Welcome to the GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum forums.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Post New Thread Reply

Register GFY Rules Calendar
Go Back   GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum > >
Discuss what's fucking going on, and which programs are best and worst. One-time "program" announcements from "established" webmasters are allowed.

 
Thread Tools
Old 07-20-2007, 06:10 PM   #1
xxxjay
Tube groupie.
 
xxxjay's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: LoScandalous, CA
Posts: 13,482
2257 Changes: In Case You Don't Know, No You Know

ADDITIONS, CHANGES AND CLARIFICATIONS
RE: 18 U.S.C. 2257
Source: Federal Register, Vol. 72, No. 133, Page 38033-39

These are NOT the final rules!

NEW Record Keeping Rules for Secondaries:

"Lascivious exhibition of the genitals" is now part of the definition of "actual sexually explicit conduct," (the recording of which triggers the statute) purportedly retroactively back to July 27, 2006. Note: By some courts' view, the genital area may be clothed and yet fall within this definition. See, for example, U.S. v. Knox 32 F.3d 733 (C.A.3,1994)
Applies only to images recorded on or after July 27, 2006.*
Can accept a duplicate of ID and with the address and other unnecessary data deleted, but must contain photo, serial number, name, and DOB.
Must otherwise index and cross-reference as if a primary (but with additional burdens).
Secondaries are subject to inspections just as primaries have been.
CHANGES:

Live web cams must record sufficient material to identify performer and must otherwise comply with record-keeping (may be in conflict with pending FSC v. Gonzalez injunction).
Websites must put entire 2257 statement (designating e.g., custodian and street address), rather than previously approved hypertext.
Primaries may delete "non-essentials" from ID copies provided to secondaries (but must contain photo, serial number, name, and DOB).
CLARIFICATIONS:

Producers (foreign or domestic) filming overseas may rely on government-issued ID other than USA-issued.
Primary producers with performances recorded before June 23, 2005, may rely upon non-government ID, such as employer or school ID.
Fight Back:

FSC is launching an industry-wide campaign to encourage participation for the 2257 public comment period.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD ENDS SEPTEMBER 10, 2007
Visit freespeechcoalition.com for help in formatting and transmitting your comments (Guide will be soon available).
xxxjay is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 06:17 PM   #2
Nikki_Licks
Confirmed User
 
Nikki_Licks's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Behind The Lens
Posts: 6,323
I look forward to seeing the guide

We all need to participate in this, hopefully many will...
__________________
Amateur Content
ICQ: 292 356 077
Nikki_Licks is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 06:41 PM   #3
JD
Too lazy to set a custom title
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 22,651
i predict text (currently safe for US webbies) sites coming under the gun in the future as well :/ Because they link to (provide) porn
JD is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 06:41 PM   #4
Veronica Vain
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8
Thanks for the post
Veronica Vain is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 06:46 PM   #5
Extreme John
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Fl
Posts: 1,475
Def. need to keep supporting the FSC, constant bullshit.
__________________
Florida Honnies - Extreme John


51299342
Extreme John is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 07:46 PM   #6
VexXxed
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: What Bitch?
Posts: 544
Time to start blurring images...
__________________
VexXxed is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 07:50 PM   #7
Azlord
Confirmed User
 
Azlord's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: City... City of Satan
Posts: 2,651
Thanks for the update
Azlord is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 07:52 PM   #8
GatorB
The Demon & 12clicks
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: SallyRand is a FAGGOT
Posts: 18,208
Quote:
Originally Posted by SPeRMiNaToR View Post
i predict text (currently safe for US webbies) sites coming under the gun in the future as well :/ Because they link to (provide) porn

Doubtful. Then sites like Google and Yahoo would be truely fucked. That now would be taken to court and maybe 10 years later be ruled unconstitutional.
GatorB is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 07:58 PM   #9
jakethedog
Confirmed User
 
jakethedog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Vancouver B.C.
Posts: 2,497
I'm gonna ship big black felt pens with memberships .. so the dudes can black out the naughty bits ..
can't wait to see things in a couple years .. holy moving backwards batman
__________________
No sig .. just me
jakethedog is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 08:04 PM   #10
crockett
in a van by the river
 
crockett's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 76,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorB View Post
Doubtful. Then sites like Google and Yahoo would be truely fucked. That now would be taken to court and maybe 10 years later be ruled unconstitutional.
Sites like google and yahoo have have a get out of jail free pass since this whole thing came to be.
__________________
In November, you can vote for America's next president or its first dictator.
crockett is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 08:05 PM   #11
AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE
best designer on GFY
 
AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: IALIEN.COM - High Definition Video and Photographic Productions -ICQ 78943384
Posts: 30,307
"Lascivious exhibition of the genitals" is now part of the definition of "actual sexually explicit conduct," (the recording of which triggers the statute)


what a fucken crock of muther fucking shit...
AlienQ - BANNED FOR LIFE is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 08:15 PM   #12
Trixxxia
Confirmed User
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 5,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by xxxjay View Post
Websites must put entire 2257 statement (designating e.g., custodian and street address), rather than previously approved hypertext.


FSC is launching an industry-wide campaign to encourage participation for the 2257 public comment period.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD ENDS SEPTEMBER 10, 2007
Visit freespeechcoalition.com for help in formatting and transmitting your comments (Guide will be soon available).

At the seminar, a point was brought up about URLs and the lawyers agreed that as it's written, every address with what is deemed explicit would need the ENTIRE 2257 statement - which would also mean that every image would need to be on an HTML with the statement below it. Now when you build thousands of galleries a year, you know what that will do to the TGP/MGPs/Free Sites/Blogs & their submitters? Programs can probably handle the transition but a lot of you, will have to go back and change the galleries, scripts will have to be modified to scan and accept HTML pages from the thumb - the actual thumb will probably need it's own HTML page too.... Brace yourselves if it's not clarified, modified or removed from the new recordkeeping rules!
Trixxxia is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 08:25 PM   #13
AsianDivaGirlsWebDude
Purveyor, Fine Asian Porn
 
AsianDivaGirlsWebDude's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 38,323


ADG
AsianDivaGirlsWebDude is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 08:30 PM   #14
GatorB
The Demon & 12clicks
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: SallyRand is a FAGGOT
Posts: 18,208
Quote:
Originally Posted by AsianDivaGirlsWebDude View Post


ADG

I'm sure that was prodcued before July 1995.
GatorB is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 08:33 PM   #15
munki
Do Fun Shit.
 
munki's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: OC
Posts: 13,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by jakethedog View Post
holy moving backwards batman
couldn't have said it better myself...

fucking fuckity fuck...
__________________

I have the simplest tastes. I am always satisfied with the best.” -Oscar Wilde
munki is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 08:41 PM   #16
AsianDivaGirlsWebDude
Purveyor, Fine Asian Porn
 
AsianDivaGirlsWebDude's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 38,323
Lascivious: arousing sexual desire

Damn, that means if these rules were in effect when I was a kid that the Sears Catalog, National Geographic, and later the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition would have to carry 2257 labels.

ADG
AsianDivaGirlsWebDude is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 08:55 PM   #17
TheDoc
Too lazy to set a custom title
 
TheDoc's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Currently Incognito
Posts: 13,827
This industry needs a Nick Naylor... I will volunteer for the job!!!
__________________
~TheDoc - ICQ7765825
It's all disambiguation
TheDoc is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 08:56 PM   #18
tony286
lurker
 
tony286's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: atlanta
Posts: 57,021
I think many wont write for one of two reasons, they are afraid of shining a spot light on themselves or will choose to ignore it just like they have done all along.
tony286 is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 08:59 PM   #19
TheDoc
Too lazy to set a custom title
 
TheDoc's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Currently Incognito
Posts: 13,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony404 View Post
I think many wont write for one of two reasons, they are afraid of shining a spot light on themselves or will choose to ignore it just like they have done all along.
I don't think as many will ignore this one, as long as we can educate past all 'message boards', which only accounts for 5% of all active webmasters.

I didn't write in on .xxx, it was clear that the hate group hated the people making money and the people making money just wanted to do what the others wanted. I knew from day 1 that it would never go through, so I didn't care either way.

This on the other hand, has me a little more worried. One thing being they don't care wtf we or some judge says, that's just scary. I will write in this one, but I wouldn't mind something to go off of.. I will email to my webmasters, I will post it in my yard, I will get my folks to email in.
__________________
~TheDoc - ICQ7765825
It's all disambiguation
TheDoc is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 09:03 PM   #20
tony286
lurker
 
tony286's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: atlanta
Posts: 57,021
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDoc View Post
I don't think as many will ignore this one, as long as we can educate past all 'message boards', which only accounts for 5% of all active webmasters.

I didn't write in on .xxx, it was clear that the hate group hated the people making money and the people making money just wanted to do what the others wanted. I knew from day 1 that it would never go through, so I didn't care either way.

This on the other hand, has me a little more worried. One thing being they don't care wtf we or some judge says, that's just scary. I will write in this one, but I wouldn't mind something to go off of.. I will email to my webmasters, I will post it in my yard, I will get my folks to email in.
Man I could go out there right now and come up with at least 100 sites not in compliance just with their 2257 statement thats without any deep digging. I would say probably 90 percent of all adult webmasters arent in compliance.
You have to remember you got a ton of small mom pops.
tony286 is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 09:16 PM   #21
TheDoc
Too lazy to set a custom title
 
TheDoc's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Currently Incognito
Posts: 13,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony404 View Post
Man I could go out there right now and come up with at least 100 sites not in compliance just with their 2257 statement thats without any deep digging. I would say probably 90 percent of all adult webmasters arent in compliance.
You have to remember you got a ton of small mom pops.
I was just working with a client who was a little out of compliance, he had the records but the statement was wrong and in the wrong spot. Little thing, but still something.


I have a hell of a question about the new 2257.. One being, I don't personally, ever.. produce, see, validate, change, crop, cut, see, download or process ANY content, pictures or videos.. It's all done before I even buy it and the content actually isn't owned by me, but everything is leased.. Yet I host it.

(quick edit, I do have all the records though)
__________________
~TheDoc - ICQ7765825
It's all disambiguation
TheDoc is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 07:13 AM   #22
MrPinks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: FL
Posts: 1,767
I agree with Tony, I doubt many will write. And I also agree with Sperminator, I can see text sites being a target after this is law. Fucking bullshit. I thought of some realistic solutions to 2257 the other night and wrote them down. I will post them in this thread later on. As I say "realistic" I mean that they will never go into effect since this entire law is getting out of hand.
MrPinks is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 07:43 AM   #23
Extreme John
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Fl
Posts: 1,475
So overall whats everyone's take on the new 2257, with the FSC and everything else, does everyone see themselves jumping to resolve any issues right away?
__________________
Florida Honnies - Extreme John


51299342
Extreme John is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 08:58 AM   #24
Nubiles
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 1,496
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trixxxia View Post
At the seminar, a point was brought up about URLs and the lawyers agreed that as it's written, every address with what is deemed explicit would need the ENTIRE 2257 statement - which would also mean that every image would need to be on an HTML with the statement below it. Now when you build thousands of galleries a year, you know what that will do to the TGP/MGPs/Free Sites/Blogs & their submitters? Programs can probably handle the transition but a lot of you, will have to go back and change the galleries, scripts will have to be modified to scan and accept HTML pages from the thumb - the actual thumb will probably need it's own HTML page too.... Brace yourselves if it's not clarified, modified or removed from the new recordkeeping rules!

Good point, I dont know how many people are aware of the burdensome of this rule. Whether every image needs to be on its own html page or whether some sort of reference system is created per each web page referencing each image to the 2257 info and date is pretty much impossible.

Even if these rules only apply back so far its would be our burden to prove that and its probably better to do it for everything.
__________________
NUBILES.NET : Hosted galleries with thumbs and descriptions | nn galleries | Hosted free sites | 3 new girls shot each week | Icq 143674274
Nubiles is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 09:03 AM   #25
tony286
lurker
 
tony286's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: atlanta
Posts: 57,021
unfortunately the big problem with 2257 is until someone is arrested and dragged into court on a non age related 2257 violation.We wont have a clear understanding.
tony286 is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 09:14 AM   #26
Scootermuze
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Extreme John View Post
So overall whats everyone's take on the new 2257, with the FSC and everything else, does everyone see themselves jumping to resolve any issues right away?
If everyone in the adult industry did exactly as 2257 (including new proposals) required, and all record keeping was in perfect order in every case..

Better yet.. if every adult webmaster just took down their sites altogether... no more pay sites.. no more tgps.. no more adult search engines.. no more adult anything....

It wouldn't, and won't, change the growing problem with cp one bit..

Nothing to do with protecting children.. Everything to do with harassing the adult industry...

That's my take..
Scootermuze is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 09:17 AM   #27
tony286
lurker
 
tony286's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: atlanta
Posts: 57,021
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scootermuze View Post
If everyone in the adult industry did exactly as 2257 (including new proposals) required, and all record keeping was in perfect order in every case..

Better yet.. if every adult webmaster just took down their sites altogether... no more pay sites.. no more tgps.. no more adult search engines.. no more adult anything....

It wouldn't, and won't, change the growing problem with cp one bit..

Nothing to do with protecting children.. Everything to do with harassing the adult industry...

That's my take..
You are right, like someone doing cp has records. its bullshit.
tony286 is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 09:29 AM   #28
pornask
So Fucking Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: 253-233-241
Posts: 6,518
I enjoy being Canadian and caring less about this :D

Life is good :D
pornask is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 10:06 AM   #29
SmokeyTheBear
►SouthOfHeaven
 
SmokeyTheBear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: PlanetEarth MyBoardRank: GerbilMaster My-Penis-Size: extralarge MyWeapon: Computer
Posts: 28,609
i brought up this issue about gfy infact..

what will sites like gfy.com do ?


ban nude pics on gfy ? and banners ?
require users to post 2257 with every picture/video ?
will they have 2257 for gfy banners that rotates along with the banner ?
__________________
hatisblack at yahoo.com
SmokeyTheBear is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 10:23 AM   #30
Bruce_Miller
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 4REALCASH.COM
Posts: 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scootermuze View Post
If everyone in the adult industry did exactly as 2257 (including new proposals) required, and all record keeping was in perfect order in every case..

Better yet.. if every adult webmaster just took down their sites altogether... no more pay sites.. no more tgps.. no more adult search engines.. no more adult anything....

It wouldn't, and won't, change the growing problem with cp one bit..

Nothing to do with protecting children.. Everything to do with harassing the adult industry...

That's my take..
I couldn't have said that better!! This is a war on our industry, and nothing to do with anything else.
Bruce_Miller is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 10:27 AM   #31
crockett
in a van by the river
 
crockett's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 76,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony404 View Post
Man I could go out there right now and come up with at least 100 sites not in compliance just with their 2257 statement thats without any deep digging. I would say probably 90 percent of all adult webmasters arent in compliance.
You have to remember you got a ton of small mom pops.
That fact alone should be grounds enough to show the law is overly burdensome with the intent to be confusing.
__________________
In November, you can vote for America's next president or its first dictator.
crockett is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 10:34 AM   #32
SmokeyTheBear
►SouthOfHeaven
 
SmokeyTheBear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: PlanetEarth MyBoardRank: GerbilMaster My-Penis-Size: extralarge MyWeapon: Computer
Posts: 28,609
btw there is one big OUT to 2257..


these new regs can be removed if we industry can prove a certain amount of cost this would cause to the american economy

because this would effect a HUGE portion of the net not just porn. this will effect all american hosting companies and domain registrars , severely affecting their ability to compete in a global market.. this will affect billing companies the same way add onto that the cost each site will have to spend to document every image/video will be HUGE $$$
__________________
hatisblack at yahoo.com
SmokeyTheBear is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 10:36 AM   #33
crockett
in a van by the river
 
crockett's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 76,806
Btw incase you guys hadn't thought of this. Those saying text sites might be included.

Well if a simple text link would require you to have 2257 for a gallery full of images. Think about a text link to a trade site. You would then need 2257 info on all your trades sites which of course is impossible. So I can't see how they could possibly get away with that.
__________________
In November, you can vote for America's next president or its first dictator.
crockett is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 10:42 AM   #34
TheDoc
Too lazy to set a custom title
 
TheDoc's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Currently Incognito
Posts: 13,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear View Post
btw there is one big OUT to 2257..


these new regs can be removed if we industry can prove a certain amount of cost this would cause to the american economy

because this would effect a HUGE portion of the net not just porn. this will effect all american hosting companies and domain registrars , severely affecting their ability to compete in a global market.. this will affect billing companies the same way add onto that the cost each site will have to spend to document every image/video will be HUGE $$$

I know the FSC is trying to fight this for us.. But I have been a little, shocked if you would, that some of the large multi million dollar companies haven't stood up to really fight this head on. We are the only sin industry that just lays down and hopes it gets better..
__________________
~TheDoc - ICQ7765825
It's all disambiguation
TheDoc is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 10:50 AM   #35
tony286
lurker
 
tony286's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: atlanta
Posts: 57,021
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDoc View Post
I know the FSC is trying to fight this for us.. But I have been a little, shocked if you would, that some of the large multi million dollar companies haven't stood up to really fight this head on. We are the only sin industry that just lays down and hopes it gets better..
You are so right, considering the amount of money the industry makes.Unless its at their front door nothing happens but buy a six figure car and fancy watches oh yeah.
tony286 is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 11:16 AM   #36
crockett
in a van by the river
 
crockett's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 76,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDoc View Post
I know the FSC is trying to fight this for us.. But I have been a little, shocked if you would, that some of the large multi million dollar companies haven't stood up to really fight this head on. We are the only sin industry that just lays down and hopes it gets better..
Well think of it like this..

If anyone "can" comply with the new regulations it would be those very multi million dollar companies. So this is their chance to get rid of a lot of competition.
__________________
In November, you can vote for America's next president or its first dictator.
crockett is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 11:25 AM   #37
Dirty Dane
Sick Fuck
 
Dirty Dane's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: www
Posts: 9,491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trixxxia View Post
At the seminar, a point was brought up about URLs and the lawyers agreed that as it's written, every address with what is deemed explicit would need the ENTIRE 2257 statement - which would also mean that every image would need to be on an HTML with the statement below it. Now when you build thousands of galleries a year, you know what that will do to the TGP/MGPs/Free Sites/Blogs & their submitters? Programs can probably handle the transition but a lot of you, will have to go back and change the galleries, scripts will have to be modified to scan and accept HTML pages from the thumb - the actual thumb will probably need it's own HTML page too.... Brace yourselves if it's not clarified, modified or removed from the new recordkeeping rules!
Technically, even if you had to create HTML page for each picture, the pic is still in a directory. You can just right-click, choose properties, and copy-paste to source...ending up the same way as non-html galleries.
Off course you can avoid this with htaccess for common browsers, but still there are browsers, ways of surfing and software that can access/hotlink the pic directly, outside the html page.
So basically, it makes no sense requiring that, because you would break the law anyway.
Dirty Dane is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 11:42 AM   #38
TheDoc
Too lazy to set a custom title
 
TheDoc's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Currently Incognito
Posts: 13,827
Quote:
Originally Posted by crockett View Post
Well think of it like this..

If anyone "can" comply with the new regulations it would be those very multi million dollar companies. So this is their chance to get rid of a lot of competition.
I think the larger you are the harder it will be to fully comply. Large companies have 100's of paysites, tours and member areas to update. Many have purchased other TGP's and free sites, which need the same. Verses myself who has 5 paysites and a hand full of content driven free sites, all with my own content though.

We already have the records, the extra work that would be required would be a much larger burden the larger you are.
__________________
~TheDoc - ICQ7765825
It's all disambiguation
TheDoc is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 11:56 AM   #39
crockett
in a van by the river
 
crockett's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 76,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDoc View Post
I think the larger you are the harder it will be to fully comply. Large companies have 100's of paysites, tours and member areas to update. Many have purchased other TGP's and free sites, which need the same. Verses myself who has 5 paysites and a hand full of content driven free sites, all with my own content though.

We already have the records, the extra work that would be required would be a much larger burden the larger you are.

Yes but you are forgetting, they have the money and the manpower to be able to comply. They also tend to shoot their own content or have good relationships with the people whom shoot their content.

So they "can" get the required id's and so on with out too much hassle. So it becomes a point of just updating their old stuff. Sure that's tedious and might cost them some money, however once they are up to date it's not going to be hard for them to just add this as "one more thing to do".

Affiliates on the other hand or smaller mom and pop operations don't have the money or the man power to do the same in most cases. Nor will affiliates be able to easily get a hold of the required records.

This is nothing more than a way to put the "little guys" out of the biz so the govt can easier regulate the bigger companies. The bigger companies might not like the idea of the regulations, but they do it know will reduce competition, which means they make more money in the long run.
__________________
In November, you can vote for America's next president or its first dictator.

Last edited by crockett; 07-21-2007 at 11:58 AM..
crockett is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 11:59 AM   #40
check
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 315
what about google yahoo msn... "Cached' pages?
those pages host on their ips!
check is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 12:02 PM   #41
crockett
in a van by the river
 
crockett's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 76,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by check View Post
what about google yahoo msn... "Cached' pages?
those pages host on their ips!
If you have read anything about 2257 in the past, you should already know google ect..ect.. are already exempt.
__________________
In November, you can vote for America's next president or its first dictator.
crockett is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2007, 10:00 AM   #42
Creeper
Registered User
 
Creeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Miami
Posts: 85
Let me get this straight. I just opened a tgp which I was working for about a month now and it's thumb based. While I completely forgot on my part to check out the 2257 on the explicit part which would require me to have 2257 info linked back, that is no longer the case. I am left with 2 options from what I thought would be to go either a text tgp or still be thumb but not be explicit. Yet, if I am correct from what I am reading, it can just be "nude" no masturbation/penetration / sex and I can still be on grounds for investigation. Please say it ain't so.. I am going to be really disappointed -_-.

I'd definitely wouldn't mind just doing a non explicit tgp.

Last edited by Creeper; 07-22-2007 at 10:01 AM..
Creeper is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2007, 10:25 AM   #43
Tom_PM
Porn Meister
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 16,443
As usual, their clarifications and additions need more clarifications! The proposal says the statement must be "affixed" to each page containing the content in question. This change was from the previous requirement that said only the root and other "known major entry points" had to have the statement affixed to them (which was a pre-approved text link to a 2257 page). It's not 100% that a hyperlink is NOT "affixing"..
Once again the DOJ used terms that, while it may believe are perfectly clear, they are not.
__________________
43-922-863 Shut up and play your guitar.
Tom_PM is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2007, 12:32 PM   #44
nikki99
Supermodel
 
nikki99's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sodoma & Gomorra
Posts: 22,893
Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorB View Post
I'm sure that was prodcued before July 1995.


nikki99 is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2007, 12:53 PM   #45
crockett
in a van by the river
 
crockett's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 76,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by Creeper View Post
Let me get this straight. I just opened a tgp which I was working for about a month now and it's thumb based. While I completely forgot on my part to check out the 2257 on the explicit part which would require me to have 2257 info linked back, that is no longer the case. I am left with 2 options from what I thought would be to go either a text tgp or still be thumb but not be explicit. Yet, if I am correct from what I am reading, it can just be "nude" no masturbation/penetration / sex and I can still be on grounds for investigation. Please say it ain't so.. I am going to be really disappointed -_-.

I'd definitely wouldn't mind just doing a non explicit tgp.
It was like that before.. however now "anything" in regards to sexual material involving pictures or videos needs full 2257.

So even if the girl is fully clothed in your thumbnails, but links to a gallery that is intended to be "sexually arousing" .. Well you need full 2257 info.
__________________
In November, you can vote for America's next president or its first dictator.
crockett is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2007, 01:03 PM   #46
Juilan
Sultan of Swing
 
Juilan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: XXXodus
Posts: 15,141
ok so fine artists and fine art photographers are not FCC regulated, they don't qualify for the "Hollywood Pass" so they will by hit by 2257 as well.

In the event one is targeted, I would imagine the ACLU fights it out and we get our first new case law that way.


Last edited by Juilan; 07-22-2007 at 01:05 PM..
Juilan is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2007, 01:11 PM   #47
Kingfish
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 668
Quote:
Originally Posted by crockett View Post
It was like that before.. however now "anything" in regards to sexual material involving pictures or videos needs full 2257.

So even if the girl is fully clothed in your thumbnails, but links to a gallery that is intended to be "sexually arousing" .. Well you need full 2257 info.
That isn?t entirely true. As I read it, they want a multi-factor test, and one of those factors is it a picture of the pubic area. Thus, if the image is above the waist you could even use bare breasted pictures.
Kingfish is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2007, 01:54 PM   #48
Xplicit
Confirmed User
 
Xplicit's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: █◄►█
Posts: 3,558
Quote:
Note: By some courts' view, the genital area may be clothed and yet fall within this definition.
Hope to see 2257's on Victoria's Secrets website.
Xplicit is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2007, 03:39 PM   #49
GreyWolf
So Fucking Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,036
Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorB View Post



I'm sure that was prodcued before July 1995.
Never assume Gator - You are talking about relatively uncultured folks from the FBI doing the checking

They had to have refresher classes at Quantico to point out Iraq on the map, so....



PS Na.. There are some bright guys and girls there - it's the usual trash that let them down.

Last edited by GreyWolf; 07-22-2007 at 03:40 PM..
GreyWolf is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2007, 03:51 PM   #50
Humpy Leftnut
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Creeper View Post
I'd definitely wouldn't mind just doing a non explicit tgp.
Yeah but good luck finding sets with that many fully clothed pictures, and why the fuck would a surfer use your sites, when all the european sites don't give a rats ass about 2257? Huge competition problems.
__________________
Humpy Leftnut - Pornsumer Reviews
Humpy Leftnut is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote
Post New Thread Reply
Go Back   GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum > >

Bookmarks



Advertising inquiries - marketing at gfy dot com

Contact Admin - Advertise - GFY Rules - Top

©2000-, AI Media Network Inc



Powered by vBulletin
Copyright © 2000- Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.