FSC Says: DirectNic Violating Privacy Laws, Requests Are Illegal - GoFuckYourself.com

BoyAlley · 12-13-2006, 02:15 PM

Excellent reporting here by Steve Javors:

http://www.xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=18587

Quote:

First Amendment attorney and Free Speech Coalition Chairman Jeffrey Douglas said the ID request is unprecedented, and more importantly, a violation of privacy laws. According to Douglas, the request is illegal, and also could have a chilling effect on the free speech of webmasters that deal in legal teen content.

?This is a blatant and absolute violation of privacy laws,? Douglas told XBIZ. ?There?s absolutely no legal liability for the registrar if underage models appear on a website. DirectNic is an officious intermeddler.?

who · 12-13-2006, 02:17 PM

That's good news.

Theo · 12-13-2006, 02:18 PM

of course all ex-oprano ass kissers are gonna skip this fact.

PMdave · 12-13-2006, 02:21 PM

What info are they requesting?

Agent 488 · 12-13-2006, 02:22 PM

i thought they were stand up guys?

GonZo · 12-13-2006, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soul_Rebel

of course all ex-oprano ass kissers are gonna skip this fact.

FSC has never lied to us either.

BoyAlley · 12-13-2006, 02:23 PM

FSC Says DirectNic are not the Internets Police:

Quote:

?The bottom line is that if [DirectNic] received a complaint about child porn, there are a numerous avenues for them to report it to the proper legal authorities,? Douglas said. ?DirectNic has no remote prayer to legally justify their request. They are licensed to provide a service ? not to police content. I would think that upon hearing this, most adult companies would transfer their domains [away from DirectNic] immediately.?

Pleasurepays · 12-13-2006, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soul_Rebel

of course all ex-oprano ass kissers are gonna skip this fact.

really? for the first time, a legal analysis was offered explaining the liability issues. if DirectNIC was wrong... then they are wrong. Just because a band of idiots that didn't like something got together to express thier displeasure without addressing the relevant facts, doesn't mean they were right at that moment either.

DateDoc · 12-13-2006, 02:26 PM

Best said here:

Quote:

?DirectNic has no remote prayer to legally justify their request. They are licensed to provide a service ? not to police content. I would think that upon hearing this, most adult companies would transfer their domains [away from DirectNic] immediately.?

Well said!!

GonZo · 12-13-2006, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

really? for the first time, a legal analysis was offered explaining the liability issues. if DirectNIC was wrong... then they are wrong. Just because a band of idiots that didn't like something got together to express thier displeasure without addressing the relevant facts, doesn't mean they were right at that moment either.

Got to draw the drama out. The charity sig work is slow this month.

aico · 12-13-2006, 02:30 PM

Jesus that was fast

dig420 · 12-13-2006, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

really? for the first time, a legal analysis was offered explaining the liability issues. if DirectNIC was wrong... then they are wrong. Just because a band of idiots that didn't like something got together to express thier displeasure without addressing the relevant facts, doesn't mean they were right at that moment either.

Didn't take much genius to see that they were overstepping thier bounds in the first place. The problem is that people like us HAVE to band together to keep people like YOU from running everybody else over with your own holier than thou brand of 'officious, meddling' morality. And we shouldn't have to.

bl4h · 12-13-2006, 02:31 PM

ya keep pushing the beast.

Soon enough youre gonna wish it was still up to the registars

Anthony · 12-13-2006, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GonZo

Got to draw the drama out. The charity sig work is slow this month.

Don't be an idiot, his charity work isn't an issue to this discussion.

teenfunsfan · 12-13-2006, 02:32 PM

the FCS is not really doing a good job here.....

BoyAlley · 12-13-2006, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

Just because a band of idiots that didn't like something got together to express thier displeasure without addressing the relevant facts, doesn't mean they were right at that moment either.

Maybe some of us "idiots" didn't comment on the "legality" of things, and only on the "right vs. wrong" aspect, because we knew a legal analysis by one of the countries top first amendment attorneys was on the way.

GonZo · 12-13-2006, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anthony

Don't be an idiot, his charity work isn't an issue to this discussion.

Im always an idiot.

PMdave · 12-13-2006, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teenfunsfan

the FCS is not really doing a good job here.....

always make sure people think they need you to save their ass...

Anthony · 12-13-2006, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GonZo

Im always an idiot.

I see it is working great for you.

bl4h · 12-13-2006, 02:35 PM

thanks to the boyalleys of the past, looks where we are now

Pleasurepays · 12-13-2006, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dig420

Didn't take much genius to see that they were overstepping thier bounds in the first place. The problem is that people like us HAVE to band together to keep people like YOU from running everybody else over with your own holier than thou brand of 'officious, meddling' morality. And we shouldn't have to.

people like me?? you are absolutely, completely and totally out of your fucking mind. i dont give a fuck about anyones site content. i really don't. i never said i did. the issue was about the law and what people kept referring to as "their rights" and what "rights" they do or dont have. it all boils down to very simple legal questions that were never answered until right now.

Can you get that through your thick fucking head?

but then again... what could we expect from a poly-sci major from Berkley whos simplistic world view has broken everything down into black and white... "white" being "liberal democrat" and "black" being "evil conservatives"

jesus christ. you need to get out of the fucking compound more.

Pleasurepays · 12-13-2006, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoyAlley

Maybe some of us "idiots" didn't comment on the "legality" of things, and only on the "right vs. wrong" aspect, because we knew a legal analysis by one of the countries top first amendment attorneys was on the way.

i like you in a non-gay way and it totally pisses me off.

JFK · 12-13-2006, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GonZo

Im always an idiot.

dont it make you feel right at home ??

eroswebmaster · 12-13-2006, 02:39 PM

What I find funny, is that in their attempt at avoiding liability, they stepped right into it.

Quote:

Douglas continued, ?Again, under federal law they have no right to these documents, so now they have no protection from civil liability. They are immune from policing content under the law, but now by doing so they have created liability. DirectNic is lawlessly intruding into their business.?

GonZo · 12-13-2006, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anthony

I see it is working great for you.

Dont mind me. Im imploding.

teenfunsfan · 12-13-2006, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PMdave

always make sure people think they need you to save their ass...

yeah and while they are doing that they are also trying to protect the ones that actually don't run a honest business

Anthony · 12-13-2006, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JFK

dont it make you feel right at home ??

Julius, you are on GFY, not Oprano.

GonZo · 12-13-2006, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JFK

dont it make you feel right at home ??

Your a top notch guy... bring me a drink will you?

Anthony · 12-13-2006, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GonZo

Dont mind me. Im imploding.

Sorry, is that the mating call of the Loser I'm hearing?

eroswebmaster · 12-13-2006, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

really? for the first time, a legal analysis was offered explaining the liability issues. if DirectNIC was wrong... then they are wrong. Just because a band of idiots that didn't like something got together to express thier displeasure without addressing the relevant facts, doesn't mean they were right at that moment either.

As has already been pointed out...common sense played hugely in understanding the issues going on.

Just be a man, and say..."I'm sorry BoyAlley, I was wrong, you were right."

GonZo · 12-13-2006, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anthony

Sorry, is that the mating call of the Loser I'm hearing?

No its your leasing agent.

JFK · 12-13-2006, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GonZo

Your a top notch guy... bring me a drink will you?

With, or without umbrella??

makefuckingmoney · 12-13-2006, 02:47 PM

this policy would only make me use directnic more.. i have ZERO problem with it.

Anthony · 12-13-2006, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GonZo

No its your leasing agent.

No idea what you are talking about, I don't lease a car or home.

Have you found a car you can fit into yet?

sarettah · 12-13-2006, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soul_Rebel

of course all ex-oprano ass kissers are gonna skip this fact.

Ooops, almost missed this, sorry bout that.

The nice thing about what was Oprano was that facts never got skipped, if people were wrong, they ponied on up and said "I was wrong".

In this case, I don't happen to agree with the FSC lawyer and I have a lawyer friend of mine checking things out to give me his opinion before I pony up. If Jim agrees with the FSC, then I will say I was wrong, but so far he is telling me that DN can ask for anything they fucking please and are not in violation of the law by doing so. Whether Slick has to comply is another story alltogether.

.

dig420 · 12-13-2006, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

people like me?? you are absolutely, completely and totally out of your fucking mind. i dont give a fuck about anyones site content. i really don't. i never said i did. the issue was about the law and what people kept referring to as "their rights" and what "rights" they do or dont have. it all boils down to very simple legal questions that were never answered until right now.

Can you get that through your thick fucking head?

but then again... what could we expect from a poly-sci major from Berkley whos simplistic world view has broken everything down into black and white... "white" being "liberal democrat" and "black" being "evil conservatives"

jesus christ. you need to get out of the fucking compound more.

yeah people like you. EVERY time an issue comes up regarding someone's "rights" - your quote, and isn't that telling - you're on the bandwagon, pounding the drums, being as LOUD as you possibly fucking can about how stupid we are for thinking we as individuals even have any "rights". You're basically an evil person, and someone needs to make sure you know this. You're the bad guy. You're the bookburner, the brownshirt, the censor, the bigot. Everything I hate.

Now fuck off.

RawAlex · 12-13-2006, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pleasurepays

really? for the first time, a legal analysis was offered explaining the liability issues. if DirectNIC was wrong... then they are wrong. Just because a band of idiots that didn't like something got together to express thier displeasure without addressing the relevant facts, doesn't mean they were right at that moment either.

Plus we can take Mr. Douglas's comments and put it with the "no 2257 inspections" protection that FSC promised and file it under "good intentions".

Mr Douglas does not address the ToS from Directnic, the terms under which the domain was leased. The only ones who can determine Directnic's liability in the issue would be in a court of law, and any action does to mitigate that liability would work in their favor at a future point.

Mr Douglas may be correct, but it isn't his business and his personal pocketbook on the line. If he was working for Directnic, was licensed to practice law in that state, and was privy to the information that Directnic is faced with, I suspect his opinion might be somewhat different.

GonZo · 12-13-2006, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anthony

No idea what you are talking about, I don't lease a car or home.

Have you found a car you can fit into yet?

Im looking at a Camero in Charlotte. I have a great idea for a custom tag for it.

Thanks for asking!

Juicy D. Links · 12-13-2006, 02:55 PM

Pleasurepays · 12-13-2006, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eroswebmaster

As has already been pointed out...common sense played hugely in understanding the issues going on.

Just be a man, and say..."I'm sorry BoyAlley, I was wrong, you were right."

Why? its not an issue of common sense. its a simple issue of the policy of a private company, where those policies are within the law and whether or not their request and action was a lawful request/action.

has nothing at all to do with common sense.

supporting it or not supporting it might. but the question was never "do you agree with this". i dont think anyone in their right mind would agree that a registrar should be able to lock your domain for any reason that is not related to its transfer and any issue that might arise during transfer.

in that respect, of course i agree with BoyAlley. but "rights" and "legal" and "illegal" are not subjective ideas. they are codified in law.

Peaches · 12-13-2006, 02:57 PM

I have never seen so many dumbASSumptions in my life - even on GFY!

NOTHING has been played out. DirectNic put a lock until they heard from the customer. Who's to say it won't be removed once the customer says "I want to change registars instead of giving you proof of age"? Who's to say DirectNic wanted anything but the company to contact them and clear up complaints of possible underage pictures? How is it a violation of privacy to provide just a picture and DOB? And more importantly, where was the FSC when at least one of their members was being checked out by the FBI, lol.

Move your domains. From what others have posted, other domain companies have similar stipulations in their contracts (which probably most of you never bother to read...........).

Anthony · 12-13-2006, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Im looking at a Camero in Charlotte. I have a great idea for a custom tag for it.

Heard it was a piece of shit and not worth shit. Should be in your price range.

Don't know many people who get L00s3r for a license plate. Whatever floats your boat.

Jon Clark - BANNED FOR LIFE · 12-13-2006, 02:59 PM

and the story gets even better!

Peaches · 12-13-2006, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sarettah

The nice thing about what was Oprano was that facts never got skipped, if people were wrong, they ponied on up and said "I was wrong".

Hell, on another board you get banned if you accuse someone, are requested to provide proof and then you do.

Pleasurepays · 12-13-2006, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dig420

yeah people like you. EVERY time an issue comes up regarding someone's "rights" - your quote, and isn't that telling - you're on the bandwagon, pounding the drums, being as LOUD as you possibly fucking can about how stupid we are for thinking we as individuals even have any "rights". You're basically an evil person, and someone needs to make sure you know this. You're the bad guy. You're the bookburner, the brownshirt, the censor, the bigot. Everything I hate.

Now fuck off.

Some might say that you are delusional, bitter, angry and confused and you have transposed this image and ideas of everything you feel is making you angry onto others with the misguided idea that somehow you will eventually make the anger go away by getting rid of those external things that are "wrong" and causing you to feel what you feel.

Nothing makes you feel the way you do but you. thats the sad paradox about your anger... you can't change it because you refuse to accept responsibility for it. i can understand that though... it requires true character. it requires humility. it requires maturity. you just aren't ready apparently.

But Dig. I love you. I really love you. please know that i love you very much. i will never censor you or burn your books.. you're special.

Jon Clark - BANNED FOR LIFE · 12-13-2006, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bl4h

ya keep pushing the beast.

Soon enough youre gonna wish it was still up to the registars

what he said....

GonZo · 12-13-2006, 03:04 PM

I was thinking more along the lines of "Spamero"

Peaches · 12-13-2006, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anthony

No idea what you are talking about, I don't lease a car or home.

Lots of people lease cars and homes - including at least one "playa". I don't see why the issue keeps being brought up against you. If you want to lease your home, your car, your TV - WTF cares??

dig420 · 12-13-2006, 03:09 PM

Hey pleasurepays... I bet you think the Patriot Act is just fine, don't you? I bet you think Bush wiretapping American citizens is fine and dandy, we shouldn't teach evolution in schools, and all kinds of other fun stuff. Maybe we shouldn't hold a presidential election in a time of war?

The fact that you were dead wrong on this issue just highlights the fact that you're dead wrong on damn near EVERY issue. Again, you are evil. You can get personal, you can claim I'm an angry man, but at the end of the day you are what you are, and that's a misguided wannabe moral leader of the porn community. Sad.

Anthony · 12-13-2006, 03:10 PM

Quote:

I was thinking more along the lines of "Spamero"

I'd be more worried about fitting in the car if I were you.

I imagine that's why you want that convertible, not much space to get in through the door, you can just stick in an appendage and slowly leak into the front seat and steering wheel.

12-13-2006, 03:04 PM	#47
GonZo Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Atlanta,Ga. Posts: 3,180	I was thinking more along the lines of "Spamero" __________________ Assclown Bob Rice wants to BANG your credit card! "I am putting the bastards of this world on notice; greed and corruption will always be met with "a voice made of ink and rage." All the information above is my personal opinion.

12-13-2006, 02:17 PM	#2
who So Fucking Banned Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: ICQ #23642053 Posts: 19,593	That's good news.

12-13-2006, 02:18 PM	#3
Theo HAL 9000 Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 34,515	of course all ex-oprano ass kissers are gonna skip this fact.

12-13-2006, 02:21 PM	#4
PMdave Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 1,517	What info are they requesting?

12-13-2006, 02:22 PM	#5
Agent 488 Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 22,511	i thought they were stand up guys?

12-13-2006, 02:30 PM	#11
aico Moo Moo Cow Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Washington State Posts: 14,748	Jesus that was fast

12-13-2006, 02:31 PM	#13
bl4h Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 1,282	ya keep pushing the beast. Soon enough youre gonna wish it was still up to the registars

12-13-2006, 02:32 PM	#15
teenfunsfan Registered User Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 74	the FCS is not really doing a good job here.....

12-13-2006, 02:35 PM	#20
bl4h Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 1,282	thanks to the boyalleys of the past, looks where we are now

12-13-2006, 02:47 PM	#33
makefuckingmoney Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 3,277	this policy would only make me use directnic more.. i have ZERO problem with it.

12-13-2006, 02:55 PM	#39
Juicy D. Links So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: N.Y. -Long Island -- Posts: 122,992

12-13-2006, 02:57 PM	#41
Peaches Old broad Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Away Posts: 13,933	I have never seen so many dumbASSumptions in my life - even on GFY! NOTHING has been played out. DirectNic put a lock until they heard from the customer. Who's to say it won't be removed once the customer says "I want to change registars instead of giving you proof of age"? Who's to say DirectNic wanted anything but the company to contact them and clear up complaints of possible underage pictures? How is it a violation of privacy to provide just a picture and DOB? And more importantly, where was the FSC when at least one of their members was being checked out by the FBI, lol. Move your domains. From what others have posted, other domain companies have similar stipulations in their contracts (which probably most of you never bother to read...........).

12-13-2006, 02:59 PM	#43
Jon Clark - BANNED FOR LIFE North Coast Pimp Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: 304-534-757 Posts: 9,395	and the story gets even better!

12-13-2006, 03:09 PM	#49
dig420 Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 9,240	Hey pleasurepays... I bet you think the Patriot Act is just fine, don't you? I bet you think Bush wiretapping American citizens is fine and dandy, we shouldn't teach evolution in schools, and all kinds of other fun stuff. Maybe we shouldn't hold a presidential election in a time of war? The fact that you were dead wrong on this issue just highlights the fact that you're dead wrong on damn near EVERY issue. Again, you are evil. You can get personal, you can claim I'm an angry man, but at the end of the day you are what you are, and that's a misguided wannabe moral leader of the porn community. Sad.