Cock only shots..where do they fall under 2257 ?

[tombarr]

I would think they would have to be matched up to the model and the associated model ID just like any other photograph.

[realtoughbear]

I would think they would have to be matched up to the model and the associated model ID just like any other photograph.

Yes, that is true. That is also what makes it hard for those doing free sites with "mixed" sets in their sites.

[gaybucks_chip]

Under 2257, a dick-only shot, if the guy isn't touching his dick, would probably be exempt, since in the correspondence between Justice and FSC, the Justice attorney stipulated that an erection only would not be explicit, and therefore not subject to 2257.

However, 4472 appears to make mere nudity subject to regulation. So content produced or published (not sure which) after the date at which 4472 goes into effect will most likely be subject to 2257 recordkeeping requirements.

[collegeboyslive]

I would think they would have to be matched up to the model and the associated model ID just like any other photograph.

LOL i just had a vision of an FBI agent holding a pic of the models ID and a pic of the dick shot going " How do i KNOW this is really his cock?"

[realtoughbear]

However, 4472 appears to make mere nudity subject to regulation. So content produced or published (not sure which) after the date at which 4472 goes into effect will most likely be subject to 2257 recordkeeping requirements.

This is assuming you are taking the stance that a few of the big lawyers are saying in that it applies to content after that date. It is not specifically stated in 4472 that that is in fact the case.

[Squirt]

My only input is DOCUMENT ALL OF THE CONTENT ON YOUR ADULT SITE :french:

[gaybucks_chip]

This is assuming you are taking the stance that a few of the big lawyers are saying in that it applies to content after that date. It is not specifically stated in 4472 that that is in fact the case.

My understanding is that one cannot enact a law that requires specific actions *before* the law was passed, so if that's true, it's unlikely that Justice would try to enforce the regulations on content that was "published" before the law took effect.

The catch is what "published" means... and there was a lot of discussion about that on one of the legal panels a year or so ago when the new 2257 regs were being discussed.

However, if you're being conservative, it's wise to assume that all content, regardless of publication date, should be compliant until the justice department indicates otherwise.

[basschick]

i think it would be extremely easy for law enforcement or a judge - or most people - to consider a hard cock a lascivious exhibition of genitals. i'd say yes, 2257 applies. a soft cock could be different but i wouldn't count on it. remember, any law is subject to interpretation.

[DEVELISH]

on this site: how is he going to get 2257 info? people email them pics and text

http://www.abadboy.com/amateur/index.htm

Is a picpost 2257 / 4472 required, too?