is it true that if one moves one's site/content to another country - say Australia - that it would not have to be 2257 complient?
:gossip:
Printable View
is it true that if one moves one's site/content to another country - say Australia - that it would not have to be 2257 complient?
:gossip:
I am not completely sure, but I think you still have to comply because you are US citizen or have a US based company.
no, it is not true. if you read the law, it refers to your place of business - not to where your site is hosted. i also talked to a couple lawyers about that, and suggest that you do the same if you're not sure.
as it was explained to me, if you are here when you work, 2257 applies to you.
What if you transfer "ownership" to someone in another country and act as an employee?
If you sell or close your business, aren't you still required to keep records for 7 years? But I guess you wouldn't have your name on the sites anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xstr8guy
yes, whoever was the custodian must stay the custodian for 7 years.
Remember though that the US Government has a long arm.
I had a friend move to Germany to 'escape' a tax lein. Nothing happened for about 4 years...until her parents got sick and she wanted to come back to the US to visit them...
They did not allow her a VISA to come back.
I would suspect that if you are not 2257 compliant, they will find some way to screw you in the long run.
I can imagine a time in the future where they restrict the ability to view sites on servers that are not US based, etc. Maybe I am too paranoid...but as much as a pain in the ass as 2257 is...it really is not that bad.
Get some software, spend a few days getting everything into it...and from that point on it is just easy to update.
Just my opinion.
From my understanding all site that have adult content which is covered under 2257 are supposed to be compliant.
Now, from a realistic standpoint, if you live in another country, your server is in another country, your bank accounts are in another country I would think you've be pretty safe from having to worry about any inspections even if you are a US Citizen.
If you are in fact a resident of another country and everything is located outside of the United States the US really would not have jurisdiction over you as 2257 is a US Law and applies only to US residents.
And, realistically, the Department of Justice doesn't have the resources to inspect all of the primary and secondary producers in this country, much less those that operating legally out of another country. The only exception to that of course would be child pornography which violates the laws in most countries.
I suppose that if I lived in Amsterdam, my servers were in Amsterdam and my bank accounts were in Amsterdam, I'd have the 2257 information posted on my sites but I damned sure would not be to concerned that a team of FBI agents was going to be knocking on my door to conduct 2257 inspections.
Bill
our gonvernment has never really dealt actively with 2257 before so this is all unknown territory we're discussing. the feds could bust a guy who could turn you in. they've also known to be at internext and to read the board.
why fuck with the feds? they can throw your ass away for a loooooong time, and waste years of your life in court, using all the money you made OR they can freeze or sieze your assets. they can arrest someone who knows you and ask if hey have worked with you in this country - and ask them for the phone number they have for you.
and if it's obvious you were avoiding them, i believe that is a charge of its own. plus if you talk to anyone about doing this, it's conspiracy. you could do 20 years IF your caught.
Trying to "move offshore" but not really leaving the country will not avoid 2257. If you sell bicycles in the US market from Belize, your bicycles must still comply with US law to be sold in the US. If you sell porn in the US, then that porn must be compliant with US law to take advantage of the US market.
By trying to find a way to avoid the law, you are risking greater troubles.
My legal opinion [no charge of course!] is to spend your time, energy and money on complying with the law rather than finding ways to avoid it.
Ok, all of these opinions make sense and I suppose all of you are compliant then. May I ask another question... what software are you using? I'll be completely honest here. I still haven't found anything that actually works as required by the regulations. If there is anything out there, then you all are sure keeping it a secret.
Jim,Quote:
Originally Posted by Xstr8guy
I've looked at all the software (I think) that is available, and they all have their flaws and none are completely in compliance with all of 2257.
That being said, let me say this. I am as in compliance as I can possibly be. We have a 1st Amendment attorney, (huge damn retainer), and have followed his advise completely. BUT......I don't want all of my files in a database that is accessible to the FBI or anyone else. Don't misunderstand, I do have that, but it's not in my office and not accessible to anyone but me.
All of my 2257 files are in paper form, filed in file cabinets, I guess about 10 of them now. They are all locked and they all sit in an un-airconditioned portion of my warehouse right next to a desk and chair and several security camera that broadcast video (not audio) and record off site. Signs are clearly posted to that effect.
Now, I pray, that if the DoJ ever does come to check my files that they do it in August when it is 120 degrees outside, and about 150 dgrees inside that portion of the warehouse. If they show up they will find that we will be polite and pleasant. We will happily allow them full access to the thousands of pieces of papers in each of the files and more than willing to allow them to use the desk and chair. I'm told they need to bring their own copier. They will be invited to stay as long as they wish once they provide me with their cards, names and identification numbers and we contact our attorney and provide the same to him. They will also find our files to be in full compliance
The last thing I want is to grant to them is access to one of my computers that has all of that information so that they simply click a few buttons and save what they want and then and then be able to peruse those files at their leisure.
Now, does anyone think that I'm being wrong in this approach?
I'm sure, that as Patti has said, the DoJ monitors these boards. And, I agree with Chad that we should spend our time and effort and dollars making sure we are in compliance. But, as many times as I have read 2257, I just don't see where it say I can't keep all of this documentation in hard copy form and in an un-airconditioned warehouse.
Bill
Bill,
You can absolutely keep your records in hard copy form. There is no specific way to keep the records, although we are specifically authorized to keep records in a digital database--but not required to keep them in any specific format.
My only concern is that YOU have to go into that hot warehouse to maintain your records! They might come one day but you know with 100% certainty that you must go in there to do some work. However, there is no rule that the air conditioning has to work on the day the inspectors are there. ;-)
2 cents from JP on this, as I use to assist the FBI in criminal investigations in the past (related to cybercrime / information warfare), and have a good bit of experience dealing with them. I've also lectured at both the FBI Headquarters in Washington DC and at the FBI Training Academy in Quantico Virginia.
I feel far too often in the conversations that I've been seeing take place on various boards, that FBI Agents are made out to be "evil" or "the enemy". I think one of the things we as an industry need to do is separate the Career Law Enforcement Agents of the FBI from the politically appointed offices (such as Attorney General).
As a whole, I can say without a doubt, the agents that I came in contact with were some of the most dedicated, devoted, patriotic, self sacrificing individuals that I've ever met in my life. They are intelligent, highly trained, and consummate professionals.
To be honest, I'm willing to bet most agents involved with these "inspections" hate them just as much as we do. I believe there's something very unamerican feeling about the entire inspection process, and I also believe that many of these agents feel that way as well. We're forced to keep the records and make them available, and they're forced to inspect them.
I had the honor on several occasions of meeting many agents from the "Innocent Images" division of the FBI, the group of people responsible for tracking down child pornographers, and I suspect the same group that now has what is probably a forced hand in 2257 as well. These agents dedicate their lives to protection our nation's most vulnerable, and I just have to think that the political pressures surrounding 2257 and the wasted federal resources on it must just infuriate them. They know who the real criminals are, and they certainly know who the real victims are, and anything that would detract from their work must just frustrate them to no end. They don't want to harass anyone, and they don't care about legitimate business, they want to save children who need help, who are being hurt and scarred for life.
I had one agent tell me once that she always felt guilty taking days off, because she knew that every minute she wasn't working to find these abused children, is another minute that they're forced to endure that abuse. Do you think she cares about 2257 records inspections and harassing the adult industry? I certainly don't.
As for our company, we keep all of our records in a database. While it's certainly possible for DVD producers to keep their records in paper form, I honestly see NO WAY that anyone who publishes content on the web could POSSIBLY do the types of URL cross referencing and the like that is required via paper format. The sheer volume of that task combined with the dynamic nature of web development I believe commands electronic records.
Are our records 100% perfect? Who the hell knows. We're doing our best to abide by the letter and spirit of the law, have all of our records, and that's all that we can do. While the ridiculousness of the statue allows for 5 years in prison for even a minor clerical error, I firmly believe that we'll see nothing like that play out in the form of actual prosecutions. I firmly believe those will be reserved for companies and individuals who have shown total contempt for the law, and probably deserve to sit in prison for a host of other issues on top of what would be charged from the 2257 statute.
I can tell you one thing for certain:
If we do happen to be unfortunate enough to go through an inspection, I won't be making an effort to make the agents responsible uncomfortable, or inconvenienced. They won't be forced to work in 150 degree heat, or treated with other similar contempt or disrespect.
In fact, it will be the exact opposite.
That all being said, I do want to mention those that I DO hold contempt for, and that is the politicians and political appointees who have ignored what the field agents have told them, ignored what the adult industry has told them, and ignored what legal scholars have told them. Frustrating efforts to track down and prosecute those who are abusing children, to appease a conservative base by harassing legitimate industry, is a defenseless act.
I will continue to support the FSC in their efforts and hope that they prevail against this ridiculous statute, and I have a hunch many on the "other side" are secretly hoping for the very same.
the fbi agents are sent to do a job, and i doubt it's up to the agents to decide what is to be inspected and what is not. they have been sent in with lists so far, and the can't leave till their job is done, uncomfortable or not. that being the case, the only effect that i can see in making them uncomfortable is to make them irritable and that will make them feel a lot less friendly.
Am I the one who has to point out the 500 lb gorilla in the room?
Why do you want to escape 2257 in the first place???
It's not like this was just sprung on us... this has been around for 2 years now. You should already be compliant instead of trying to skip out...
My 2 cents... or maybe I am just uninformed.
Yes, it's true, as long as you move there with it!Quote:
Originally Posted by USAJock
it may not be true unless you also give up your citizenship.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stickyd
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustMe
In total agreement! (Although I did meet one asshole Secret Service Officer a while back at a anti-bush rally...but it could have just been the situation.)
I have NO problem with 2257 Record Keeping. The ONLY thing that bothers me is that those of us who are carefull about only hiring models that are over 18 have to do so much work...whereas I doubt that the people that are making child porn keep any records. It seems unfair.
As far as turning the AC off...well, I will wait and see what atitude they have if they come to inspect me. I know where the fuse is for the AC if needed. :gaydays:
I keep all my files on a computer database that I can just burn a copy and have them out of my place in under 5 minutes. With all the cross indexing needed, I don't see how it could be done on paper...and we only have about 50 DVD's.
Hi,Quote:
Originally Posted by USAJock
its true that if you don't fall under the laws of the USofA you are not required to have the 2257 information on hand... you should have however the information needet by the country you are in.
Oh... and some payment processors (ccBill, Verotel and maybe Epoch) require you to have 2257 links and information on hand even if you have another countries citizenship and physically reside in that country.
:develish:
Patti, Chad and John Paul,
All of your points are very well taken and I certainly understand where you are coming from.
I'm sure that these Agents hate doing these inspections as much as we hate we threat of having them done. If they are truly dedicated agents they know damned well that all of this is politically motivated and achieves absolutely NOTHING against the war on Child Pornography, and, in fact, detracts from it. Everything I have heard about the inspection which have been conducted is that the Agents were polite and professional in each case. As I intend to be if they come and pay us a visit.
However, that being said, if I were to allow them to access my computer that has the 2257 database and then they walk out the door with a complete copy of those records, I have no idea in whose political hands they may end up. It just ain't going to happen.
As to where my records are stored, in an un-air conditioned warehouse, well, the warehouse simply doesn't have air-conditioning, only the front part of our offices do, and I don't have the space in the front offices for the number of filing cabinets required because of all of the cross referencing required under this stupid law. The warehouse has an evaporative cooler, or swamp cooler for those of you who knows what that it. I can't run it because of the amount of moisture it puts into the air causing the paper to get damp.
Are my records 100% accurate? Probably not only because I think it is physically impossible to comply with the standard as written. But they are as accurate as they can possibly be. As John-Paul said, with ever changing dynamic url's and in certain cases, dozens of websites changing HOURLY, how could they EVER be 100% accurate. You may be compliant one hour, and out of compliance the next hour.
For that reason, and not necessarily to make the Agents uncomfortable or grumpy or miserable, I am never going grant them access to the computer. or make their job easy.
I hate that the Agents have to be put into such a position, but if enough of them complain enough about this waste of time, perhaps some things will change on the political scene where this waste of agents time, our time and tax payer dollars is concerned.
Bill
Quote:
Originally Posted by stickyd
No, it is NOT true.
It is ONLY true IF you move AND IF YOU DO NOT SELL IN THE UNITED STATES MARKET
The likelihood of being inspected approaches zero for a truly offshore company but the law does apply even to non-residents if they sell to US residents.
Find one person who is licensed to practice law [ not someone who has watched 3 episodes of Boston Legal and regularly reads GFY] that agrees that if you are entirely outside of the US and selling to US residents that you do not need to comply with US laws regarding the sale of that product.
If it were so easy to shun US law for non-residents, then why have so many gambling companies that are ENTIRELY offshore closed their sites to US residents? Companies with literally tens of millions of dollars in annual US-sourced revenue and the financial ability to retain the best legal advice either do not agree with you or else somehow have completely missed the magical legal loophole you believe exists!
in your opinion, when you say "sell" does that include affiliate promoters who use free or paid content to generate sales from another entity? I.E. Free Sites, Blogs, TGPs, etc..Quote:
Originally Posted by chadknowslaw
I know the FBI hasnt been going after those people, but it still seems like murky water to me.... lol, or maybe its a dumb question
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaySearch4Sex
The only dumb question is the question that is not asked!
The Department of Justice will be of the opinion that you are subject to 2257 if you allow US residents to view your site, whether you are charging them or not.
So, if you have a blog with pics on it, you would be required to comply with 2257. The easiest way to do that would be to only put up images that are exempt from 2257, such as non-nudes. Then you can link to the paysite, earn money from promoting that site, and not have any 2257 obligations.
I have a good answer for that question.Quote:
Originally Posted by EonFilms_Rocky
The secondary producer requirements are a lot harder to comply with than primary producer requirements. Webmasters with TGP's, Blogs, or any sites that uses sponsor content has virtually no way to gather ID's for models.
Not everyone is a primary producer. :(
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xstr8guy
As of July 27, 2006, everyone that puts an image on a website IS a primary producer.
To be precise, Congress did away with the "primary vs. secondary" and basically defined everybody as a "producer". How long that will hold up against judicial scrutiny has yet to be determined. I have yet to see a challenge to that language by the FSC or anyone else, despite its ominous ramifications for every webmaster that puts a nudie pic up on a website.
Then every single explicit TGP and blog that uses sponsor content is illegal now.Quote:
Originally Posted by chadknowslaw
Technically, yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xstr8guy
Stupid, but yes.
not if they only use sponsor content that comes with full 2257 records and if they are willing to act as custodian for those records.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xstr8guy
I am aware of 2257 software that can be maintained by the sponsor but in the event of inspection of an affiliate, the sponsor can provide the affiliate with a login and access code so that an inspector can review the records from the affiliate's place of business. This would not be 100% compliant because the 2257 records maintained by the sponsor would not include all the URLs where the images are found on the affiliate's website
The only way to be 100% compliant would be for the affiliate to maintain a complete set of records for all images on their site, and list themselves as custodian. Or, just use non-nude images.
How many sponsors provide them Patti? I don't see a lot of sponsors excited about releasing unredacted ID's to affiliates.Quote:
Originally Posted by basschick
I truly doubt there is a single secondary producer that is completely compliant... unless they only have a few sites.
C'mon! Don't tell me that you have a database that has every single url of every depiction of your hundreds of models on hundreds of sites/galleries! That would take years to accomplish. And no one has ever shown me a script/program that can accomplish this task yet.
I'm sorry but I don't think people are being honest about their compliance. Sure, I believe that many primary producers are compliant with the old regs. But I seriously doubt that most are truly compliant with the new regs.
don't look at me - i removed every nude picture we had on june 22, 2005. but honestly a bunch of sponsors have been willing to give me i.d.s. i'm not sure if it's their policy or it's because they know me.
Hehe, I know. I guess my question shouldn't have directed at you. You're the exception. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by basschick
But I'm just trying to understand what I'm hearing from everyone. I just don't buy it that every secondary producer is compliant because I don't think it's even possible.
I agree completely. I do not believe that anyone can be 100% compliant with the law the way it is written! If you have a site that uses frames or is otherwise not completely static, maintaining a list of EVERY URL for EVERY IMAGE is impossible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xstr8guy
However, I do not believe anyone is going to jail because their 2257 records do not include every URL or the other asinine requirements. If we look to the Girls Gone Wild prosecution, we see a producer that didn't have complete records and allegedly had underage performers yet walked away with probation and a not-so hefty fine. That does not mean ALL prosecutions would follow that precedent but it certainly sets a standard by which all others will be judged.
Keeping records of every model that appears on the website satisfies the bulk of the intent of the law. If I were making the prosecution decision, I certainly would not waste time on a producer that had copies of IDs for every model, evidence that all models were 18 at the time of the shooting, but failed to comply with the "every URL ever used" technicality.
I cannot believe that a non-US webmaster with non-US domainnames, non-US hosting and non-US content do have to comply if he is selling to US citizens. Then we should also comply with chinese laws, arabian laws and so on.
Let's translate the "cyberworld" to the "real world": An American tourist comes to Amsterdam (there are thousands of them right now, because of the so-called international canabisweek). He goes to a "coffeeshop" to buy some joints. Nothing illegal about that in Holland as you all know. Just because the customer is a US citizen, the coffeeshop owner should comply to US regulations and should not sell the joints ? This is not realistic.
US regulations do not count for those who do not live / host in the US. The FBI is not authorised to go after the webmasters who are in this (ideal) situation.
Well, thank you Chad! That was refreshing to hear a dose of reality. Now if I could just get some ID's from World Wide Content, I could get a night's sleep. Lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by chadknowslaw
Oh... and do I REALLY need to worry about explicit banners and galleries that use sponsor content?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pocoloco78
That is not the same.
It is perfectly legal for a US citizen to travel to Amsterdam, smoke a joint and rent a prostitute.
It NOT legal for someone in Amsterdam to ship that same joint to a guy in Mobile, Alabama.
The important location is where the product is delivered, not where it came from, so a webmaster in Amsterdam with servers in Amsterdam does not need to comply with US law until he delivers products to a consumer in the US. Once that webmaster allows his product to be delivered to a US consumer, he is obligated to comply with US law or else decline delivery. If you want to take advantage of a particular market, you must comply with the laws that apply to sale in that market.
The laws of the US apply to anyone that sells to US consumers that are located in the US. The laws of any jurisdiction apply to goods and services delivered to that location; that is not just some US anomaly. In your Amsterdam scenario, the goods are delivered within a jurisdiction where it is legal to do so, but would land you in jail if you delivered those goods to the same consumer on US soil.
If and only if they could get an extridition. If your models are not kids, i find it hardly unlikely that they would go for extriditon, and in case, they would need juridistiction to inspect in your country, which they dont actually have. And also why bother? Why spend the money involved to inpsect on foriegn soil, extradite and then prosecute?
That said, you should have model ids anyway. Anyone can accuse you of cp, even YOUR OWN LOCAL POLICE FORCE!
didn't expect that much response..i guess i should have included some other facts....
1) I am Canadian
2) Reside in Canada
3) site is hosted in NYC
4) i am complient on all videos etc
So was just inquiring - does it make a diff at this point if i move my site outside usa.
and no - no intentions of going non-2257 complient - i would just rather leave my options open so i can grow business then have it hampered by the us govt.
Will wait until you get another Dem president before i consider moving it back! :)
:luke: