GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Senate launches bill to remove immunity for websites hosting illegal content (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1274023)

Bladewire 08-02-2017 07:39 AM
Senate launches bill to remove immunity for websites hosting illegal content
 
It looks like congress is going to make platforms responsible for content on their sites, and using sex trafficking as the excuse. Both the House & Senate have similar bills to do this.

------

Senate launches bill to remove immunity for websites hosting illegal content

The Senate on Tuesday introduced an amendment to a law that protects the hosts of websites from liability for content posted by others to go after sites such as Backpage.com that have been criticized for facilitating child sex trafficking.

The bill, titled the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act of 2017, would amend the Communications Decency Act. It is sponsored by Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and a bipartisan group of 19 other senators, some of whom served on the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, which focused on Backpage.com in its probe of online sex trafficking.

In April, Rep. Ann Wagner (R-Mo.) introduced a slightly broader bill in the House which now has 101 co-sponsors. In addition to amending the Communications Decency Act, it also seeks to amend the federal criminal code to say that any website provider who publishes information from anyone, ?with reckless disregard that the information ? is in furtherance of? sex trafficking of a person under 18 ?shall be fined ? or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.?

directfiesta 08-02-2017 07:56 AM
Curious to see how that would be enforced WORLDWIDE ....

Bladewire 08-02-2017 08:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by directfiesta (Post 21928507)
Curious to see how that would be enforced WORLDWIDE ....
Just like the UK, block offending sites from U.S. surfers

directfiesta 08-02-2017 08:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bladewire (Post 21928534)
Just like the UK, block offending sites from U.S. surfers
So you say that foreign countries will start enforcing for them their local laws ?

A bit like asking China to settle NK issues ... others doing the job ...

It would be more to the US providers to prevent foreign sites to be seen , just like China does ...

Barry-xlovecam 08-02-2017 08:56 AM
https://www.capito.senate.gov/imo/me...ll%20Text).pdf

Try reading the ACTUAL BILL ...

I don't really think it is tantamount to 'the sky is falling' the bill's wording says with knowledge that is a rather high burden of proof. Of course there will be SODDI and TODDI defense aplenty.

They are not going after porn or free speech.
There are no ridiculous extraterritorial actions.
There is no alluding to blocking DNS resolution.

Bladewire 08-02-2017 10:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by directfiesta (Post 21928606)
So you say that foreign countries will start enforcing for them their local laws ?

A bit like asking China to settle NK issues ... others doing the job ...

It would be more to the US providers to prevent foreign sites to be seen , just like China does ...
China, the U.K. & Russia all block access to sites so why shouldn't we when the site is hosting stolen content?

If Americans only see legal sites without stolen content, they buy downloads or memberships.

The Porn Nerd 08-02-2017 10:22 AM
The Feds really want Backpage don't they?
Like they wanted Craig's List.....

Bladewire 08-02-2017 12:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Porn Nerd (Post 21928837)
The Feds really want Backpage don't they?
Like they wanted Craig's List.....
Yeah Backpage really fucked up evidently

blackmonsters 08-02-2017 02:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by directfiesta (Post 21928507)
Curious to see how that would be enforced WORLDWIDE ....
International agreements are possible for many things.
Copyright protection is recognized by other nations so there could be lots of cooperation in
bringing charges abroad.

bns666 08-02-2017 02:17 PM
that cant work worldwide...

pornlaw 08-02-2017 02:22 PM
The worst bills are always pushed under the guise of "let's protect the children."

You never know how this will be implemented until its passed and signed into law.

onwebcam 08-02-2017 02:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pornlaw (Post 21929476)
The worst bills are always pushed under the guise of "let's protect the children."

You never know how this will be implemented until its passed and signed into law.
That's any bill. If Washington is calling it one thing. Expect the complete opposite.

Barry-xlovecam 08-02-2017 04:14 PM
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1591
USC 18 §1591
Trafficking and Commercial Sexual Exploitation

This is just including law already existing.
United States v. Kozminski, 487 U.S. 931 (1988)
UNITED STATES v. KOZMINSKI | FindLaw

http://uscode.house.gov/statviewer.h...e=129&page=238

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-10...106publ386.htm

' and other commercial sexual services.' is the problem -- well this law is from 2000 and this has never been tried to be enforced toward hiring and shooting model or other forms of commercial porn or explicit adult entertainment as it would not meet the standards set forth by the SCOTUS in United States v. Kozminski, 487 U.S. 931 (1988).

Quote:
barry@paragon-DS-7:/media/barry/5...../hmantraff$ egrep -i 'servitude' victims_of_trafficking_and_violence_protection_act _of_2000
slavery, and involuntary servitude, to reauthorize certain Federal
involuntary servitude, peonage, and other forms of forced labor
market. Within the context of slavery, servitude, and labor or
conduct that amounts to a condition of servitude, victims are
(13) Involuntary servitude statutes are intended to reach
cases in which persons are held in a condition of servitude
absent a definition of involuntary servitude by Congress. As a
servitude that is brought about through use or threatened use of
involuntary servitude is among those unalienable rights.
involuntary servitude in 1865, recognizing them as evil
involuntary servitude, violence against women, and other
(5) Involuntary servitude.--The term ``involuntary
servitude'' includes a condition of servitude induced by means
for the purpose of subjection to involuntary servitude,
servitude, or forced labor
servitude, or forced labor
servitude, or forced labor.
peonage, slavery, involuntary servitude, or forced labor.
of peonage, involuntary servitude, slave trade offenses, and
servitude, and slave trade offenses; and
involuntary servitude, being held hostage or being
involuntary servitude; slave trade; kidnapping;
continued below

Barry-xlovecam 08-02-2017 04:15 PM
continued from above

Quote:
barry@paragon-DS-7:/media/barry/....../hmantraff$ egrep -B25 -A100 -i 'porn' victims_of_trafficking_and_violence_protection_act _of_2000

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-1...106publ386.htm

SEC. 101. <<NOTE: 22 USC 7101 note.>> SHORT TITLE.

This division may be cited as the ``Trafficking Victims Protection
Act of 2000''.

SEC. 102. <<NOTE: 22 USC 7101.>> PURPOSES AND FINDINGS.

(a) Purposes.--The purposes of this division are to combat
trafficking in persons, a contemporary manifestation of slavery whose
victims are predominantly women and children, to ensure just and
effective punishment of traffickers, and to protect their victims.
(b) Findings.--Congress finds that:
(1) As the 21st century begins, the degrading institution of
slavery continues throughout the world. Trafficking in persons
is a modern form of slavery, and it is the largest manifestation
of slavery today. At least 700,000 persons annually, primarily
women and children, are trafficked within or across
international borders. Approximately 50,000 women and children
are trafficked into the United States each year.
(2) Many of these persons are trafficked into the
international sex trade, often by force, fraud, or coercion. The
sex industry has rapidly expanded over the past several decades.
It involves sexual exploitation of persons, predominantly women
and girls, involving activities related to prostitution,
pornography, sex tourism, and other commercial sexual services.
The low status of women in many parts of the world has
contributed to a burgeoning of the trafficking industry.
(3) Trafficking in persons is not limited to the sex
industry. This growing transnational crime also includes forced
labor and involves significant violations of labor, public
health, and human rights standards worldwide.
(4) Traffickers primarily target women and girls, who are
disproportionately affected by poverty, the lack of access to
education, chronic unemployment, discrimination, and the lack of
economic opportunities in countries of origin. Traffickers lure
women and girls into their networks through false promises of
decent working conditions at relatively good pay as nannies,
maids, dancers, factory workers, restaurant workers, sales
clerks, or models. Traffickers also buy children from poor
families and sell them into prostitution or into various types
of forced or bonded labor.
(5) Traffickers often transport victims from their home
communities to unfamiliar destinations, including foreign
countries away from family and friends, religious institutions,
and other sources of protection and support, leaving the victims
defenseless and vulnerable.
(6) Victims are often forced through physical violence to
engage in sex acts or perform slavery-like labor. Such force
includes rape and other forms of sexual abuse, torture,
starvation, imprisonment, threats, psychological abuse, and
coercion.
(7) Traffickers often make representations to their victims
that physical harm may occur to them or others should the victim
escape or attempt to escape. Such representations can

[[Page 114 STAT. 1467]]

have the same coercive effects on victims as direct threats to
inflict such harm.
(8) Trafficking in persons is increasingly perpetrated by
organized, sophisticated criminal enterprises. Such trafficking
is the fastest growing source of profits for organized criminal
enterprises worldwide. Profits from the trafficking industry
contribute to the expansion of organized crime in the United
States and worldwide. Trafficking in persons is often aided by
official corruption in countries of origin, transit, and
destination, thereby threatening the rule of law.
(9) Trafficking includes all the elements of the crime of
forcible rape when it involves the involuntary participation of
another person in sex acts by means of fraud, force, or
coercion.
(10) Trafficking also involves violations of other laws,
including labor and immigration codes and laws against
kidnapping, slavery, false imprisonment, assault, battery,
pandering, fraud, and extortion.
(11) Trafficking exposes victims to serious health risks.
Women and children trafficked in the sex industry are exposed to
deadly diseases, including HIV and AIDS. Trafficking victims are
sometimes worked or physically brutalized to death.
(12) Trafficking in persons substantially affects interstate
and foreign commerce. Trafficking for such purposes as
involuntary servitude, peonage, and other forms of forced labor
has an impact on the nationwide employment network and labor
market. Within the context of slavery, servitude, and labor or
services which are obtained or maintained through coercive
conduct that amounts to a condition of servitude, victims are
subjected to a range of violations.
(13) Involuntary servitude statutes are intended to reach
cases in which persons are held in a condition of servitude
through nonviolent coercion. In United States v. Kozminski, 487
U.S. 931 (1988), the Supreme Court found that section 1584 of
title 18, United States Code, should be narrowly interpreted,
absent a definition of involuntary servitude by Congress. As a
result, that section was interpreted to criminalize only
servitude that is brought about through use or threatened use of
physical or legal coercion, and to exclude other conduct that
can have the same purpose and effect.
(14) Existing legislation and law enforcement in the United
States and other countries are inadequate to deter trafficking
and bring traffickers to justice, failing to reflect the gravity
of the offenses involved. No comprehensive law exists in the
United States that penalizes the range of offenses involved in
the trafficking scheme. Instead, even the most brutal instances
of trafficking in the sex industry are often punished under laws
that also apply to lesser offenses, so that traffickers
typically escape deserved punishment.
(15) In the United States, the seriousness of this crime and
its components is not reflected in current sentencing
guidelines, resulting in weak penalties for convicted
traffickers.
(16) In some countries, enforcement against traffickers is
also hindered by official indifference, by corruption, and
sometimes even by official participation in trafficking.

[[Page 114 STAT. 1468]]

(17) Existing laws often fail to protect victims of
trafficking, and because victims are often illegal immigrants in
the destination country, they are repeatedly punished more
harshly than the traffickers themselves.
(18) Additionally, adequate services and facilities do not
exist to meet victims' needs regarding health care, housing,
education, and legal assistance, which safely reintegrate
trafficking victims into their home countries.
(19) Victims of severe forms of trafficking should not be
Much ado about nothing

Advertising on the Internet sex for hire and when crossing state lines to perform prostitution is a violation of The Mann Act (18 U.S.C.A. § 2421 et seq.)https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2421
https://prostitution.uslegal.com/federal-mann-act/
Quote:
Federal Mann Act

The Mann Act is a federal statute that prohibits interstate or foreign transportation of an individual with the intention of engaging such individual in sexual activity or prostitution. The Mann Act is also known as the White Slave Traffic Act. The Act made it a felony to transport knowingly any person in interstate commerce or foreign commerce for prostitution, or any other immoral purpose. It also made it a felony to coerce an individual into such immoral acts.

Under the Mann Act, transportation for the purpose of prostitution need not be with a commercial intention to be made liable. If a person is transported for non-commercial for sexual activity, it will amount to an offense under Mann Act[i]. The Act also applies when a male takes his under-age girlfriend to a neighboring state, or a female transports an underage boy across the state line for sexual purposes.
Backpage fucked the porn business up by trying to make a fast buck advertising prostitution and trying to use safe harbor as an internet entity -- mia no culpa for reason of safe harbor SODDI

Paul Markham 08-02-2017 11:32 PM
This could be interesting for Tubes.

JuicyBunny 08-03-2017 02:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by directfiesta (Post 21928507)
Curious to see how that would be enforced WORLDWIDE ....
Its done through trade deals. Country A + Country B make a deal. Components of all the FTA's stipulate each country must help the other when it comes to illegal activity happening in the other country etc. If you have 12 countries making a deal. They all must work together. Thank you one world globalization.

Ashley Madison got banged by the FTC because the US DOJ threatened to sue or did sue Canada for assistance. For example.

Hopefully they won't fuck this up and actually help out kids and content owners.

Barry-xlovecam 08-03-2017 05:30 AM
This has everything do do with to do with sex trafficking and marketing/advertising prostitution over the Internet.

It has nothing to do with copyright, intellectual property, tubes or any of your agendas.

As long as "porn" remains as an object that is a speech issue, with first amendment protections, the courts *should* not infer any meaning towards what is precedented legal conduct.

'trafficking' from what I see, is a criminal and territorial issue in the USA. The dictionary and legal meaning is not the same IMO.

Paul Markham 08-03-2017 06:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam (Post 21930484)
This has everything do do with to do with sex trafficking and marketing/advertising prostitution over the Internet.

It has nothing to do with copyright, intellectual property, tubes or any of your agendas.

As long as "porn" remains as an object that is a speech issue, with first amendment protections, the courts *should* not infer any meaning towards what is precedented legal conduct.

'trafficking' from what I see, is a criminal and territorial issue in the USA. The dictionary and legal meaning is not the same IMO.
It can make a difference if it's stolen content. There's no free speech on that.

mce 08-03-2017 03:32 PM
Backpage = the last refuge of ewhoring marketing tactics (circa 2003)

Bladewire 08-03-2017 03:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam (Post 21930484)
This has everything do do with to do with sex trafficking and marketing/advertising prostitution over the Internet.

It has nothing to do with copyright, intellectual property, tubes or any of your agendas.

As long as "porn" remains as an object that is a speech issue, with first amendment protections, the courts *should* not infer any meaning towards what is precedented legal conduct.

'trafficking' from what I see, is a criminal and territorial issue in the USA. The dictionary and legal meaning is not the same IMO.
I think you're overlooking how laws are utilized past their initial intention.

Remember the 2257 raids? I do.

Raids over checking paperwork to "save the children"

But you think this bill will be used strictly for sex trafficking in the strictest sense :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Barry-xlovecam 08-03-2017 04:01 PM
Remember what the US Appeals Court did with §2257?

I don't think this proposed change in the CDA will have any affect on lawful porn notwithstanding an possible effect on porn shooters-- and that is a big maybe. If you are shooting in the USA and have a permit for the production, like in California ... Using this statute to somehow restrict porn advertising or services is an overreach.

The law with the wording *activities related to prostitution, pornography, sex tourism, and other commercial sexual services.* has been on the books since 2000 so ... in 17 years there has been no attempt at any prosecution, to the best of my recall -- why is that?

Only sites advertising prostitution, and in most cases that includes escorts also, should have real worries. Servers could be seized in rem theoretically if they are operated by persons foreign to the USA.

Matt 26z 08-03-2017 04:05 PM
Should McDonalds be liable for hosting drug dealers in their parking lot?

Bladewire 08-03-2017 04:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam (Post 21931636)
Remember what the US Appeals Court did with §2257?

I don't think this proposed change in the CDA will have any affect on lawful porn notwithstanding an possible effect on porn shooters-- and that is a big maybe. If you are shooting in the USA and have a permit for the production, like in California ... Using this statute to somehow restrict porn advertising or services is an overreach.

The law with the wording *activities related to prostitution, pornography, sex tourism, and other commercial sexual services.* has been on the books since 2000 so ... in 17 years there has been no attempt at any prosecution, to the best of my recall -- why is that?

Only sites advertising prostitution, and in most cases that includes escorts also, should have real worries. Servers could be seized in rem theoretically if they are operated by persons foreign to the USA.
So tube sites where escorts have channels showing their videos with clients are violating that law. And the tubes that charge memberships fee to view those channels are accessories.

See how easy that was?

Every tube site I've been to has those kinds of channels.

Bladewire 08-03-2017 04:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt 26z (Post 21931642)
Should McDonalds be liable for hosting drug dealers in their parking lot?
They should be arrested for giving 39 cents worth of beef in a $3 burger! Bastards

Barry-xlovecam 08-03-2017 04:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bladewire (Post 21931654)
So tube sites where escorts have channels showing their videos with clients are violating that law. And the tubes that charge memberships fee to view those channels are accessories.

See how easy that was?

Every tube site I've been to has those kinds of channels.
Take it to court and see ...

Paul Markham 08-03-2017 11:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt 26z (Post 21931642)
Should McDonalds be liable for hosting drug dealers in their parking lot?
Yes, if they know it's going on and do nothing to prevent it.

Barry-xlovecam 08-04-2017 06:40 AM
No, businesses have very limited control over their parking lots -- that is just foolishness.

Businesses have been known to lose their liquor licenses for the reason of drug dealing or alcohol consumption on the property when it becomes a criminal nuisance.

Landlords have the same status. They are not responsible for the illegal acts of their tenants that they are not party to. Dealing drugs in rented premises are grounds for civil eviction.

I am sure they execute the landowner, for whatever happens on his property, that is against the law in North Korea or some other fascist state ...

Phoenix 08-04-2017 07:15 AM
as it should be....there are a lot of businesses in business hosting stoeln and worse content and pretending they don't know what is up


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:06 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc