![]() |
|
|||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
||||
|
Now tell me: Do you live in the USA? Are you aware of recent US laws on Porn? They just recently got a lot worse last month as HR 4472 was signed into law. HR 4472 amend the 2257 regs. http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/FSCView.asp?coid=655 Basically any "sexually explicit" depiction (real or simulated) is now a felony punishable by 5 years in prison - If you don't have the proper documentation. The documentation has to be cross referenced 3 different ways and you have to have a hyper link on every page that lists the custodian of records. The custodian has to be available during normal business hours as the FBI could may show up at any time unannounced to check your records.
As for what is “sexually explicit”, well there is no bright line rule. An artistic nude may not be sexually explicit, yet a girl in a revealing night gown on a bed playing with a dido could be. Much of this was covered under the old 2257 regs, but they were never enforced. Partially, because of a pending law suit by the Free Speech Coalition. HR 4472 was is an attempt to do an end run around the judiciary. And they have now started inspections. The guy that runs Girls Gone Wild just got nailed with a 4 million dollar fine - and that was under the old 2257, not the more draconian 4472. The biggest problem with 4472 is that it makes no distinction between “primary producer” and “secondary” (Domain parking is what?!). So if you are an affiliate and just use the images given to you by a sponsor, you are still required to have documentation and be prepared for an FBI inspection. In the 4472 regs there is also a provision about “Innocent Text” if you use some kind of text that a child might search on such as “hot blond plays with toy” then you face up to (I think) 20 years in the clink. The entire crop of legislation was passed in the name of stopping child porn. So even if your models are of legal age, but you screw up the documentation you are gonna prosecuted as a pedophile child pornographer. There is a good chance that this entire thing will get chucked out as unconstitutional for a variety of different reasons, but it's gonna be a while for it to work through the courts. In the mean time, the FBI is out doing random inspections. Now those are just the Federal laws. The situation there is getting worse as well. Lost of neocon prosecutors looking to score points with the electorate. Now is a bad time for on-line porn or anything like it.
__________________
idn.bz <- free automatic idn appraisal |
|
|||
|
It is a U.S law, but does that mean it only affects U.S domain holders? or parking services or webspace hosters based geographically in the U.S, or is the law aimed at protecting U.S citizens from porn and therefore you break the law if you serve porn to U.S citizens regardless of where you are based serving it?
__________________
Theres a storm coming...
|
|
|||
|
"It is often overlooked that Section 2257 imposes one obligation on persons who are neither primary nor secondary producers. If someone distributes material covered by Section 2257 which should have, but does not have a disclosure statement on it, that person (assuming for the moment that Section 2257 is constitutional) commits the same federal felony and can be jailed for the same 5 years as a producer who keeps no records and affixes no disclosure statement. This is why Section 2257 concerns retailers who do not produce and do not even have a website. "
So porn affiliates have to have a whole lot of trust that their affiliate provider has kept all their records up to standard. No wonder buydomains and other big companies are getting out of the game. |
|
|||
|
Quote:
If you don't show up on the beach, we know you've been rendered to Libya for a good ol' waterboarding at his majesty's pleasure.
__________________
Blame Edwin. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|