Secondary producers do have to keep records:

(From page 38035)

Finally, the Act confirmed that the statute applies to secondary
producers as currently (and previously) defined in the regulations.
Specifically, the Act defines any of the following activities as
``produces'' for purposes of section 2257:

(i) Actually filming, videotaping, photographing, creating a
picture, digital image, or digitally- or computer-manipulated image
of an actual human being;
(ii) Digitizing an image, of a visual depiction of sexually
explicit conduct; or, assembling, manufacturing, publishing,
duplicating, reproducing, or reissuing a book, magazine, periodical,
film, videotape, digital image, or picture, or other matter intended
for commercial distribution, that contains a visual depiction of
sexually explicit conduct; or
(iii) Inserting on a computer site or service a digital image
of, or otherwise managing the sexually explicit content, of a
computer site or service that contains a visual depiction of,
sexually explicit conduct * * *.

They haven't included in the published changes all of the original act, but the language was there in the original act as above.

One thing I haven't heard anyone comment on yet: apparently it is no longer sufficient to simply place a link on the bottom of the entry page to the site, or even a link on the bottom of each page within the site. From my read, the new requirement is that every single page of a site displaying regulated content must contain a full 2257 notice as required in the regs, rather than a link to a page that displays the notice.

For models and others who use their home address as their records location, this will make for even less privacy, as instead of having to click a link that most people won't bother with, the address information will be clearly listed at the bottom of every page of a site.

I will say that whomever wrote these regulations could actually write decent English, unlike the person that wrote the previous set.

And they have added at least a couple of "reasonable person" clarifications; they have clarified that webcam shows do not have to store the entirety of each performance, only a snippet and IDs can be redacted, and it appears that one can republish older content exempt from regulation without triggering 2257 recordkeeping.

There are a few other things I read which said to me "Wow, somebody actually thought about this and tried to be reasonable."

Now... that said, there are some serious problems:

- Unequal treatment under the law; Hollywood producers are exempt from the requirements to maintain records for "simulated sex" that adult (and indy film) producers are required to keep

- Serious free speech restrictions by requiring that pretty much all nudity (and simulated sex acts that may not even have nudity) is now regulated.

and probably more issues. But this one, on the face of it, will be harder to overturn because somebody has paid attention and at least given lip service to making it less burdensome than the previous changes.