2257 problems already starting

Just got an email from sitepass:

Quote:

---

...Everything from Visa regulations on processing transactions to the latest anticipated 2257 changes have created an environment that we must adapt to in order to continue to prosper and bring webmasters a wide range of programs. That being said, it is to my displeasure that I must inform all of our webmasters that as of September 1st, 2004, SitePass will be closing down for good.

---

I never used them but I wonder if its an indication of things to come!

cheers,
Luke

It may just be, Luke. I'm curious to see how this plays out with other companies.

Gary-Alan

Any Canadians have opinions on 2257? its like alot of things, its a grey area because I do my business in the usa and use a server hosted in the usa but I am not incorporated in the usa. So would I have to comply with any of the us laws?

People often toss out "dont try to cross the border". I figure I would never let it get that far. You get a warning, you shut everything down. In my case being Canadian I cant imagine them picking on me first. There would be a zillion Americans to pick on.

Any thoughts?

anyone who doesnt wanna keep up with their 2257 stuff is just lazy. im a webmaster, a photographer, and i run a program. i have paper files for every model we've bought or shot. i have copies of their IDs and model release, i can tell u what url any given pic is on and match it up with the model's paper file. i dont see why so many people are freaking out. if u havent been keeping good records, its your own fault.

that said, it IS a pain in the ass because now those who buy content, not shoot it, must list their own address & such on their website. working from home, that becomes an issue.

anyway... 2257 is lame because it doesnt accomplish shit. if they really wanna get rid of cp, go after it. dont just punish us.

The problem is that some of us have been in the business going on 10 years. Hard to believe. I was not quite that long but I was a paysite owner and had my own server full of sites long before this became an issue. I cant even remember if there was a vague restriction other then when you bought content you should go with reputable companies that promised to keep the model info even if they go out of business. Yes we had to give domain names to the content people but from what I understood, that was so they knew who they sold it too and could track down anyone stealing content.

Calling me lazy is the stupidest thing I have ever heard. I know of companies with 20 times the servers I have and they do not have every model categorized, I can assure you of that.

I have every licence and could spend/pay someone 6000 hours tracking down every webpage I own and recording the model used OR I could just hit the delete key and spend those hours making fresh sites.

I wonder how this will effect the DVD business. There is some law that states that movies made before a certin date do not need to have model releases or ids. I think the date was sometime in 97, but I am not sure.

Does this also apply for sites?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Dawgy
i have paper files for every model we've bought or shot. i have copies of their IDs and model release, i can tell u what url any given pic is on and match it up with the model's paper file.

---

What about people you've sold images to for content on their sites and they're using it for TGP gallery posts on a variety of their own domain names?

And cropped thumbnail images uploaded to the TGPs themselves?

Explicit promo material such as banners and distributed free content?

It's definitely good that you're up on current 2257, but as it will exist come a few weeks from now, the rules will be entirely different and involve a whole new level of records keeping.
Every URL of every individual image and it's locations online - wherever they may be and posted by whomever - crossreferenced with the information you already had on file for the old and soon to be outdated 2257.

Damn that sucks although im sure if Hi-Rise have closed it was for good reason perhaps there is more to this 2257 stuff than we are already aware of legally?

Regards,

Lee

maybe we all should stop being a $0.02 cent lawyer and ask someone that really is a adult company lawyer?

Cause like Lee said, it large companeis are closing because of it, maybe there is something that we're missing.

Andrew that is what this thread is about....to hear from anyone that has already talked to a lawyer. We are hashing out the things we might need to think about... everyone then determines their risk.

You go first Andrew... talk to your lawyer and tell us? :goofy:

Sus,

The problem with that is that each lawyer is going to interpret things on an individual basis.

Because there have not been any convictions of challenges to this new law as yet there is nothing definate that lawyers can go by only 'supposition'.

Basschick had a thead a couple of days ago though were she let us know what her lawyer had told her, do a search for '2257' and you will find it :)

Regards,

Lee

We spoke with our lawyers last week, and they are not concerned with these new proposed changes.

How hard is it to keep records of the models used on your sites? If you have this info and your models are in fact over 18, what's the problem?

I'd be more concerned about being accused of selling/transporting obscene materials to anyone like in that backasswards state Alabama.

Jim

Correct me if I am wrong, which is very likely, but it sounds to me like everyone here is a primary producer of the material?

If so, then you have had years to get the hang of what to keep, what to file, how to file, etc...

The issue to me is that now folks like me who are secondary producers also have to have that info on hand plus their own information being posted. So while all you guys have been doing this paperwork for some time, us secondary shmoes have only had to put up a link and that was it... now all that could change when the new regs come into play...

And too, if you are producers wasn't the old criteria being that material produced prior to 1995 was exempt but which has now been changed to 1990? So do you have all the info from 1990 to 1995?

All I know is my lawyer up here in Canuck land merely chuckled and said he might move south just to get a piece of the legal pie... but for me, he said don't sweat it, the producers and paysites who I use will provide what their lawyers tell them to and for me to just put it in a box and keep on writing...

So much for legal advice.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by susanna Any Canadians have opinions on 2257? its like alot of things, its a grey area because I do my business in the usa and use a server hosted in the usa but I am not incorporated in the usa. So would I have to comply with any of the us laws?

---

Susanna,

I'm in Canada and what I'm hearing from our legal people that in spite of being the closet neighbour to the U.S., in spite of sharing the longest unprotected border on the planet, and in spite of being their biggest trading partner, Canadians are still considered "foreigners" and as foreigners the only identification that will be accepted in 2257 documents is a passport. So if the models you want to shoot only have a birth certificate or driver's license, you're SOL.

I think your location doesn't matter so much in terms of following the laws. I mean you could choose to say, I live in Canada F-U, but I think the problem comes into play that you'll end up having the credit card or billing companies saying, "We don't care where you living, if you want billing, you need to follow these rules." Otherwise, everyone would just move their servers to Malaysia and continue.

You also have to understand that a lot of this stuff, as far as I see it, is falling under the Patriot Act, which came about after 9/11, which essentially says: "We are IT, you will do what we say or you won't be allowed to do business with our citizens. Period. End of discussion."

Just my .02

Dzinerbear

Quote:

---

Every URL of every individual image and it's locations online - wherever they may be and posted by whomever - crossreferenced with the information you already had on file for the old and soon to be outdated 2257.

---

This is impossible!!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by nicedreams
We spoke with our lawyers last week, and they are not concerned with these new proposed changes.

How hard is it to keep records of the models used on your sites? If you have this info and your models are in fact over 18, what's the problem?

I'd be more concerned about being accused of selling/transporting obscene materials to anyone like in that backasswards state Alabama.

Jim

---

I'm more concerned that now I'm a secondary producer and for every image on every site -- every banner included -- I need to have a model ID and list my home address where the records are kept.

If you have been in business as a secondary producer for a few years and have been following current 2257 regs, you have a folder or an online file that you keep that lists out all your content sources as being the record keeper. And you are 100% 257 compliant!

Now, to remain legal you have to:
- go out and get all those ID records from your content suppliers, even those that are no longer in business!
- keep all these records organised and in a location that is fully accessible without warning during normal business hours.
- make & maintain a log of where each set of content is displayed (every specific page, not just every URL)
- go back and change every page on every domain that has sexually explicit content and put up 2257 info links (yes there is a grandfather clause but there is much debate on what this actually means so to be safe you better be changing all your old pages too!)
- ensure all models have compliant documentation, and that means US government issued or a passport that can be verified by US officials
- publicly list your business address on the internet for all freaks to freely access
- somehow get docos on previously excluded years of content (now back to 1990)
- dispose of thousands of dollars worth of content that was legal, licensed content but that can no longer comply with the above points

But don't worry, you will have 30 days after the passing of the new regs to comply :wtf:


cheers,
Luke

I think what the DOJ is trying to do is shut down as many websites as possible. Then they’ll have fewer targets. They are turning up the 2257 heat for just that reason.

I foresee OSHA stepping in soon. Performers will need to be licensed through a centralized database. Each producer will have to have models registered and approved before releasing content.

Big Brother, dudes!