2257 for profile / blog / forum sites?

[Reflexion]

Just curious... total newbie to all of this... how does one handle 2257 compliance when it comes to sites where members can freely create profiles (including nude images of themselves if they desire), maintain a blog, post in forums, etc.. From what I understand, as long as they aren't masterbating or engaged in sex in the pictures they post of themselves, I'm OK... what about guys who are hard? I dunno... this whole 2257 mess is really confusing. It's a shame I don't have enough start up money to invest in a good attorney...

[basschick]

hopefully someone here can answer your question however i have one piece of advice.

since you can spend 5 or more years in jail if what you're told here is wrong, maybe you shouldn't allow people to post pictures in your blog till you can afford a lawyer.

and as far as sexually explicit, anything "lewd" can be considered sexually explicit by the right (or is that wrong?) judge. so masturbation definitely is sexually explicit, and an erection is very iffy territory.

[gaybucks_chip]

This issue is a moving target, and if you ask 4 different adult industry attorneys, you'll likely get 4 somewhat different answers.

I think most all of the attorneys will agree that nudity alone (a guy just standing, arms at sides, with limp dick) doesn't constitute "sexually explicit content" and is therefore exempt from 2257.

Where it's more murky is if the same guy has an erection. The justice department attorney arguing the 2257 issues sent a letter to the free speech coalition saying that a picture of a man with an erect penis that he is not touching would not be sexually explicit; however, there is some disagreement as to whether the justice dept. attorney writing the letter was empowered to make that determination. Many studios and websites are not providing any photos or ads with erections to affiliates or other secondary producers because of concerns over this interpretation.

Finally, if the person is touching his dick or balls (or presumably ass), or if someone else is, then the picture would be considered sexually explicit according to most, if not all, interpretations.

So... to comply with the law, you *must* have a copy of an ID on file for any picture where a person is touching himself or someone else's genitals. You may or may not need the ID on file if the guy has an erection but isn't touching himself, and you almost certainly don't need ID if it's just a naked guy with a limp dick.

Standard disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer; objects in mirror are closer than they appear; testing done under laboratory conditions, your mileage may vary.