You got to be kidding me ... If you can't see the difference between a digital playing field and the old bricks and mortar environment of 30 years ago you are beaten down before you start.

What would you suggest; that the surfer email you his driver's license or his passport for you to inspect and keep safe so you can be sure that the surfer is of legal age to enter your porn site, ROFLMAO.

That is absolutely ludicrous and verification of age is a red herring online. Ultimately, parental responsibility must play a role -- parents are responsible for their children's actions. Now, should laws be passed requiring some mandatory tagging of websites as to content so parental filters would function better I would have no problem with that -- it would just be responsible behavior on this industry's part. But bullshit age verifications walls, LMAO. Every 14 year old knows how to put a fake birth date into the script. So, age verification walls are a joke in self deception they are just used as an affirmative defense.

Anyone over the age of 14 can buy a prepaid stored value credit card at the local 7-11, WalMart or Grocery store so possession of a credit card proves nothing. But hey, start a new trend "email me your ID to see my hardcore porn -- we'll get back to you with your secret password!! And if you act now we'll send you a link to your magic online decoder ring" good fucking luck.

We voluntarily tag our content:

Code:

---

<meta name="verify-v1" content="aEagIlYCzQNCxEzEMxmYXt3DHuWuzm9E6FTxTTryVx4=" />
<meta name="verify-v1" content="uFmHimGMo1gS3tgDhIO/BMpo7/4+usZtAk2RFlw++hQ=" />
<meta name="msvalidate.01" content="3D667A43C2C1D301AE3BEFBAD227E0E9" />
<

---

Why don't you even tag your site with adult meta tags that content filters could identify? Yeah, I just checked the source of paulmarkham.com you set a good example to follow ...

Practice what you preach ...

shit wrong tags :P

They can be used for online purchases they are branded VISA or Mastercharge and work in all ATMs in the Cirrus Maestro Networks ...

http://usa.visa.com/personal/cards/p...-explore.html#

Example ...

They are issued by member banks and private labeled for stores that are sponsored by private banks -- if anyone in merchant account processing wants to comment as to their treatment ... be my guest ...

There is online bank account debiting also -- most banks will open accounts for minors with a parent as the co-signer. However, the principal account holder can make transactions with the funds in the account.

Quote:

Where to use it Use your card online, over the phone, and at the millions of places where Visa debit cards are accepted ? supermarkets, clothing stores, drug stores, restaurants, web sites, gas station pumps, and many more. Your money is replaced if the card is lost or stolen.

One of the points in the COPA Decision overturning the access restrictions to adult websites by law was that the possession or use of a credit card was not proof of age.

Should there even be card readers (or OCR) on all computers in the future and all ID documents have a machine readable code it still would not be proof of age -- a minor could just scan an adult's ID card and pretend to be them.

So, it boils down to tagging a website so if a content filter is active it will deny access to the browser. We use the ICRA and RTA tagging -- at least we make some effort.

Quote:

U.S. Supreme Court BUTLER v. MICHIGAN, 352 U.S. 380 (1957) 352 U.S. 380 BUTLER v. MICHIGAN. APPEAL FROM THE RECORDER'S COURT OF THE CITY OF DETROIT, MICHIGAN. No. 16. Argued October 16, 1956. Decided February 25, 1957. Section 343 of the Michigan Penal Code, in effect, makes it a misdemeanor to sell or make available to the general reading public any book containing obscene language "tending to the corruption of the morals of youth." For selling to an adult police officer a book which the trial judge found to have such a potential effect on youth, appellant was convicted of a violation of this section. Held: The statute violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the conviction is reversed. Pp. 380-384. Reversed. MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER delivered the opinion of the Court. We have before us legislation not reasonably restricted to the evil with which it is said to deal. The incidence of this enactment is to reduce the adult population of Michigan to reading only what is fit for children. It thereby [352 U.S. 380, 384] arbitrarily curtails one of those liberties of the individual, now enshrined in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, that history has attested as the indispensable conditions for the maintenance and progress of a free society. We are constrained to reverse this conviction. Reversed.

This Supreme Court Decision is often cited in cases before the Courts where the constitutionally of limited access to adult material is mandated "We have before us legislation not reasonably restricted to the evil with which it is said to deal." A REASONABLE policy has to be written into the statute. Filling out some form or using a financial instrument that could be offered by a person of any age is not reasonable age verification -- this is why COPA was declared by the Courts as unconstitutional.

On adult verification, put this baby to rest already in the USA ...

This US Appeals Court Case is FINAL all appeals exhausted WRITTEN IN STONE

Quote:

No. 07-2539 (2008) PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 07-2539 (2008) AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, et al v. MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, in his official capacity Permanent Injunction sustained ... http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/072539p.pdf Page 31; The court later explained, ?[t]he affirmative defenses cannot cure COPA?s failure to be narrowly tailored because they are effectively unavailable. Credit cards, debit accounts, adult access codes, and adult personal identification numbers do not in fact verify age. As a result, their use does not, in good faith, ?restrict [] access? by minors.? Id. at 811 (second alteration in original) (quoting 47 U.S.C. § 231(c)(1)(A)). Page 33; The Government argues that the District Court erred in rejecting the limiting effect of COPA?s affirmative defenses. It contends that ?[t]he possibility that some minors may have access to credit cards merely demonstrates that no system of age verification is foolproof. It does not call into question the availability of credit card screening as an affirmative defense that tailors COPA more narrowly.? Appellant?s Br. at 37. The Government also argues that ?the court ignored testimony that minors do not have access to traditional payment cards under their own control but simply have access to cards supervised by adults.? Id. But the District Court found that even if there is parental supervision of payment card use, the supervision does not prevent access to harmful material by minors because parents ?may not be able to identify transactions on sexually explicit Web sites because the adult nature of such transactions is often not readily identifiable . . . .? Gonzales, 478 F. Supp. 2d at 802. In any event, we conclude that the District Court correctly found that the affirmative defenses are ?effectively unavailable? because they do not actually verify age. Page 50; In addition to being more effective, it is clear that filters are less restrictive than COPA. As the Supreme Court has stated: [f]ilters are less restrictive than COPA. They impose selective restrictions on speech at the receiving end, not universal restrictions at the source. Under a filtering regime, adults without children may gain access to speech they have a right to see without having to identify themselves or provide their credit card information. Even adults with children may obtain access to the same speech on the same terms simply by turning off the filter on their home computers. Above all, promoting the use of filters does not condemn as criminal any category of speech, and so the potential chilling effect is eliminated, or at least much diminished. All of these things are true, moreover, regardless of how broadly or narrowly the definitions in COPA are construed ...

This whole matter of the "credit card" or other adult verification as stated above "[C]redit cards, debit accounts, adult access codes, and adult personal identification numbers do not in fact verify age. As a result, their use does not, in good faith, ?restrict [] access? by minors.? Id. at 811 (second alteration in original) (quoting 47 U.S.C. § 231(c)(1)(A)). ..." is an issue already settled in the COPA case in 2008 -- its a dead horse now and a red herring argument.

Thread: If tubes like pornhub are so great for sponsors then why are sites still closing?

Answer is: Pay Sites got out maneuvered -- content theft was taken to a new level, a perverse marketing strategy. Free download traffic was commoditized then monetized.

Stream your new content in a manner that it cannot be downloaded and consequently stolen -- don't leave the barn door open so the new horses get stolen ... The Great Wall of China was built for a reason (221-206 BC) during the Qin Dynasty. To stop the barbarians and China survived (at considerable construction costs).

If you think that the US Government will be the White Night to save the Porn Industry you are dreaming ... Best possibility is no new laws and just being left to our own 'self-regulation'. (That's a good one.)</sarcasm>.