Wow - Girls Gone Wild Follow Up...

Quote:

---

Dear GGWCash Affiliate,

We regret to inform you that in order to comply with the imposed 2257 regulations we must remove all content associated with our Endless Spring Break site. This includes all promo content including banners and picture sets. We have begun redirecting the Endless Spring Break tour links and free hosted movie gallery links to the main Girls Gone Wild blue and white tour. Furthermore, we have removed content from several dvds from the GGW membership sites.

These titles include:

Girls Gone Wild Endless Spring Break Vol 1-14
GGW Best of Endless Spring Break Vol 1-3
Girls Gone Wild on Campus

Also, for your information, additional dvds are being discontinued from our online store found at GirlsGoneWild.com. These titles include:

College Girls Exposed Vol 1-2
Sexy Sorority Sweethearts Vol 1-2
Totally Exposed Uncensored and Beyond Vol 1-12
Girls Gone Wild Dorm Room Fantasies Vol 1-9
Girls Gone Wild on Tour Vol 1-8
Girls Gone Wild Ultimate Spring Break Vol 1-12
GGW Best of Ultimate Spring Break Vol 1-2
Girls Gone Wild: Best on Tour Vol 1-4
GGW Extreme Uncensored
GGW Party Extreme

If you have purchased any of the listed dvds for the purpose of using content to promote any Girls Gone Wild membership sites, we ask that you please remove the content immediately.

We appreciate your understanding and cooperation in this matter. Should you have any questions or require further clarification, please don’t hesitate to contact us at webmaster@GGWCash.com. Thanks for your business and have a great day.

Sincerely,

The GGWCash Staff

---

So, not only were they filming models without IDs meaning they could potentially have been under age, they were selling their DVDs to webmasters to use as 'content' knowing full well they didnt have the required 2257 documentation in place :eek:

That just seems like a really fucked up way of doing business to me and one that could potentially leave EVERY one of their affiliates open to an obscenity/2257 prosecution that they wouldnt have a chance of winning :eek:

Regards,

Lee

I totally agree on that one, though I have to say that any affiliate that has been using non-hosted explicit materials since 6/23/05 is probably not making the wisest move in any case.

Even with the FSC injunction, it's only an injunction and if it's lifted, there's nothing to say it couldn't be enforced.

The sad thing is, there will still be people that will promote them, even after all of this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaybucks_chip

The sad thing is, there will still be people that will promote them, even after all of this.

---

You know what, that really is the saddest thing about all of this, its almost like webmasters today really dont care about what happens, or has happened with the companies and sites that they promote, just so long as the company in question has a good 'persona' on the boards or knows how to throw a 'party' where webmasters can get free liquor, and see titties or cocks jiggling around.

Regards,

Lee

I don’t think its the party’s or their persona on the boards that webmasters really care about I think conversion ratios are the bottom line. Every thing else is just gravy, people will keep promoting their site as long as it stays up, and the numbers still look good. Personally I always thought sites like Girls Gone Wild must be totally fake, because how could they go around shooting content with out models releases and ID’s. Even if you do not use the content, if you filming underage people in that way it could still be big problems. I just don’t see how such a big company could be so careless, we all know the Gov will start at the top and work their way down for the most part with these 2257 regs.

Quote:

---

Even with the FSC injunction, it's only an injunction and if it's lifted, there's nothing to say it couldn't be enforced.

---

didnt the goverment get around this by using the other 442 something statue?

I havnt seen anything on the FSC website saying how this affect the injunction.

ALso I am suprised that there wasnt jail time involved for GGW especially if they couldnt verify a lot or all of the girl's ages. guess thats the differnce between gay and st8. the public at large seems more accepting of st8 girls.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by collegeboyslive

didnt the goverment get around this by using the other 442 something statue?

I havnt seen anything on the FSC website saying how this affect the injunction.

ALso I am suprised that there wasnt jail time involved for GGW especially if they couldnt verify a lot or all of the girl's ages. guess thats the differnce between gay and st8. the public at large seems more accepting of st8 girls.

---

Tell me about it, I was told that just having a gay site is one strike already. Can you imagine if we presented our content in the same hateful way most str8 sites do, the bank would never allow it to start with. About ever gay site starts out behind the 8ball even though most of our sites are much less offensive if you ask me.

I was talking too my processing rep about this today, what we really need is reviewers with the banks that specialize in gay sites. If you ask me this would be best for the banks (knowing what contents is what and a better understanding of our market so they could spend more time flagging content they should be) the gay market is pretty small its not that hard to get some good insights on what is available. This would also help gay webmasters getting sites approved by having people that really understand and can deal with what we create.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by collegeboyslive

didnt the goverment get around this by using the other 442 something statue?

I havnt seen anything on the FSC website saying how this affect the injunction.

ALso I am suprised that there wasnt jail time involved for GGW especially if they couldnt verify a lot or all of the girl's ages. guess thats the differnce between gay and st8. the public at large seems more accepting of st8 girls.

---

well... I think there are two issues here.

If I were GGW, I would be arguing that much of the content doesn't meet the definition of "sexually explicit" (which is, in fact, true, according to most of the legal specialists' interpretation of the term )

Plus, they have more money than God, so the Feds probably knew that they'd be better to take a deal and run than go to trial and stand a reasonable chance of losing.

As for 4472, as far as I know, it's not actually in effect yet, and I'm sure before it is, the FSC will be pushing hard for an injunction, I think there's a lot in there that's highly questionable with regard to the first amendment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maxpower

I don’t think its the party’s or their persona on the boards that webmasters really care about

---

Really? Tell that to these idiots..

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=655839

As you can see, its business as usual despite the fact that each and every one of their affiliates could still potentially end up on obscenity charges because of their actions.

They even go as far as saying there were NO 2257 VIOLATIONS :eek:

Regards,

Lee

This comment says it all:

Quote:

---

it's no big deal for GGW or for the GGWCash affiliate program, just some busy work to remove a few titles.

---

no big deal? thats the attitude that got them into trouble in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lee

Really? Tell that to these idiots..

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=655839

As you can see, its business as usual despite the fact that each and every one of their affiliates could still potentially end up on obscenity charges because of their actions.

They even go as far as saying there were NO 2257 VIOLATIONS :eek:

Regards,

Lee

---

I don’t really know if I would go as far as say that affiliates really need to worry that much other than the site being shut down and losing their recurring transactions. I might be wrong but I would think I could count on one hand how many affiliates have ever got in trouble for promoting content or sites that they where reasonable sure where not providing CP. Now if they are promoting obvious CP sites well I am sure they would be in deep shit.

As far as people taking advice from me LOL, well it seems I really think differently about allot of things than most webmasters so I do not really see that happening. But I will say this is not always a bad thing :) 10 years from now most of what our current crop of webmaster believe will be considered antiquated. Now I do not think I am right all the time, but I would bet I am also not wrong about some of this stuff too. ;)

A little off topic but I thought I'd share. My cousin drives limo's in Los Angeles for a company that is contracted to the big movie studios as well as a lot of personal agents. During one of the recent hollywood award shows my cousin picked up Joe F. from ggw and drove him all night from party to party. Towards the end of the night Joe told my cousin to take him to Prince's house (yes the short guy in purple) cause he heard he was having a huge bash.

They get there and there is a mile long line of limo's waiting to get in the gate. Joe tells my cousin to drive directly to the front of the line, which he does and tells my cousin not to move the car as he won't be long. Joe gets out with 4 hotties (cousin said he thought 2 looked REAL young) and walks right past the gate and up to the security guard. Apparently Joe was not welcome. My cousin could not here the start of the argument but after a few minutes he heard a loud "do you know who the fuck I am ??"

Hearing it get loud my cousin took a peak just in time to see the guard mace Joe F. right in the face from about 3 feet away. Dropped him. Joe tried to get agro but was contained by security (not hard to secure a blind man) and escorted back the waiting limo.

Just thought I'd share that little story. --Chubbs