Digital 2257 Records Keeping Help

[Lee]

Okay currently, this is how *we* are handling our 2257 records as required by these new regulations, i figured some of you may also be interested in the method we're using to keep our digital records:

We presently have EVERY set of content we own on a portable hard drive, each set has its own thumb and docs folder for example:

/set/
/set/thumbs/
/set/docs/

In the top level /set/ folder, we have the full images, in the /set/thumbs/ folder we have the thumbnailed images, in the /set/docs/ folder we have the scans provided by the content providers for each set.

If the content provider gave us hardcopy (read as paper) docs, we scanned them and placed the scanned image files in the /set/docs/ folder for each set that this needed to be done to.

So far as having a label for each URL we are presently not doing that.

The reason we arent doing that is because the sites that use the 'content' are all dynamically generated, meaning, the content is only 'loaded' in to the .php pages when a surfer hits the page, therefore, no individual url lists are required as set out in the new 2257 regs here:

The Department understands that it would not be possible to track or maintain records of dynamically generated URLs.

Therefore, each entry URL that the content is accessible on, (the domain root) is more than adequate for 2257 records under these new regs.

Instead, we have a list of all our root domain urls which is loaded in to the top level on the drive E:\content\

This in essence means, that every set/image/depiction below E:\content\ has a list of URLs associated with it

In addition, all content that we are currently using resides in its own root directory on the server, outside any domain, it is also aliased across each and every domain that we want to use the said image content on, therefore, making it easy for us to know that, for example:

http://www.domain.com/content/ is where the content resides on ANY domain name that we presently own or, that we could own in the future.

Now, it should also be mentioned, this is what WE have been advised is acceptable, ultimately, nothing is going to be defiitively 'acceptable' until a test case hits the courts.

Regards,

Lee

[JustMe]

Greetings:

From my understanding, your current setup isn't in compliance Lee. I'm not sure who your attorney is, but to be honest, mine laughed when I showed him a similar post on another board. I think a lot of us would feel a bit more at ease if such a simple setup complied with the new regs.

Where's your directory with all of your IDs organized by model's real last name? Where's your directory organized by each of the model's aliases? Each with a copy of the depiction (yes, you are required to keep multiple copies of the depiction, one under each). Where's the cross referencing between them all?

Organizing the docs under these new regs is a logistical nightmare, and I honestly don't think it's possible to comply without a structured database being set up.

:uhoh:

[Matt 26z]

(yes, you are required to keep multiple copies of the depiction, one under each).

The model info can just go into a database also containing the model's content locations.

[Matt 26z]

Everything has to be searchable and cross referenced. Here's a loose example I just did. There could other approaches.

DATABASE: 2257

Table 1: Model ID info

Fields: Model number | Real first | Real Last | etc...
1 : Model1 | Jane | Doe


Table 2: Content locations

Fields: Model1 | Model2 | Model3 | etc...
1 : C:\2257\Model1\Set1\photo1.jpg
2 : C:\2257\Model1\Set1\photo2.jpg
3 : C:\2257\Model1\Set1\photo3.jpg


Table 3: Scanned ID locations

Fields: Model number | ID location
1 : Model 1 | C:\2257\Model1\ID\1.jpg