2257/Adam Walsh legal question - GoFuckYourself.com

baycouples · 06-28-2007, 05:39 PM

I run an adult dating service and the 2257 along with the Adam Walsh act have always been worrying me. I know that both of those laws claim that whether you're a primary or secondary producer - you must have IDs of all people that are on the picture. However, according to Section 230(c)(1) of the Communications Decency Act:

"No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected."

So, does that mean that any site that has members posting on there does not fall under the rules of 2257 and the Adam Walsh act? And if so - why did AFF just commit to about $10K of donations to FSC to fight the 2257?

Hammer · 06-28-2007, 07:07 PM

You're responsible for any 'explicit' image that appears on your site. If it was put there by a member that doesn't get you off the hook.

You seem to be confusing obscenity laws with 2257 which is a records keeping law.

baycouples · 06-28-2007, 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hammer

You seem to be confusing obscenity laws with 2257 which is a records keeping law.

But the record keeping law is not applicable here, isn't it? I'm not producing or licensing someone else's content. I'm in a different kind of business which is providing a forum - not a content. Am I wrong?

baycouples · 07-01-2007, 12:08 PM

Bump for me

yahoo-xxx-girls.com · 07-04-2007, 06:37 AM

Ok, I will try to explain this to you...

The courts understand the difference between the primary and secondary producers... they state this... and yes webmasters by definition produce their website(s) and yes the definition of producer covers both primary and secondary regarding the 2257 record keeping law. So every adult webmaster is by law required to display their 2257 record(s), however this is only the half of it...

Within the required 2257 record, that all US adult webmasters are required to make available, is the "custodian of records" contact information on where to find the records on the models.

Now a webmaster who is only using adult pictures and or movies from a associate program still needs to have a 2257 record statement and include a statement within such pointing to the associate programs street address on where to find the actual information on the models...

Since the models personal information is protected under US law from being released to the "public" ... the most a adult webmaster who does not manufacture any adult content but uses associate program(s) adult content needs only to give a statement within their required 2257 record indicating the street address on where the associate programs records are kept... and such adult webmastes do not need to have such personal information at place of business on the models ... ( since such is protected under US law )

Regarding web hosting ... each company has their own take on what is legal and what is not ...

Don't take my word on this matter... do some research for yourself !

Later,

thecougarlist · 07-04-2007, 05:35 PM

Wasnt Adam Walsh abducted? What does he have to do with 2257?

StickyGreen · 07-04-2007, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thecougarlist

Wasnt Adam Walsh abducted? What does he have to do with 2257?

The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006...

Subtle · 07-26-2007, 05:10 AM

Thanks, Balalsubturfyooj for the explanation!

Interesting thread! Good replies by all!!

06-28-2007, 05:39 PM	#1
baycouples Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 1,341	2257/Adam Walsh legal question I run an adult dating service and the 2257 along with the Adam Walsh act have always been worrying me. I know that both of those laws claim that whether you're a primary or secondary producer - you must have IDs of all people that are on the picture. However, according to Section 230(c)(1) of the Communications Decency Act: "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected." So, does that mean that any site that has members posting on there does not fall under the rules of 2257 and the Adam Walsh act? And if so - why did AFF just commit to about $10K of donations to FSC to fight the 2257?

06-28-2007, 07:07 PM	#2
Hammer Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Florida Posts: 961	You're responsible for any 'explicit' image that appears on your site. If it was put there by a member that doesn't get you off the hook. You seem to be confusing obscenity laws with 2257 which is a records keeping law. __________________ Porn Site Pros - Custom Website Design, Turnkey Webcam and Pay Sites, SEO, and Consulting Last edited by Hammer; 06-28-2007 at 07:09 PM..

07-04-2007, 06:37 AM	#5
yahoo-xxx-girls.com Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Canada Posts: 3,143	Hi baycouples Ok, I will try to explain this to you... The courts understand the difference between the primary and secondary producers... they state this... and yes webmasters by definition produce their website(s) and yes the definition of producer covers both primary and secondary regarding the 2257 record keeping law. So every adult webmaster is by law required to display their 2257 record(s), however this is only the half of it... Within the required 2257 record, that all US adult webmasters are required to make available, is the "custodian of records" contact information on where to find the records on the models. Now a webmaster who is only using adult pictures and or movies from a associate program still needs to have a 2257 record statement and include a statement within such pointing to the associate programs street address on where to find the actual information on the models... Since the models personal information is protected under US law from being released to the "public" ... the most a adult webmaster who does not manufacture any adult content but uses associate program(s) adult content needs only to give a statement within their required 2257 record indicating the street address on where the associate programs records are kept... and such adult webmastes do not need to have such personal information at place of business on the models ... ( since such is protected under US law ) Regarding web hosting ... each company has their own take on what is legal and what is not ... Don't take my word on this matter... do some research for yourself ! Later,

07-26-2007, 05:10 AM	#8
Subtle Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 2,005	Thanks, Balalsubturfyooj for the explanation! Interesting thread! Good replies by all!! __________________ ----- Blog Themes for $49 ----- ------ INSTANT DELIVERY ------

07-01-2007, 12:08 PM	#4
baycouples Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 1,341	Bump for me

07-04-2007, 05:35 PM	#6
thecougarlist Registered User Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 41	Wasnt Adam Walsh abducted? What does he have to do with 2257?