Interesting read..Attorney's response letter!

[Slade]

Posted on another board..interesting read:
------------------------------------------

THE LAW OFFICE OF
JEFFREY J. DOUGLAS
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

TELEPHONE 1717 FOURTH STREET, THIRD FLOOR TELECOPIER
(310) 576-3411 SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA 90401-3319 (310) 576-3408

June 10, 2005


Re: Secondary Producer Records Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2257

To Whom It May Concern:

I represent OC Cash Media. We received your inquiry concerning copies of records for secondary producers. I am very familiar with 18 U.S.C. § 2257 in my capacities as a First Amendment and criminal defense practitioner, the Chairman Emeritus of the First Amendment Lawyers Association and the Chair of the Board of the industry’s trade association, the Free Speech Coalition. I write this letter exclusively in my capacity as OC Cash Media’s attorney

Despite General Gonzalez’ efforts at reviving the concept of “secondary producers” in the most recent version of regulations in support of 18 U.S.C. § 2257, the concept is not supported by the statute itself. The only case addressing the issue, Sundance Assocs. Inc. v. Reno, 139 F.3d 804, 807 (10th Cir.1998), held that the “secondary producer” requirements of the regulations to be unconstitutional. We rely on that holding, and further decline to violate the privacy of the performing artists by disseminating private data when not required to do so by law.

If you have any questions regarding this policy, please do not hesitate to call, or have your attorney do so.


Sincerely,

The Law Office of
Jeffrey J. Douglas

By: Jeffrey J. Douglas


cc: OC Cash Media

[basschick]

he gave pretty much the same letter to adultlounge. does california even acknowledge sundance vs reno? anyway, here's the letter:

THE LAW OFFICE OF
JEFFREY J. DOUGLAS

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
1717 FOURTH STREET, THIRD FLOOR
SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA 90401-3319
TELEPHONE (310) 576-3411
TELECOPIER (310) 576-3408


June 20, 2005


Re: Secondary Producer Records Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2257

To Whom It May Concern:

I represent Adultlounge.com. We received your inquiry concerning copies of records for secondary producers. I am very familiar with 18 U.S.C. § 2257 in my capacities as a First Amendment and criminal defense practitioner, the Chairman Emeritus of the First Amendment Lawyers Association and the Chair of the Board of the industry’s trade association, the Free Speech Coalition. I write this letter exclusively in my capacity as Adultlounge.com’s attorney.

Despite General Gonzalez’ efforts at reviving the concept of “secondary producers” in the most recent version of regulations in support of 18 U.S.C. § 2257, the concept is not supported by the statute itself. The only case addressing the issue, Sundance Assocs. Inc. v. Reno, 139 F.3d 804, 807 (10th Cir.1998), held that the “secondary producer” requirements of the regulations to be unconstitutional. We rely on that holding, and further decline to violate the privacy of the performing artists by disseminating private data when not required to do so by law.

If you have any questions regarding this policy, please do not hesitate to call, or have your attorney do so.



Sincerely,

The Law Office of
Jeffrey J. Douglas

[Matt D]

Is that how you say, "Al, go fuck yourself!" in legalese?

[basschick]

i do believe it is **

i'd be pissed if i paid a premium priced attorney and got the same letter as someone else! besides, regardless of what he says, some webmasters can get in serious trouble. sundance vs reno isn't accepted in most states.