Adult Sites Don?t Have to Verify Models? Ages, Holland Justice Says
 

Adult Sites Don?t Have to Verify Models? Ages, Holland Justice Says.

So what happens is the site owner has content of a 15 year old on his site?

Just about the most stupid thing I have ever heard a judge say.

It's like saying "We can't stop people breaking laws so let's not bother."

We have to take measures to protect young people from those who would exploit them, from themselves and most importantly protect ourselves from them.

same thing that happens if you're in canada - you go to jail for underage porn

but its the police's job here to prove that a model is below 18 and shit, if you don't want to end up in jail you better keep a copy of an id and make sure that your models are 18 years old, the point here is if you know the model is 18 (like if its your grandma or some shit) then you don't need to do that whereas in the US you would still need it

Good points, but 2257 documentation goes beyond proving the model is 18. also proves the content is legal. Even if she's 85 she can still sue you.

sue for what though? aren't you the one with the rights to the pictures/video as long as youre the photographer? she'd have to pretty much say you raped her wouldn't she? i dont do any shooting if i did id make sure i had model releases with all that just to make sure but technically i mean like you can go take pictures of britney spears walking down the street and sell them and britney spears cant do shit

the judge ruled that you dont have to have the id's but you can still get caught for underage models. 2257 in usa doesnt realy work does it.

It's for secondary producers..... The people shooting still need to have vaild docs.

There you have it.

"Website owners and their companies that operate in the Netherlands don?t have to prove their models are over the age of consent"

??? Age of consent is 16.. so does that mean 17 is ok to shoot?

That is little bit disturbing,lot of strange thing happened in Holland

maybe he's smoke some ganj ? :)

my understanding is that they are saying you don't need a second law telling you not to break the first law. it is not about proof of age, its about requiring a publisher to have the docs as 2257 does.

its illegal to produce and publish pics of an underage person. the burden of proof is still on the person that produced the image.

i would guess (without caring enough to read the decisions) that they view it as being redundant to create a law to insure no one is breaking the first law. otherwise... why not create 1000 laws... with the 1000th, to make sure you don't break the 999th, the 999th to make sure you don't break the 998th etc...

Which is as it should have been all along.

Underage is still an criminal act in Holland. Law focusses on real underage CP and not 17 year old and 10 months old people that made a movie/pic when they were drunk and show their titties.

The newspaper in Holland said the SITEOWNERS do not have to prove the age like with the 2257 docs (unless its obvious CP).

With the age of consent being 16, I would worry about buying content from anyone in the Netherlands. I believe that Hungary's age of consent is 15. This may be good for those that are there, but it just complicates things for those that want to purchase content and have to be 2257 compliant.

Porn video or photo it is 18 years in Holland, not 16 as you state.

You might be confusing professionals content providers that even license US studios from The Netherlands with full 2257 docs with this implication.

I wasnt trying to call into question your business. Sorry if it came across that way. I was merely making the point that someone purchasing content from countries outside the US must be extra vigilant.

I had a client that purchased bulk content from an eastern European broker only to find that one of the scenes contained an underage girl having hardcore sex.

If I hadnt gone through and looked at every scene, he probably would have distributed it never knowing that it was CP.

No problem. I must have read it the wrong way probably.
Most content providers/studios/producers I've known for many many years so I know who the good guys are by experience. I don't let new amateur suppliers in easy and manually check lot's of content & 2257 docs first before I even consider taking it for our broker site. Especially not from some countries where they don't take the laws very seriously.
Most fall of anyway if I ask if the 2257 papers are in their own name/company name and if they can send some samples (most never reply to that email after trying to be a supplier first...)