OK. 2257 Requirements.............. - GoFuckYourself.com

SallyRand · 08-22-2010, 10:38 AM

If a website is not the "producer" within the meaning and intent of the law and merely shows links, iframes, banners, etc procued by others, is any sort of 2257 notice required to appear on that website? Seems to me a clear "NOT!" but I'm interested in your opinions, recommendations and experience. See, you never know what the gov is going to do.

2257 Requirements:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18...7----000-.html

Thanks in advance.

Sally.

area51 - BANNED FOR LIFE · 08-22-2010, 11:08 AM

oh shut up.

Frasier · 08-22-2010, 11:55 AM

welcome to two years ago

icymelon · 08-22-2010, 12:00 PM

I would be worried if sarah palin were president

Agent 488 · 08-22-2010, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by area51

oh shut up.

Sally

.

ottopottomouse · 08-22-2010, 12:15 PM

Move to a sensible country.

SallyRand · 08-22-2010, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by area51

oh shut up.

Thank you for your worthless and irrelevant reply.

GFY.

Sally.

SallyRand · 08-22-2010, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by icymelon

I would be worried if sarah palin were president

I'm worried as we already have a self-admitted fundamentalist Christian occupying the White House but thank your for your Red Herring irrelevant reply.

GFY.

Sally.

SallyRand · 08-22-2010, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agent 488

Sally

.

GFY.

Sally.

SallyRand · 08-22-2010, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ottopottomouse

Move to a sensible country.

Yes, perhaps a sensible country like the UJ. You know, the place settled because people on their way South got lost in the Channel fog and wrecked up on the rocks, stranding themselves on that pitiful protrusion in the Atlantic.

You mean the place in which enforcement of Sharia law is permitted, the place in which punitive taxes rule, the health care system is collapsing and the place which maintains a dangerously inbred and corrupt monarchy paid for by the people?

That place?

The place which has virtually outlawed firearms and is now experiencing a nightmarishly severe increase in firearms violence?

The place which has essentially outlawed pocket knives due to "knife crimes"?

Yeah, I soooooooooooooooooooo want to move to a "sensible" country like that!

Thank you for your completely irrelevant reply.

Sally.

ottopottomouse · 08-22-2010, 02:02 PM

I definitely wasn't inviting you to come here.

Thank you for your xenophobic reply.

Otto.

SallyRand · 08-22-2010, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ottopottomouse

I definitely wasn't inviting you to come here.

Thank you for your xenophobic reply.

Otto.

You evidently do not understand the definnition of xenophobia and further, you failed to challenge anything that I wrote as you would find it very difficult to do so, as everything I wrote is verifiable fact.

Just the facts, Ma'am!

Perhaps you have a "more sensible" country in mind?

Sally.

area51 - BANNED FOR LIFE · 08-22-2010, 02:15 PM

SallyRand, Sabby, JaneB

All psycho-retarded.

2intense · 08-22-2010, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by area51

SallyRand, Sabby, JaneB

All psycho-retarded.

asshole

area51 - BANNED FOR LIFE · 08-22-2010, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2intense

asshole

2intense · 08-22-2010, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by area51

low IQ .that's all about you

area51 - BANNED FOR LIFE · 08-22-2010, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2intense

low IQ .that's all about you

With your broken English, you're either in a shit hole third world country or you're retarded just like your girlfriend Sally over here. Which one is it?

SallyRand · 08-22-2010, 02:26 PM

Area 51's home page, maybe?

http://zapatopi.net/afdb/

Could be.

Sally.

SallyRand · 08-22-2010, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SallyRand

If a website is not the "producer" within the meaning and intent of the law and merely shows links, iframes, banners, etc procued by others, is any sort of 2257 notice required to appear on that website? Seems to me a clear "NOT!" but I'm interested in your opinions, recommendations and experience. See, you never know what the gov is going to do.

2257 Requirements:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18...7----000-.html

Thanks in advance.

Sally.

Never mind.

There is no intelligent life responding.

Sally.

foorhoom · 08-22-2010, 02:52 PM

The government will find a way to charge you as primary producer if they want to. They can bend the law and interpret it a different way and bring a lousy case knowing that they'll probably lose because they have limitless funds and nothing else to do, and you could win but still go bankrupt in the process. If they want to prove a point, if for some reason their attention is drawn to your little website with dirty pictures on it. The safest thing is either not do it at all, or try to blend in.

Vendzilla · 08-22-2010, 03:33 PM

Sally, XBiz in feb is going to have a siminar
http://www.xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=19250

SallyRand · 08-22-2010, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Sally, XBiz in feb is going to have a siminar
http://www.xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=19250

Yeah, I found that in my google search but that was in 2007. There have been minor updates to the law since then.

Thank, though.

Sally.

SallyRand · 08-22-2010, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by foorhoom

The government will find a way to charge you as primary producer if they want to. They can bend the law and interpret it a different way and bring a lousy case knowing that they'll probably lose because they have limitless funds and nothing else to do, and you could win but still go bankrupt in the process. If they want to prove a point, if for some reason their attention is drawn to your little website with dirty pictures on it. The safest thing is either not do it at all, or try to blend in.

Very true! There is a lot of proposed legislation out there which is what prompted my question in the first place and am only looking to not give them an excuse as you can't really stay low and earn.

Thanks for your reply.

Sally.

V_RocKs · 08-22-2010, 04:07 PM

I never paid that shit much attention.

AaronM · 08-22-2010, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SallyRand

....I'm interested in your opinions, recommendations and experience. See, you never know what the gov is going to do.

You never know what the gov is going to do so you want all of our opinions, recommendations, and experiences... LOL

Isn't that why people pay attorneys?

CIVMatt · 08-22-2010, 07:22 PM

oh forget it

SallyRand · 08-22-2010, 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AaronM

You never know what the gov is going to do so you want all of our opinions, recommendations, and experiences... LOL

Isn't that why people pay attorneys?

Attorneys are not actually trained in the practical aspects of the law but instead are highly trained in courtroom procedure, how to give a case perpetual life through incessant motions and filings, the generation and falsification of billable hours and most know dick about the internet in the first place. So-called internet law, except for 2257 and the CAN-SPAM act, is much more than vague and nebulous, so speaking to a legal beagle about it is tantamount to talking to a wooden post. Aside from that, attorneys are also trained to be deal killers rather than deal doers.

Practical experience in the field will trump a law dregree any day, which is why I seek such practical advice and opinions from those in the trenches.

Sally.

2intense · 08-22-2010, 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by area51

With your broken English, you're either in a shit hole third world country or you're retarded just like your girlfriend Sally over here. Which one is it?

yes my english is broken,in my country english language is not required ,but there is about IQ ,and from what i can see u have a very low one

2intense · 08-22-2010, 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SallyRand

Area 51's home page, maybe?

http://zapatopi.net/afdb/

Could be.

Sally.

cool

AsianDivaGirlsWebDude · 08-22-2010, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SallyRand

Attorneys are not actually trained in the practical aspects of the law but instead are highly trained in courtroom procedure, how to give a case perpetual life through incessant motions and filings, the generation and falsification of billable hours and most know dick about the internet in the first place. So-called internet law, except for 2257 and the CAN-SPAM act, is much more than vague and nebulous, so speaking to a legal beagle about it is tantamount to talking to a wooden post. Aside from that, attorneys are also trained to be deal killers rather than deal doers.

Practical experience in the field will trump a law dregree any day, which is why I seek such practical advice and opinions from those in the trenches.

Sally.

U dun goofed...

ADG

AaronM · 08-22-2010, 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SallyRand

Attorneys are not actually trained in the practical aspects of the law but instead are highly trained in courtroom procedure, how to give a case perpetual life through incessant motions and filings, the generation and falsification of billable hours and most know dick about the internet in the first place. So-called internet law, except for 2257 and the CAN-SPAM act, is much more than vague and nebulous, so speaking to a legal beagle about it is tantamount to talking to a wooden post. Aside from that, attorneys are also trained to be deal killers rather than deal doers.

Practical experience in the field will trump a law dregree any day, which is why I seek such practical advice and opinions from those in the trenches.

Sally.

Clearly you have been speaking to the wrong attorneys.

Very few people on GYF have clue fucking one about 2257. Most of them think they know but they sure as hell don't show or practice following it.

ottopottomouse · 08-23-2010, 03:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SallyRand

You evidently do not understand the definnition of xenophobia and further, you failed to challenge anything that I wrote as you would find it very difficult to do so, as everything I wrote is verifiable fact.

Just the facts, Ma'am!

Perhaps you have a "more sensible" country in mind?

Sally.

Why would I need to challenge your Daily Mail quality facts?

As for a sensible country, anywhere with no possibly of an internet connection would be a good start.

Paul Markham · 08-23-2010, 03:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by foorhoom

The government will find a way to charge you as primary producer if they want to. They can bend the law and interpret it a different way and bring a lousy case knowing that they'll probably lose because they have limitless funds and nothing else to do, and you could win but still go bankrupt in the process. If they want to prove a point, if for some reason their attention is drawn to your little website with dirty pictures on it.

Except for the last bit a good post.

Sally what will you tel the judge if you stand in front of him? "On GFY they told me it was alright." Will piss him off no end. Go see a lawyer and take his advice. If you can afford one.

If you're working from home and scared to put up the address, go work in a different industry.

Barry-xlovecam · 08-23-2010, 09:30 AM

§2257 is only in relation to sexually explicit images as defined in §2256.

§2257 makes persons who do not contract with performers (read affiliate sellers) producers of any images displayed and requires that the same documents that a person who does contract with performers would retain.
USDOJ's 2257 Compliance Guide

CFR 28 Part 75

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)

For informational purposes only ? not to be construed as legal advice ? get legal advice from a licensed attorney if the cited information is unclear.

These laws apply to US persons (and possibly data stored on US located servers.)

SallyRand · 08-23-2010, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2intense

yes my english is broken,in my country english language is not required ,but there is about IQ ,and from what i can see u have a very low one

You don't worry about your English; you are doing fine and I will tell those who deprecate you

"GFY!"

Sally.

SallyRand · 08-23-2010, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

§2257 is only in relation to sexually explicit images as defined in §2256.

§2257 makes persons who do not contract with performers (read affiliate sellers) producers of any images displayed and requires that the same documents that a person who does contract with performers would retain.
USDOJ's 2257 Compliance Guide

CFR 28 Part 75

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)

For informational purposes only ? not to be construed as legal advice ? get legal advice from a licensed attorney if the cited information is unclear.

These laws apply to US persons (and possibly data stored on US located servers.)

AT LAST!

A sentinet and responsive reply to my original question and thank you so much for your kind reply!

Of course, compliance with that shit is virtually impossible; fucking feds and sexually repressed people, anyway.

The near impossiblity of compliance is of course the point of the legislation.

Thanks again!

Sally.

Paul Markham · 08-24-2010, 01:02 AM

Being in business requires keeping records and keeping them accurate. Try getting your tax returns wrong and see what the IRS have to say. Same goes for complying to federal, state and zoning business laws. Same goes for insurance.

As pornographers we will always be judged by harsher rules than your local shops. Live by it or go find a new trade.

I've lived with a form of 2257 for decades and it was no problem. Ask me for the documents of an image or video on my sites and I can pull them out in minutes. What I see continually in these threads is an attitude that as the publisher is on the Internet they don't need to adhere to these rules.

http://www.justice.gov/criminal/optf...nce-guide.html

Quote:

Q. Who is required to maintain records?

A. Both primary and secondary producers of covered materials. A primary producer "is any person who actually films, videotapes, photographs, or creates a digitally- or computer-manipulated image, a digital image, or a picture of, or who digitizes an image of, a visual depiction of an actual human being engaged in actual or simulated sexually explicit conduct." 28 C.F.R. § 75.1(c)(1). A secondary producer "is any person who produces, assembles, manufactures, publishes, duplicates, reproduces, or reissues a book, magazine, periodical, film, videotape, or digitally- or computer-manipulated image, picture, or other matter intended for commercial distribution that contains a visual depiction of an actual human being engaged in actual or simulated sexually explicit conduct, or who inserts on a computer site or service a digital image of, or otherwise manages the sexually explicit content of a computer site or service that contains a visual depiction of, an actual human being engaged in actual or simulated sexually explicit conduct, including any person who enters into a contract, agreement, or conspiracy to do any of the foregoing." 28 C.F.R. § 75.1(c)(2).

Live by it or go find a new trade.

SallyRand · 08-24-2010, 06:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Being in business requires keeping records and keeping them accurate. Try getting your tax returns wrong and see what the IRS have to say. Same goes for complying to federal, state and zoning business laws. Same goes for insurance.

As pornographers we will always be judged by harsher rules than your local shops. Live by it or go find a new trade.

I've lived with a form of 2257 for decades and it was no problem. Ask me for the documents of an image or video on my sites and I can pull them out in minutes. What I see continually in these threads is an attitude that as the publisher is on the Internet they don't need to adhere to these rules.

http://www.justice.gov/criminal/optf...nce-guide.html

Live by it or go find a new trade.

OK, I think I've got the 2257 thing down but as a marketer essentially doing CPA, just how do I get the 2257 records from the original publisher or do I merely indicate on my sites that the 2257 docs are held by the original creators? That doesn't seem to be quite enough to meet the letter of the law. Will the networks provide these to me? I suppose I could ask them to find out if this is the correct way.

Thanks in advance.

Sally.

Paul Markham · 08-24-2010, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SallyRand

OK, I think I've got the 2257 thing down but as a marketer essentially doing CPA, just how do I get the 2257 records from the original publisher or do I merely indicate on my sites that the 2257 docs are held by the original creators? That doesn't seem to be quite enough to meet the letter of the law. Will the networks provide these to me? I suppose I could ask them to find out if this is the correct way.

Thanks in advance.

Sally.

This is a question you should be asking your lawyer.

However if you host it and don't have the documents, DON'T PUBLISH IT. Is the safest thing.

08-22-2010, 10:38 AM	#1
SallyRand So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: In A Galaxie Far, Far Away! Posts: 3,487	OK. 2257 Requirements.............. If a website is not the "producer" within the meaning and intent of the law and merely shows links, iframes, banners, etc procued by others, is any sort of 2257 notice required to appear on that website? Seems to me a clear "NOT!" but I'm interested in your opinions, recommendations and experience. See, you never know what the gov is going to do. 2257 Requirements: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18...7----000-.html Thanks in advance. Sally.

08-22-2010, 11:55 AM	#3
Frasier Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 377	welcome to two years ago __________________ ICQ 452 one six 7 five 41

08-22-2010, 12:00 PM	#4
icymelon Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 3,220	I would be worried if sarah palin were president __________________ Network Of Adult Blogs With Hardlink Rentals Available

08-22-2010, 12:15 PM	#6
ottopottomouse She is ugly, bad luck. Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 13,177	Move to a sensible country. __________________ ↑ see post ↑ 13101

08-22-2010, 02:02 PM	#11
ottopottomouse She is ugly, bad luck. Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 13,177	I definitely wasn't inviting you to come here. Thank you for your xenophobic reply. Otto. __________________ ↑ see post ↑ 13101

08-22-2010, 11:08 AM	#2
area51 - BANNED FOR LIFE So Fucking Banned Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 3,164	oh shut up.

08-22-2010, 02:15 PM	#13
area51 - BANNED FOR LIFE So Fucking Banned Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 3,164	SallyRand, Sabby, JaneB All psycho-retarded.

08-22-2010, 02:26 PM	#18
SallyRand So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: In A Galaxie Far, Far Away! Posts: 3,487	Area 51's home page, maybe? http://zapatopi.net/afdb/ Could be. Sally.

08-22-2010, 02:52 PM	#20
foorhoom Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 11	The government will find a way to charge you as primary producer if they want to. They can bend the law and interpret it a different way and bring a lousy case knowing that they'll probably lose because they have limitless funds and nothing else to do, and you could win but still go bankrupt in the process. If they want to prove a point, if for some reason their attention is drawn to your little website with dirty pictures on it. The safest thing is either not do it at all, or try to blend in.

08-22-2010, 03:33 PM	#21
Vendzilla Biker Gnome Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: cell#324 Posts: 23,201	Sally, XBiz in feb is going to have a siminar http://www.xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=19250 __________________ Webair died? Carbon is not the problem, it makes up 0.041% of our atmosphere , 95% of that is from Volcanos and decomposing plants and stuff. So people in the US are responsible for 13% of the carbon in the atmosphere which 95% is not from Humans, like cars and trucks and stuff and they want to spend trillions to fix it while Solar Panel plants are powered by coal plants think about that

08-22-2010, 04:07 PM	#24
V_RocKs Damn Right I Kiss Ass! Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Cowtown, USA Posts: 32,391	I never paid that shit much attention.

08-22-2010, 07:22 PM	#26
CIVMatt Amateur Pimpin Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 13,075	oh forget it __________________ Make easy money with Webcams

08-23-2010, 09:30 AM	#34
Barry-xlovecam It's 42 Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Global Posts: 18,083	§2257 is only in relation to sexually explicit images as defined in §2256. §2257 makes persons who do not contract with performers (read affiliate sellers) producers of any images displayed and requires that the same documents that a person who does contract with performers would retain. USDOJ's 2257 Compliance Guide CFR 28 Part 75 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) For informational purposes only ? not to be construed as legal advice ? get legal advice from a licensed attorney if the cited information is unclear. These laws apply to US persons (and possibly data stored on US located servers.)