Well I don't get all this at all. Given how litigeous people are these days, I'd say that while the requirements are that anyone informed of content that might be in violation of certain laws, would first ascertain if the complaint has any foundation before hitting the kill switch. If they don't, they get fried for wrongful termination.

It is no different than if I wrote to any webmaster and said, hey that pic you got on so & so page looks awfully young. Do you immediately go and pull the picture from your gallery? Or do you go and check your documents first? Then if you still are in doubt you go to the supplier to verify the id that came with it... but I doubt if 95% or more of webmasters would pull the picture first.

Now if its a government agency, or some well established authority group, perhaps I'd pull the pic, or freeze the account, but come on folks... this is a business and no ISP can monitor every single image on every single account, hell even the police rely on the public to inform them of illegal activities and they don't always respond instantly. So why would you expect an ISP to do what no one else does?

I think we all have a responsibility to police our sites, and inform the powers that be when we find something not kosher. But we can't expect 'instant justice' without knowing all facts.

Myself, I am not good at determining ages. I asked our paperboy last week why the paper was late as there wasn't school. He was pretty pissed cause he was 20... so just because one or two have an 'opinion' of age, until proof is provided or those giving the 'opinion' are authorities on the matter, I'd say that how things are now for ISPs is the right way to handle it.

just my two cents
Ian