Google to be shut down - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

SmokeyTheBear · 06-11-2005, 06:42 PM

woj is slow

ContentHire · 06-11-2005, 06:46 PM

Yep he missed it

Webby · 06-11-2005, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

"they generally have not been held liable" isnt a valid excuse or a valid legal argument..

In most old cases the focus is on search engine listing that by themselves dont constitute cp. But this is a whole new area.. google images , actually copies the images..

If google knowingly let cp images on google images they would be held liable i'm sure of it , just as a forum owner or website owner would, so i dont see how they suddenly would be exempt from providiing 2257.

If i make a replica of google images for adults , then it should be 2257 exempt if google is..

A spider that searches through fhg's with my code on them , just as google does.

Seriously Smokey - you are correct! :-)

The fact that an corp handles large volumes of data is not an excuse under law. It is entirely up to that corp to manage their own data and comply with whatever laws apply.

Google images could get contentious. Google put that package together - no one else, - and they are publishing it and should have full control over it or at least be monitoring it.

On a constructive side, if they do monitor images and were to report clear violations of children, - that could be a more effective way of reducing CP than any US Civil Code. Tho that raises still more shit that would end up another "issue" in the US.

But sure, there are mitigating factors and a decent defense lawyer helps :-)

AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE · 06-11-2005, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.Fiction

Search engines, hosting companies, and similar services are exempt.

How many times does this have to be posted?

Did anyone read the regulations?

So does everyone open up a search engine?
Or does it need traffic qualifications?

Will an index do?

I sale SE scripts!

AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE · 06-11-2005, 07:12 PM

Ya people should calm down there is no way the exhisting 2257 will hold any water.

Mr.Fiction · 06-11-2005, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

"they generally have not been held liable" isnt a valid excuse or a valid legal argument..

Yes, it is a valid argument and it is what the government intended - it's written into the regulations by the government.

They have specifically excluded services like Google, even going so far as to give them their own exclusion separate from ISPs and Hosts.

I don't understand why anyone is arguing when it is pretty clear in the regulations.

You guys can read the regulations and see where they have included the following:

(4) Producer does not include persons whose activities relating to the visual depiction of actual sexually explicit conduct are limited to the following:

(v) A provider of an electronic communication service or remote computing service who does not, and reasonably cannot, manage the sexually explicit content of the computer site or service.

They have just described Google as well as large chat, forum, blog, image hosting, and many other sites.

Think about the exclusion the government has always give hosts and ISPs in criminal cases.

There is nothing new here - sites that cannot reasonably be expected to moderate all of their content have long been given some protection. This is just a continuation of that protection.

acctman · 06-11-2005, 07:44 PM

This is covered by:

US TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 110 - Sexual Exploitation of Children
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/1..._I_20_110.html

Sites whose models/actors merely *look* like minors but are actually
adults must comply with USC 18 § 2257, which requires producers of
such sites to verify that their models/actors are over the age of 18,
and requires these producers to keep records of the performers name,
address, age, and every name, nickname or stage alias ever used.
Additionally, they must prominently display a disclaimer on the site
attesting to the fact that the performers are all legally adults.

TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 110 > § 2257 Record keeping requirements
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/1...7----000-.html

mikeyddddd · 06-11-2005, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kernelpanic

Don't expect reading out of GFY when it comes to 2257 regulations

That's twice as many words as are needed. This shall suffice:

Don't expect reading out of GFY

Carry on.

SomeCreep · 06-11-2005, 07:45 PM

06-11-2005, 06:42 PM	#51
SmokeyTheBear ►SouthOfHeaven Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: PlanetEarth MyBoardRank: GerbilMaster My-Penis-Size: extralarge MyWeapon: Computer Posts: 28,609	woj is slow __________________ hatisblack at yahoo.com

06-11-2005, 07:12 PM	#55
AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE best designer on GFY Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: IALIEN.COM - High Definition Video and Photographic Productions -ICQ 78943384 Posts: 30,307	Ya people should calm down there is no way the exhisting 2257 will hold any water. __________________ NAKED HOSTING FTW!11 I'm On The INSANE PLAN $9.95/mo! \| The Alien Blog Adult News Worth Reading Updated Daily \| Content For Sale! 641 PICS 216 MINUTES OF VIDEO $350.00 \|ICQ: 78943384 \|

06-11-2005, 07:45 PM	#59
SomeCreep :glugglug Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Where the Wild Things Are Posts: 26,118	__________________ Webair Hosting I use and recommend Webair for hosting.

06-11-2005, 06:46 PM	#52
ContentHire Registered User Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 98	Yep he missed it

06-11-2005, 07:44 PM	#57
acctman Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Atlanta Posts: 2,840	This is covered by: US TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 110 - Sexual Exploitation of Children http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/1..._I_20_110.html Sites whose models/actors merely look like minors but are actually adults must comply with USC 18 § 2257, which requires producers of such sites to verify that their models/actors are over the age of 18, and requires these producers to keep records of the performers name, address, age, and every name, nickname or stage alias ever used. Additionally, they must prominently display a disclaimer on the site attesting to the fact that the performers are all legally adults. TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 110 > § 2257 Record keeping requirements http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/1...7----000-.html