I guess we don't have to worry about 2257 anymore - GoFuckYourself.com

Blackamooka · 06-09-2009, 04:21 PM

Microsoft is basically the largest porn site in the world now and I don't see a 2257 statement anywhere on their site, so why should we have to comply if they don't?

pornguy · 06-09-2009, 04:24 PM

Because they are backed by BILLIONS and you are not.

baddog · 06-09-2009, 04:24 PM

Let me know how that works out for you.

Blackamooka · 06-09-2009, 04:30 PM

Obviously I don't intend to drop all my 2257's, that wasn't the point I was trying to make....

Robbie · 06-09-2009, 04:31 PM

I've never "worried" about it anyway. We've all been keeping records of id's and model releases for years before that even existed anyway.

Just slight modification of record keeping is all it amounts to. Basically a way for them to "Gotcha" if they ever turn their eye on you. Remember Al Capone went to prison for accounting discrepancies on his taxes. If the govt. ever comes after you, they are gonna find a way one way or another to put you in prison. Hell, look at Max Hardcore. Shot porn with paid models and went to jail and the govt. took his stuff. Best just to not ever get on their radar screen.

xenigo · 06-09-2009, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackamooka

Obviously I don't intend to drop all my 2257's, that wasn't the point I was trying to make....

Not all of them? Just some of them?

pornlaw · 06-09-2009, 04:35 PM

There are exceptions for tube sites within 28 CFR 75. I think Bing.com falls within those exceptions. Remember 2257 was made easier for mainstream and adult companies to comply with this last time around.

jakethedog · 06-09-2009, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pornlaw

There are exceptions for tube sites within 28 CFR 75. I think Bing.com falls within those exceptions. Remember 2257 was made easier for mainstream and adult companies to comply with this last time around.

And your thoughts on "Anti-piracy" in this issue if you could .. I am totally beside my self with this whole MS/Bing thing ...

pornlaw · 06-09-2009, 05:05 PM

In regards to "anti-piracy" are you talking about Bing's ability to play the video directly within their site ? I assume you wouldnt care if they would send traffic to your site.

candyflip · 06-09-2009, 05:11 PM

I notice that a few of the bigger sites who are indexed on Bing are redirecting the traffic to their main pages and not the page the video is on.

DaddyHalbucks · 06-09-2009, 05:35 PM

I'd still worry.

jakethedog · 06-09-2009, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pornlaw

In regards to "anti-piracy" are you talking about Bing's ability to play the video directly within their site ? I assume you wouldnt care if they would send traffic to your site.

hopefully my content never ends up on there after being stolen .. it would make it no better than any of the large pirate tubes ..But I am sure there is already stolen content on there from companies trying to make some money in this shit economy .. that is what I am talking about .. making Bing no better than the rest, making our lives hell ..

SilentKnight · 06-09-2009, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackamooka

Microsoft is basically the largest porn site in the world now and I don't see a 2257 statement anywhere on their site, so why should we have to comply if they don't?

Because justice is two-tiered ... you're on the lower tier.

$5 submissions · 06-09-2009, 07:14 PM

2257's sub issues haven't been fully litigated yet. In particular, the intersection between 2257 and the DMCA

Blackamooka · 06-09-2009, 07:53 PM

Well, I don't bitch about illegal tubes usually, because up until now I considered them to be the underbelly of the adult webmaster world and there is nothing I can do about it. But now one of the largest corporations in the world has legitimized them all. It's a big fat "fuck you" to everyone that has playing by the rules all along and I think people should be up in arms about this, but I guess I'm not surprised by everyone's complacency.

Anyways, that's my rant and now I'll go back to playing by the rules until the thieves have completely won.

Snake Doctor · 06-09-2009, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackamooka

Microsoft is basically the largest porn site in the world now and I don't see a 2257 statement anywhere on their site, so why should we have to comply if they don't?

Let me know what the judge says when you present that argument to him.

As to your other statements, alot of people are up in arms about it, but what the fuck can they do?

Nothing.

So you're better off trying to find a way to profit in the current environment rather than getting your blood pressure up worrying about what everyone else is doing.

Rochard · 06-09-2009, 11:00 PM

Doesn't this make M$ a secondary producer?

Fucking sweet.

Barefootsies · 06-09-2009, 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pornguy

Because they are backed by BILLIONS and you are not.

Paul Markham · 06-09-2009, 11:45 PM

I've been 2257 compliant for about 25 years and would not have it any other way. 2257 or keeping records that fulfill 2257 is for my benefit.

(A) I make sure the model is over 18.
(B) She is made to produce her documents for copying and has a clue this is a professional shoot.
(C) She signs a dated model release clearly stating I own the rights on her image on the content.
(D) If I buy in or broker I know the supplier is doing his job right and covering my ass.

As probably the only person here who has stood in front of a judge the fact that ALL my content was legal was something my lawyer rammed down the prosecutions throat when he brought the question of under age content up.

I don't think "I'm exempt because....." would of gone down very well with the judge.

With all the under age girls exchanging nude images and videos of themselves on chat rooms it is unbelievable how lax some people are about a bit of paperwork.

Barefootsies · 06-09-2009, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

As probably the only person here who has stood in front of a judge the fact that ALL my content was legal was something my lawyer rammed down the prosecutions throat when he brought the question of under age content up.

Jack Sparrow · 06-10-2009, 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pornguy

Because they are backed by BILLIONS and you are not.

Amen to that

kmanrox · 06-10-2009, 12:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pornguy

Because they are backed by BILLIONS and you are not.

ha! speak for yourself!!!

Chosen · 06-10-2009, 03:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kmanrox

ha! speak for yourself!!!

06-09-2009, 04:21 PM	#1
Blackamooka Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: In Your Mind Posts: 495	I guess we don't have to worry about 2257 anymore Microsoft is basically the largest porn site in the world now and I don't see a 2257 statement anywhere on their site, so why should we have to comply if they don't? __________________ The only way to comprehend what mathematicians mean by infinity is to contemplate the extent of human stupidity. - Voltaire Last edited by Blackamooka; 06-09-2009 at 04:22 PM..

06-09-2009, 04:24 PM	#2
pornguy Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Homeless Posts: 62,912	Because they are backed by BILLIONS and you are not. __________________ PornGuy skype me pornguy_epic AmateurDough The Hottes Shemales online! TChicks.com \| Angeles Cid \| Mariana Cordoba \| MAILERS WELCOME!

06-09-2009, 04:30 PM	#4
Blackamooka Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: In Your Mind Posts: 495	Obviously I don't intend to drop all my 2257's, that wasn't the point I was trying to make.... __________________ The only way to comprehend what mathematicians mean by infinity is to contemplate the extent of human stupidity. - Voltaire

06-09-2009, 04:31 PM	#5
Robbie Leaner, Meaner, Faster Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Vegas Posts: 20,958	I've never "worried" about it anyway. We've all been keeping records of id's and model releases for years before that even existed anyway. Just slight modification of record keeping is all it amounts to. Basically a way for them to "Gotcha" if they ever turn their eye on you. Remember Al Capone went to prison for accounting discrepancies on his taxes. If the govt. ever comes after you, they are gonna find a way one way or another to put you in prison. Hell, look at Max Hardcore. Shot porn with paid models and went to jail and the govt. took his stuff. Best just to not ever get on their radar screen. __________________ -Robbie ClaudiaMarie.Com

06-09-2009, 04:35 PM	#7
pornlaw Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 1,850	There are exceptions for tube sites within 28 CFR 75. I think Bing.com falls within those exceptions. Remember 2257 was made easier for mainstream and adult companies to comply with this last time around. __________________ Michael www.AdultBizLaw.com

06-09-2009, 04:24 PM	#3
baddog So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: the beach, SoCal Posts: 107,090	Let me know how that works out for you.

06-09-2009, 05:05 PM	#9
pornlaw Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 1,850	In regards to "anti-piracy" are you talking about Bing's ability to play the video directly within their site ? I assume you wouldnt care if they would send traffic to your site. __________________ Michael www.AdultBizLaw.com

06-09-2009, 05:11 PM	#10
candyflip Carpe Visio Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: New York Posts: 43,052	I notice that a few of the bigger sites who are indexed on Bing are redirecting the traffic to their main pages and not the page the video is on. __________________ Spend you some brain. Email Me

06-09-2009, 05:35 PM	#11
DaddyHalbucks A freakin' legend! Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Las Vegas, Nevada USA Posts: 18,975	I'd still worry. __________________ Boner Money

06-09-2009, 07:14 PM	#14
$5 submissions I help you SUCCEED Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: The Pearl of the Orient Seas Posts: 32,195	2257's sub issues haven't been fully litigated yet. In particular, the intersection between 2257 and the DMCA __________________ Need a NON-ADULT income stream? We build your YOUTUBE CHANNEL for only $20 per video! For Hire: $3/hour or $400 per month Marketing Specialist Virtual Assistants

06-09-2009, 07:53 PM	#15
Blackamooka Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: In Your Mind Posts: 495	Well, I don't bitch about illegal tubes usually, because up until now I considered them to be the underbelly of the adult webmaster world and there is nothing I can do about it. But now one of the largest corporations in the world has legitimized them all. It's a big fat "fuck you" to everyone that has playing by the rules all along and I think people should be up in arms about this, but I guess I'm not surprised by everyone's complacency. Anyways, that's my rant and now I'll go back to playing by the rules until the thieves have completely won. __________________ The only way to comprehend what mathematicians mean by infinity is to contemplate the extent of human stupidity. - Voltaire Last edited by Blackamooka; 06-09-2009 at 07:56 PM..

06-09-2009, 11:00 PM	#17
Rochard Jägermeister Test Pilot Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: NORCAL Posts: 72,814	Doesn't this make M$ a secondary producer? Fucking sweet. __________________ “The choice is no longer between right or left. The choice is between normal and crazy.” - Sarah Huckabee Sanders YNOT MAIL \| THE BEST ADULT MAILING SOLUTION

06-09-2009, 11:45 PM	#19
Paul Markham Too old to care Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: On the sofa, watching TV or doing my jigsaws. Posts: 52,943	I've been 2257 compliant for about 25 years and would not have it any other way. 2257 or keeping records that fulfill 2257 is for my benefit. (A) I make sure the model is over 18. (B) She is made to produce her documents for copying and has a clue this is a professional shoot. (C) She signs a dated model release clearly stating I own the rights on her image on the content. (D) If I buy in or broker I know the supplier is doing his job right and covering my ass. As probably the only person here who has stood in front of a judge the fact that ALL my content was legal was something my lawyer rammed down the prosecutions throat when he brought the question of under age content up. I don't think "I'm exempt because....." would of gone down very well with the judge. With all the under age girls exchanging nude images and videos of themselves on chat rooms it is unbelievable how lax some people are about a bit of paperwork. __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70