You Know It Really Is Interesting - US 2257 Vs. HR 4472

[Lee]

Checking through my server stats on http://www.us2257.com and http://www.hr4472.com there is still a lot more interest on 2257 related search terms in relation to traffic flow than there is on HR4472.

Do you think webmasters actually realize these are two totally seperate issues right now or do they still beleive that it is only 2257 we need to be concerned with?

Regards,

Lee

[Lykos]

What is this HR 4472 all about?In short notes?

[gaybucks_chip]

4472 is really sort of 2257a, the new requirements, most of which deal with shooting down the loopholes created by the Sundance decision (that secondary producers don't have to keep records)

I think that very few people really take the time to read the regs and even fewer really understand them. I've read them a dozen times and there's still stuff that I don't understand... though I'm not a lawyer so I at least have an excuse

I think there is a fair amount of "head in the sand" on the issues.

[Xstr8guy]

I don't think most secondary producers will take any of the new regs seriously until the feds start inspecting them. Right now, the only inspections I'm aware of have been producers of DVDs. No web-only content sites or secondary-only producers have been inspected, right?

[webmario]

Lee, as a programme owner, when the law come in full effect for secondary producers ( afiliate), will you give the info on model along promo material?
And do you think that the affiliate format will eventualy died? I,m base in canada, and here it will be illigal for me to obtain those info as I understand canadian law (internet privacy). All those regs. are really confusing.

[Lykos]

It's very hard acctually to nderstand the 2257 correct,i read it numbers of time and still have some things which i really can't understand
and this HR 4472 now really confused me,heh

[gaybucks_chip]

Since redacted IDs are specifically mentioned as allowable under the revised regs, I suspect some programs will provide that information to affiliates.

I don't know EU or Canadian privacy laws, but I wonder if providing that information to affiliates would be OK if the release the model signs specifically grants permission for the info to be provided? We added that disclosure (that we could, if we choose to do so, release model ID info to affiliates) to our releases several years ago just in case we came upon a situation where we were required to disclose that information.

[basschick]

75% of the websites i see completely ignore 2257's june 2005 changes, and more than half the webmasters i talk with don't understand the law and don't bother to find out more about it. when i ask some webmasters "what are you doing about 4472?", most don't know what it is, although some remember seeing it posted on boards :eek:

[shackzinc]

75% of the websites i see completely ignore 2257's june 2005 changes, and more than half the webmasters i talk with don't understand the law and don't bother to find out more about it. when i ask some webmasters "what are you doing about 4472?", most don't know what it is, although some remember seeing it posted on boards :eek:

We're prepared to implement the regs as proposed, as much as they suck; also prepared to work with our affiliates to make sure they are in compliance as well.