2257 thoughts

[AusCoding Allan]

That's true basschick but they can't ask for the model ID's or enforce anything if our country's laws don't require us to keep them.

As I said however I still intend to keep the id's anyway.

Cheers,

Allan

[dirtygeek]

You better, I can't marry a jail bird :specs:

Originally posted by ozmalegalleries
As I said however I still intend to keep the id's anyway.

[Chilihost]

Lee, about offshore companies, I am going to step back and say that I do not know anything about them. I was only discussing offshore companies since Ian brought it up in his devil's advocate post, but then again since he is Canadian I don't know why either of us should be talking about offshores!

That's true basschick but they can't ask for the model ID's or enforce anything if our country's laws don't require us to keep them.

Allan, this was kind of my point to begin with and I am glad that someone else is thinking along the same lines!

My point was not all about dodging this, but instead how this affected non-US webmasters. I am going to put up 2257 links on every site, will list my address as the truthful and honest primary place of business and keep all the docos in order here. But there is no way any US authority will be able to verify or audit these docos, and as Allan said, there is no laws here in Australia which force us to keep these documents so even if the US asked AU police to come and check things out, they can't!

Now here's some good news. I have just completed signing up a contract with a new data centre that is NOT in the USA. I will have my first servers in place within a week and will be able to offer offshore hosting for a price that is not much more than I currently offer. This also gives any chilihost clients the ability to quickly move their hosting offshore if they need to for any reason, with no interruption in service. Best off, all chilihost clients will continue to receive the high quality service they are used to and will not have to worry about dealing with dodgy offshore operators.


Cheers,
Luke

[basschick]

i know a couple people who will want to use your offshore hosting, luke. where will it be, and what will the prices be?

these new regs will affect non u.s. program owners who will have to supply i.d. for the promo content they give to their u.s. webmasters. also it may affect non u.s. webmasters because of changes in smaller site programs - it's possible not everyone will be able to have a custodian.

[studpuppy]

I guess that non-U.S. companies who don't want to provide all their US revshare partners with the necessary documentation would just have to serve their banners from their own server. This would circumvent the 2257 secondary producer requirements. Additionally any free content could be served in galleries from the sponsor's own server. Many webmasters would welcome this move but I know sponsor's will not be willing to burn up so much bandwidth.

[gaystoryman]

That's an interesting solution, having the non us providers serve from their server but... the image is still being shown on your site even though it technically isn't... so would that not still make you liable? It is your site, as you put the code there.. I wish that it would be that easy but somehow I doubt if Ashcroft & co. will look at it that way.

[studpuppy]

Not really. My companies legal team states that if served from html pages on the foreign server into iframes or a framset, then the images clearly are not a part of the U.S. website. Likewise since you are actually obtaining html pages from the foreign source, you can not and do not excerise control over the images and content on such html pages. This is a provision of the proposed regulations. However, as always, consult your own legal team before making any decisions.

[studpuppy]

Actually what we see as the biggest possible threat to the adult internet porn industry would be if the United States government began to excerise dominium over its domains. That is all the .com, .net, .org etc... This could happen irregardless of where the sites isp is located. U.S. registered domains could easily be seized by the U.S. government (other countries exercise very strict control over their domains). There has been quite a bit of discussion on this in Congress and within the Justice Department. While I don't see it happening any time soon -- it is coming.

[Chilihost]

I did not realise .com/.net/.org were owned by the USA, I thought only .us was, man that would totally screw everyone.

Interesting thoughts on iframes with the banners, I was planning on going the non-sexually explicit route for US webmasters.

oh, basschick, the offshore hosting costs are not finalised yet, I just need a bit more time to get things set up.

cheers,
Luke