2257 - move to another country?

[EonFilms_Rocky]

Am I the one who has to point out the 500 lb gorilla in the room?

Why do you want to escape 2257 in the first place???

It's not like this was just sprung on us... this has been around for 2 years now. You should already be compliant instead of trying to skip out...

My 2 cents... or maybe I am just uninformed.

[stickyd]

is it true that if one moves one's site/content to another country - say Australia - that it would not have to be 2257 complient?

:gossip:

Yes, it's true, as long as you move there with it!

[basschick]

it may not be true unless you also give up your citizenship.

Yes, it's true, as long as you move there with it!

[TropixxxStudios]

(Edited for brevity)

I feel far too often in the conversations that I've been seeing take place on various boards, that FBI Agents are made out to be "evil" or "the enemy". I think one of the things we as an industry need to do is separate the Career Law Enforcement Agents of the FBI from the politically appointed offices (such as Attorney General).

As a whole, I can say without a doubt, the agents that I came in contact with were some of the most dedicated, devoted, patriotic, self sacrificing individuals that I've ever met in my life. They are intelligent, highly trained, and consummate professionals.

To be honest, I'm willing to bet most agents involved with these "inspections" hate them just as much as we do. I believe there's something very unamerican feeling about the entire inspection process, and I also believe that many of these agents feel that way as well. We're forced to keep the records and make them available, and they're forced to inspect them.

In total agreement! (Although I did meet one asshole Secret Service Officer a while back at a anti-bush rally...but it could have just been the situation.)

I have NO problem with 2257 Record Keeping. The ONLY thing that bothers me is that those of us who are carefull about only hiring models that are over 18 have to do so much work...whereas I doubt that the people that are making child porn keep any records. It seems unfair.

As far as turning the AC off...well, I will wait and see what atitude they have if they come to inspect me. I know where the fuse is for the AC if needed. :gaydays:

I keep all my files on a computer database that I can just burn a copy and have them out of my place in under 5 minutes. With all the cross indexing needed, I don't see how it could be done on paper...and we only have about 50 DVD's.

[DEVELISH]

is it true that if one moves one's site/content to another country - say Australia - that it would not have to be 2257 complient?

:gossip:

Hi,

its true that if you don't fall under the laws of the USofA you are not required to have the 2257 information on hand... you should have however the information needet by the country you are in.

Oh... and some payment processors (ccBill, Verotel and maybe Epoch) require you to have 2257 links and information on hand even if you have another countries citizenship and physically reside in that country.

:develish:

[hdkbill]

Patti, Chad and John Paul,

All of your points are very well taken and I certainly understand where you are coming from.

I'm sure that these Agents hate doing these inspections as much as we hate we threat of having them done. If they are truly dedicated agents they know damned well that all of this is politically motivated and achieves absolutely NOTHING against the war on Child Pornography, and, in fact, detracts from it. Everything I have heard about the inspection which have been conducted is that the Agents were polite and professional in each case. As I intend to be if they come and pay us a visit.

However, that being said, if I were to allow them to access my computer that has the 2257 database and then they walk out the door with a complete copy of those records, I have no idea in whose political hands they may end up. It just ain't going to happen.

As to where my records are stored, in an un-air conditioned warehouse, well, the warehouse simply doesn't have air-conditioning, only the front part of our offices do, and I don't have the space in the front offices for the number of filing cabinets required because of all of the cross referencing required under this stupid law. The warehouse has an evaporative cooler, or swamp cooler for those of you who knows what that it. I can't run it because of the amount of moisture it puts into the air causing the paper to get damp.

Are my records 100% accurate? Probably not only because I think it is physically impossible to comply with the standard as written. But they are as accurate as they can possibly be. As John-Paul said, with ever changing dynamic url's and in certain cases, dozens of websites changing HOURLY, how could they EVER be 100% accurate. You may be compliant one hour, and out of compliance the next hour.

For that reason, and not necessarily to make the Agents uncomfortable or grumpy or miserable, I am never going grant them access to the computer. or make their job easy.

I hate that the Agents have to be put into such a position, but if enough of them complain enough about this waste of time, perhaps some things will change on the political scene where this waste of agents time, our time and tax payer dollars is concerned.

Bill

[chadknowslaw]

Yes, it's true, as long as you move there with it!

No, it is NOT true.

It is ONLY true IF you move AND IF YOU DO NOT SELL IN THE UNITED STATES MARKET


The likelihood of being inspected approaches zero for a truly offshore company but the law does apply even to non-residents if they sell to US residents.

Find one person who is licensed to practice law [ not someone who has watched 3 episodes of Boston Legal and regularly reads GFY] that agrees that if you are entirely outside of the US and selling to US residents that you do not need to comply with US laws regarding the sale of that product.

If it were so easy to shun US law for non-residents, then why have so many gambling companies that are ENTIRELY offshore closed their sites to US residents? Companies with literally tens of millions of dollars in annual US-sourced revenue and the financial ability to retain the best legal advice either do not agree with you or else somehow have completely missed the magical legal loophole you believe exists!

[GaySearch4Sex]

No, it is NOT true.

It is ONLY true IF you move AND IF YOU DO NOT SELL IN THE UNITED STATES MARKET


The likelihood of being inspected approaches zero for a truly offshore company but the law does apply even to non-residents if they sell to US residents.

in your opinion, when you say "sell" does that include affiliate promoters who use free or paid content to generate sales from another entity? I.E. Free Sites, Blogs, TGPs, etc..

I know the FBI hasnt been going after those people, but it still seems like murky water to me.... , or maybe its a dumb question

[chadknowslaw]

in your opinion, when you say "sell" does that include affiliate promoters who use free or paid content to generate sales from another entity? I.E. Free Sites, Blogs, TGPs, etc..

I know the FBI hasnt been going after those people, but it still seems like murky water to me.... , or maybe its a dumb question

The only dumb question is the question that is not asked!

The Department of Justice will be of the opinion that you are subject to 2257 if you allow US residents to view your site, whether you are charging them or not.

So, if you have a blog with pics on it, you would be required to comply with 2257. The easiest way to do that would be to only put up images that are exempt from 2257, such as non-nudes. Then you can link to the paysite, earn money from promoting that site, and not have any 2257 obligations.

[Xstr8guy]

Am I the one who has to point out the 500 lb gorilla in the room?

Why do you want to escape 2257 in the first place???

It's not like this was just sprung on us... this has been around for 2 years now. You should already be compliant instead of trying to skip out...

My 2 cents... or maybe I am just uninformed.

I have a good answer for that question.

The secondary producer requirements are a lot harder to comply with than primary producer requirements. Webmasters with TGP's, Blogs, or any sites that uses sponsor content has virtually no way to gather ID's for models.

Not everyone is a primary producer.

[chadknowslaw]

Not everyone is a primary producer.

As of July 27, 2006, everyone that puts an image on a website IS a primary producer.

To be precise, Congress did away with the "primary vs. secondary" and basically defined everybody as a "producer". How long that will hold up against judicial scrutiny has yet to be determined. I have yet to see a challenge to that language by the FSC or anyone else, despite its ominous ramifications for every webmaster that puts a nudie pic up on a website.

[Xstr8guy]

As of July 27, 2006, everyone that puts an image on a website IS a primary producer.

To be precise, Congress did away with the "primary vs. secondary" and basically defined everybody as a "producer". How long that will hold up against judicial scrutiny has yet to be determined. I have yet to see a challenge to that language by the FSC or anyone else, despite its ominous ramifications for every webmaster that puts a nudie pic up on a website.

Then every single explicit TGP and blog that uses sponsor content is illegal now.

[chadknowslaw]

Then every single explicit TGP and blog that uses sponsor content is illegal now.

Technically, yes.


Stupid, but yes.

[basschick]

not if they only use sponsor content that comes with full 2257 records and if they are willing to act as custodian for those records.

Then every single explicit TGP and blog that uses sponsor content is illegal now.

[chadknowslaw]

I am aware of 2257 software that can be maintained by the sponsor but in the event of inspection of an affiliate, the sponsor can provide the affiliate with a login and access code so that an inspector can review the records from the affiliate's place of business. This would not be 100% compliant because the 2257 records maintained by the sponsor would not include all the URLs where the images are found on the affiliate's website

The only way to be 100% compliant would be for the affiliate to maintain a complete set of records for all images on their site, and list themselves as custodian. Or, just use non-nude images.