Printable View
i believe they are supposed to publish in the federal register within three days... till they release the info, it's true we don't know what was signed, or what is to be the new 2257. all i have said is based on the current 2257 regs and the new proposed regs.
Pistol,
My pleasure. The best source is to subscribe to the Free Speech Newsletter as they are keeping up to date on the latest happenings.
We also post the Free Speech newsletter on our site in our HDK FREE SPEECH are, usually when it comes out each Friday. The link to see it there is: http://www.hotdesertknights.com/03/news.php It will be updated later today, but here is the latest from the FSC:
TRADE GROUP TO CHALLENGE NEW SECTION 2257 RULES
May 18, 2005
Free Speech Coalition, the adult entertainment trade association, announced plans today to file a legal challenge to the Justice Department’s new rules for enforcement of the Federal Labeling and Recordkeeping Law known as 18 U.S.C. Section 2257.
“Just as we feared,” FSC Executive Director Michelle Freridge said, “Attorney General Gonzales has signed a final rule implementing the new provisions of the Child Protection and Obscenity Enforcement Act. We are prepared to challenge these unconstitutional and burdensome regulations in court.”
The law requires producers of sexually explicit material to maintain records proving that performers in those depictions are not minors, but the detailed and extensive records that the law requires create a daunting record-keeping task, particularly when applied to the Internet. And the penalties are harsh. Even with no minors involved in the production - indeed, even if all performers are over 40 -- a first-offense paperwork error can still mean five years in federal prison.
Although FSC is on record in strong opposition to the use of minors in sexual material, Freridge said these new regulations go too far. According to Freridge, the proposed guidelines, which were initially released to the public in August of 2004, go beyond reasonable administrative requirements and create an excessively burdensome paperwork system that may violate the privacy rights and personal safety of performers. On a practical level, many producers would find it difficult to comply with the highly technical requirements.
“In addition, we really need to examine the impact of the new regulations on webmasters, since internet content is apparently going to be the focus of the new DOJ task force,” suggested Larry Walters, a well known First Amendment attorney who represents a number of adult webmasters and internet companies and is a member of FSC’s Internet Committee.
“Under the current unfriendly administration,” Freridge commented, “The law would become a tool for selective enforcement by the Justice Department and a technical trap for legal adult businesses that have no connection whatsoever to child pornography.”
FSC intends to test the validity of the new rules by filing multiple lawsuits, asking for a temporary restraining order and an injunction. By taking swift proactive steps, FSC hopes to protect its members from prosecution, while challenging the law as unconstitutional.
To view the proposed guidelines released to the public in 2004, as well as FSC’s response to those guidelines, visit www.freespeechcoalition.com The version signed by Attorney General Gonzales today will be published in the Federal Register soon, and available on the FSC website shortly thereafter.
Free Speech Coalition is the trade organization of the adult entertainment industry. Its mission is to safeguard the industry from oppressive governmental regulation and to promote good business practices within the industry.
Bill
i can see your all still "speculating!" , well i'm off to see some "real people!" with some "real problems!"..."may the force be with you!" :goof:
jim
Greetings:
What strange little world do you live in?Quote:
Originally Posted by longboardjim
Personally, I think that comes across as a pretty insulting response to the trade group that's out there looking after your ass, whether you realize it's on the hot seat or not........
Yet at the same time, he is also 100% correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by JustMe
Its speculation, nothing more, nothing less.
The regulations havent even been published, yet, people are already saying what they are going to do in order to fight them?
How can you fight something if nobody knows what it is exactly thats being fought LOL
Regards,
Lee
I would much prefer to have an organization like the Free Speech Coalition getting prepared to protect our interests than to have no organization doing anything.
Better to be prepared than to get behind the 8 ball on this issue. Based on the Proposed Changes to 2257, as released in the Notice of Proposed Rule Making, (NPRM) it can be devastating to the industry. It's unlikely that the final result which will be released will be much changed from the NPRM.
All the FSC is trying to do is to be prepared and to protect our collective asses.
Bill
i believe there will be an injunction, and i know the fsc will do everything possible to get their injunction, but doesn't that depend on the judge? their injunction could be turned down, or it could go to a hearing that draws on while the new regs are enforced.
not as likely, but not impossible.
the fsc are flying as blind as we are, and they're doing what they can. why should the rest of us be any different? if 2257 was to remain as it was, and they would simply start working to enforce it, why would they bother with new regs at all?
? , i'm not quite clear on where you decided my opinion on the "trade group" but i have to insist you stop attaching my name to your opinions!.Quote:
Originally Posted by JustMe
jim