Ex Post Facto - GoFuckYourself.com

B_Maverick · 06-19-2005, 07:34 AM

Okay...so the general consensus is that anything posted on the internet between 1995 and today can be retroactively enforced...meaning we all have to go and either modify our galleries or pull them down.

This seems wrong. Does this mean that Playboy and Penthouse have to recall every magazine they sold in that time and attach the 2257 info to it? Of course not. So why would we have to do that? If I am an artist and have nude photos in galleries around the world...must I now go and find every one of those photos and attach a statement?

I don't think I'm comparing apples to oranges, but maybe I am.

Probono · 06-19-2005, 08:30 AM

If you read the governments logic you and they were supposed to have the statement there since 1995. Their logic is this is not an expost facto law since it has been the law since 1990 and the regualtions are not an extention but and expaination of what they always required.

The hope it the courts will be rational in their interpretation but since DOJ is discounting Sundance only time will tell.

06-19-2005, 07:34 AM	#1
B_Maverick Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 447	Ex Post Facto Okay...so the general consensus is that anything posted on the internet between 1995 and today can be retroactively enforced...meaning we all have to go and either modify our galleries or pull them down. This seems wrong. Does this mean that Playboy and Penthouse have to recall every magazine they sold in that time and attach the 2257 info to it? Of course not. So why would we have to do that? If I am an artist and have nude photos in galleries around the world...must I now go and find every one of those photos and attach a statement? I don't think I'm comparing apples to oranges, but maybe I am. __________________ Sig too big http://www.gofuckyourself.com/gfy_faqs.html Want to use a large banner in your sig??? Contact Eric about getting on as an advertiser - eric AT adult.com

06-19-2005, 08:30 AM	#2
Probono Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Under the Rainbow Posts: 2,731	If you read the governments logic you and they were supposed to have the statement there since 1995. Their logic is this is not an expost facto law since it has been the law since 1990 and the regualtions are not an extention but and expaination of what they always required. The hope it the courts will be rational in their interpretation but since DOJ is discounting Sundance only time will tell.