com/draft_letter.htm

madthumbs · 08-05-2004, 12:18 PM

ImageAuction .. can you ICQ me @ 8057295 .. please? I have something I'd like to ask and also mention a few other flaws that I think would be worthy of inclusion in your letter.

Sarah_Jayne · 08-05-2004, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Imageauction
Censoring does nothing to change whether the underlying conduct is actual sexually explicit conduct.

tombarr brings up a good point. In my letter to the DOJ I argue that the inclusion of webmasters is wrong and that "managing the content of a website" no more makes one a producer than managing the contents of your video store.

see my draft at http://www.2257.com/draft_letter.htm

EXACTLY...i want to know if Blockbuster has to have all the details of all the actresses in the adult films they rent out. I am sure that falls undere mere distribution but still it was a fly up my ass.

My hubby has been talking to a UK lawyer most of the day to try to figure out a way around post our address on the web but I have no idea what has been said.

Doctor Dre · 08-05-2004, 04:31 PM

Blah blah blah ... 50 2257 questions a day . and none is answered

freeadultcontent · 08-05-2004, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Doctor Dre
Blah blah blah ... 50 2257 questions a day . and none is answered

Sarah basicly covered it. That is a clear case of meer distribution.

FightThisPatent · 08-05-2004, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by freeadultcontent
Sarah basicly covered it. That is a clear case of meer distribution.

-brandon

08-04-2004, 07:38 PM	#1
tombarr Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 320	2257 Question I am wondering how the new proposed 2257 changes will affect adult retail websites that post pictures of box covers of videos that require 2257 information. Hard to imagine a website with thousands of videos on the site, being able to comply with this. __________________ Gay Paycheck Clickx Network Hard Link Trades, Blog Roll Trades - 110 Straight and 40 Gay Niches

08-04-2004, 07:40 PM	#2
freeadultcontent Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: "evitcepsrep ruoy egnahc" Posts: 9,976	Most box cover fronts are censored now anyways. __________________ Exclusive Ethnic & Microniche Sites

08-05-2004, 08:05 AM	#3
Imageauction Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Tampa Posts: 355	Censoring does nothing to change whether the underlying conduct is actual sexually explicit conduct. tombarr brings up a good point. In my letter to the DOJ I argue that the inclusion of webmasters is wrong and that "managing the content of a website" no more makes one a producer than managing the contents of your video store. see my draft at http://www.2257.com/draft_letter.htm __________________ SIG TOO BIG! Maximum 120x60 button and no more than 3 text lines of DEFAULT SIZE and COLOR. Unless your sig is for a GFY top banner sponsor, then you may use a 624x80 instead of a 120x60.

08-05-2004, 12:18 PM	#4
madthumbs Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Lexington, KY Posts: 339	ImageAuction .. can you ICQ me @ 8057295 .. please? I have something I'd like to ask and also mention a few other flaws that I think would be worthy of inclusion in your letter.