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)
-   -   All you thumb TGPers are just not thinking, are you???? (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=483746)

Guitar Riff 06-22-2005 11:13 AM

Thats all fine and dandy but if you want to get down and tecnical about the whole thing how does DOJ know a girls face pic on a banner didnt come from a hardcore shot . Have fun trying to keep track of that shit every fucking page each banner is used on and shit that blows Te assholes who thought this new revisions up have never made any type of sites whatsoever becasue if they did they would realize how much backtracking it wll take for each and every page now. And if you havent been t the lawyer yet ts a little late now but if you have the revisions read and reread and reread again most dont realize they are to keep copies of all pages that 2257 is required on for 7 years Thats a fuckin lot of pages to keep and Now tell me how will you do it if using Smartthumbs,comus,or tmmanager or the likes of them that update from every 5 mins to every hr or whatever if ou go by the letter of the rule you'll have to keep a copy of everytime the page gets recreated IMAGINE That LOL thats just In fucking sane but thats what they want

xxxice 06-22-2005 11:16 AM

this is going to change everything if not right on the 23 soon enough ...

Kimmykim 06-22-2005 11:30 AM

Given that police, fbi, prosecutors and judges are paid the same amount of money regardless of the case they are working on, it does not make sense for the federal government to cast a wide net over a bunch of small fish. There are no chances with mom n pop operations for big fines to fund ongoing operations or to make big splashy headlines. The US government also doesn't generally put itself into a position of filling up the prison system with a bunch of white collar criminals violating laws like this. Especially not during the initial stages of trying to enforce such a broad ranging new set of regulations that may or may not be constitutional.

Previously, when the Federal government went after the adult entertainment industry, they went after the largest companies they could find. Specifically so they could make deals involving things like large fines and restrictions on the type of businesses these people could or would run in the future. If the Feds were to go after all the little guys, great, what are they going to get? A bunch of people that weren't making all that much money to start with agreeing to leave the business and never come back on a plea bargain?

Why bother, when there are bound to be some nice sized targets that will have good attorneys who tell them to plead it out to a fine situation, admit no real wrongdoing, and can continue to run their business after its all said and done.

Bigger targets also mean more chances for the inspections to find violations, some of which may not be correctable with time to find the ids and releases, since they may no longer exist or the companies that shot the content originally are so long gone that no one knows where the data went.

The new law is not very well thought out, it's going to be very hard for the government to defend certain parts of it in a court of law, so it should be very interesting to see where they initially focus their enforcement efforts -- that should tell everyone exactly what they see as the strong points in their cases, and attorneys should be more able to advise from that point than they are today.

Of course there also exists the possibility that the government won't initiate inspections or attempt to issue indictments for quite some time. As we've all seen based on the fact that it's been a year since the original changes were proposed and the percentage of companies in adult that have gotten anywhere near true compliance is minimal. This shows the government that if they start this now, then back off of it for 6, 12, 18 months, we'll just get slack again and decide that nothing is going to happen over it. Especially if the FSC is granted a TRO.

If the FSC gets their TRO, I'd (if I were the government) sit back and wait for things to get quiet again, start building my cases based on the weak points in the TRO, and then just drop the bomb around the holidays or so...

nicchick 06-22-2005 12:07 PM

If you read the FSCs motion, one of the many reasons they are seeking an injuction/TRO is that the DOJ only gave webmasters 30 days to comply with the new regs - not enough time. I think the feds will wait until the outcome of the hearing before they move on anyone. They would look pretty silly if they started checking records prior to the ruling and a TRO was granted based on the "insufficient time" argument.
That being said, my lawyer told me not to take any chances and to make sure
that I am compliant before midnight. Obviously I will be listening to him.

dopeman 06-22-2005 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kimmykim
If the Feds were to go after all the little guys, great, what are they going to get? A bunch of people that weren't making all that much money to start with agreeing to leave the business and never come back on a plea bargain?

.

remember who started this attack - ashcroft. the goal of these regulations are to send a message to the 'religious right' that the Bush administration is getting tough on online porn. this has nothing to do with protecting kids. this is politics.

now what's a better way to appease these religio-facist creeps? send all your fed agents into a huge paysite that probably has the best laywers in the industry ready to fight this case in court? or get ~50 or so small time part-timers who will plea. the result - convictions and headlines "Crackdown on Online Porn - raids conducted across thre country blah blah"

you telling me that these Free Speech Coalition lawyers are going to spend a minute defending a TGP operator or gallery submitter who makes a couple hundred bucks a month in court? those guys are sitting ducks.


but i digress - i hope we're both wrong. porn is not illegal. these new regulations are absolute bullshit and won't hold up to a real legal challenge. but until that real legal challenge, there could be casualties.

MrVids 06-22-2005 12:22 PM

scare tactic, you just wanna scoop up all the thumb tgp's

Choker 06-22-2005 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrVids
scare tactic, you just wanna scoop up all the thumb tgp's

I have never bought a tgp or mpg my friend. Why should I when I can build them cheaper?

Kimmykim 06-22-2005 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dopeman
this is politics.

now what's a better way to appease these religio-facist creeps? send all your fed agents into a huge paysite that probably has the best laywers in the industry ready to fight this case in court? or get ~50 or so small time part-timers who will plea. the result - convictions and headlines "Crackdown on Online Porn - raids conducted across thre country blah blah"

Read your own post again. Republicans do things for money, it's that simple. Especially the Bush administration if even 10% of Michael Moore's rants are on target.

The Federal government is a business. Right now it's a Republican big business.

I'll stick with the fact that history pretty much always repeats itself.

V_RocKs 06-22-2005 01:05 PM

I don't think the DOJ has this kinda time to fuck around with thousands of TGP's.

V_RocKs 06-22-2005 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kimmykim
Read your own post again. Republicans do things for money, it's that simple. Especially the Bush administration if even 10% of Michael Moore's rants are on target.

The Federal government is a business. Right now it's a Republican big business.

I'll stick with the fact that history pretty much always repeats itself.

Currently our Rep. gov't is in the business of defense spending. The new destroyers we are coming out with are almost double the size of a regular destroyer and cost 2 times more than the 2nd to last (wholely completed) carrier did. Their original cost was projected at 1/10th.

Instead of 760 fighter planes, we will get 240 for 4 times the original price. Why? Because we are making some defense companies seriously fat right now.

Eventually we will get a democrat and the market will shift to personal technology again. Then get a Rep. who will start a war and pull the rug out from under technology and put the money back into defense...

woj 06-22-2005 01:11 PM

50......,.

Nicky 06-22-2005 01:12 PM

51 2257 concerns

edit: god damn it woj :upsidedow

chris01282 06-22-2005 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by V_RocKs
I don't think the DOJ has this kinda time to fuck around with thousands of TGP's.

No, maybe they'll make an example of some of the bigger sites and all the smaller ones will freak, when they read the fines and prison sentences that the bigger non compliant site owners get :1orglaugh

Paraskass 06-22-2005 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Choker
SOO many thumb tgpers have iced me about this 2257 going into effect tomorrow. Most have said they are only using non-expicit thumbs from now on. I for one do not see how that is really going to help you. Imagine a DOJ agent over your shoulder while you both are looking at your thumb TGP. He points out a thumb of a face pic of a cute little blonde. You say "that thumb is not sexually expicit". DOJ says "Prove it did not come from a bigger picture that was sexually explicit". Think about this real hard. You are going to have to do all the thumb cropping yourself and have every thumb matched up to the big pic it came from.

I am not a attorney this is just my personal opinion.

I do my own thumb cropping.
What's your point?

V_RocKs 06-22-2005 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris01282
No, maybe they'll make an example of some of the bigger sites and all the smaller ones will freak, when they read the fines and prison sentences that the bigger non compliant site owners get :1orglaugh

You are 100% correct. I went to school for Administration of Justice and my GF got a Bachelor's degree in it. It doesn't teach you to be a cop, it teaches you to be a department head.

What you outlined is the basic 101 version of policing. Take out big busts that make big headlines, then the other dominos will fall on their own.

Za Ha 06-22-2005 01:45 PM

"Prove it did not come from a bigger picture that was sexually explicit".

In the USA you are innocent until proven guilty.

dopeman 06-22-2005 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Za Ha

In the USA you are innocent until proven guilty.


not according to these new bullshit regulations. it's the complete opposite.

GatorB 06-22-2005 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oracle Porn
actually it's him who needs to prove that the image DID came from a sexually explicit image.

Ok so you are sayig the thumb image you have will have NOTHING to do with the thing it's linking too? Won't that confuse and piss off your surfers?

GatorB 06-22-2005 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Za Ha
In the USA you are innocent until proven guilty.

That's why people are often in JAIL for months if not years before they go on trial to be proven innoncent or not. See before you can prove you are innoncent you have to be CHARGED with a crime. Which means getting arrested and a lot of other shit.

Head 06-22-2005 02:07 PM

Glad i'm out of the biz now.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:29 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123