Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Sex sites win reprieve from new federal rules

  1. #1
    God/dess Deogol's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,493
    Thanks
    120
    Thanked 50 Times in 35 Posts

    Default Sex sites win reprieve from new federal rules

    Have you put your money where your mouth is?



    Most Internet sex sites won't immediately have to follow expanded federal record-keeping standards, thanks to an 11th-hour deal with the U.S. government.

    The , an adult-entertainment trade group, and the U.S. Department of Justice reached an agreement Thursday afternoon that the government will not begin enforcing the regulations, which expand existing rules to cover online material, until Sept. 7. The expanded regulations had been scheduled to take effect June 23.

  2. #2
    Senior Member grinew127's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2005
    Posts
    186
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Sex sites win reprieve from new federal rules

    I suppose that those wonderful people who I used to slave for are now ecstatic. Oh, well, it just figures.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Ana_217's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    76
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Sex sites win reprieve from new federal rules

    And friends, somewhere in Washington enshrined in some little folder, is a
    study in black and white of my fingerprints. And the only reason I'm
    singing you this song now is cause you may know somebody in a similar
    situation, or you may be in a similar situation, and if your in a
    situation like that there's only one thing you can do and that's walk into
    the shrink wherever you are ,just walk in say "Shrink, You can get
    anything you want, at Alice's restaurant.". And walk out. You know, if
    one person, just one person does it they may think he's really sick and
    they won't take him. And if two people, two people do it, in harmony,
    they may think they're both faggots and they won't take either of them.
    And three people do it, three, can you imagine, three people walking in
    singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out. They may think it's an
    organization. And can you, can you imagine fifty people a day,I said
    fifty people a day walking in singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and
    walking out. And friends they may thinks it's a movement.

    And that's what it is , the Alice's Restaurant Anti-Massacre Movement, and
    all you got to do to join is sing it the next time it come's around on the
    guitar.

    You can get anything you want, at Alice's Restaurant

  4. #4
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Sex sites win reprieve from new federal rules

    First, the 'deal' made between the Free Speech Coalition and the USDOJ only applies to FSC member websites ... " In light of yesterday’s deal, struck between the FSC and the U.S. Department of Justice to put off inspections and prosecutions of FSC members under 18 U.S.C. §2257 regulations until 30 days after the organization’s preliminary injunction hearing – scheduled for August 8 and 9 – or a decision is reached on the injunction, the FSC has received a response for new members that they and their phones weren’t prepared for."


    Second, this is actually a two edged sword. It has allowed adult websites to yet another opportunity to become fully informed of the Section 2257 requirements, and it has allowed them yet more time to comply with those requirements. But it has also essentially let the air out of any potential 'impractical/unreasonable/impossible" lines of defense for adult webmasters because of this extra time, it has given the USDOJ three more months to analyze current website compliance and organize enforcement efforts, and it has laid down a specific date when enforcement is scheduled to begin in earnest.

    As to arguments in principle regarding gov't control of the internet, in the final analysis the US gov't paid for the construction of the US internet backbone (i.e. originally ArpaNet), and a coalition of gov'ts charters the 'gov't monopoly business' DNS companies like Network Solutions. For better or for worse, the internet's infrastructure is an entirely different situation from say AT&T's privately owned long distance phone lines. The US gov't as well as state and local gov'ts also have a widely supported power to control the distribution of material considered to be 'over the top' i.e. Section 2257's underage models appearing in adult pics/videos.

    Therefore, despite Arlo Guthrie-esque wishes to the contrary, IMHO there is NO chance whatsoever that the Section 2257 requirements are going to be lifted or changed in any major way ... and the FSC hearing is merely a delaying tactic which as I already said may actually make matters worse once the hearing is disposed of and the Section 2257 regulations are then enforced in earnest by a freshly pissed-off USDOJ.
    Last edited by Melonie; 06-25-2005 at 03:42 AM.

  5. #5
    Veteran Member stant's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    613
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Sex sites win reprieve from new federal rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie
    First, the 'deal' made between the Free Speech Coalition and the USDOJ only applies to FSC member websites ... .
    Those FSC boys are now being literally flooded with cash from new members. The warchest for funding first amendment legal battles in the future is overflowing.

    The Colorado DOJ office didn't have the game or the balls to take these guys on, and now they've given their opposition a winning lotto ticket. Nice.

    Quote Originally Posted by grin
    I suppose that those wonderful people who I used to slave for are now ecstatic. Oh, well, it just figures.
    I take you worked for some bad guys. They should be busted for whatever evils they did, not this nonsense. Do you also wish harm on the thousands of businesses and people trapped by this law you have never met? By dodging this bullet, the object of your ire has not escaped the consequences of any evil actions they may have done.

    This is a dishonest law. If the government wants to outlaw porn, so be it. Pass a law: No porn. Creating a regulation for record keeping that is virtually impossible to comply with is a bullshit backdoor for religious zealots to advance their agenda of repression.

    Quote Originally Posted by mel
    the US gov't paid for the construction of the US internet backbone (i.e. originally ArpaNet), and a coalition of gov'ts charters the 'gov't monopoly business' DNS companies like Network Solutions. For better or for worse, the internet's infrastructure is an entirely different situation from say AT&T's privately owned long distance phone lines.
    Not true since 1995. ARPANET was shut down in 1989 and replaced by NSFNet, which shut down in 1995. Virtually all of the net is now privately owned, and numerous private "backbone" networks exist, all of them interconnected:
    http://www.nthelp.com/maps.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_backbone
    The Internet does not, however, have any built-in means for fact checking content, even when such content is proclaimed with seeming authority.
    Last edited by stant; 06-25-2005 at 11:18 AM.

  6. #6
    Jay Zeno
    Guest

    Default Re: Sex sites win reprieve from new federal rules

    Quote Originally Posted by stant
    The Colorado DOJ office didn't have the game or the balls to take these guys on, and now they've given their opposition a winning lotto ticket. Nice.
    Just to avoid confusion, there is no such thing as a "Department of Justice" in the Colorado state government. The Department of Justice is a Federal agency. The subject group filed its action in U.S. District Court in the Federal Courthouse in Denver against the U.S. Department of Justice.

  7. #7
    Veteran Member stant's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    613
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Sex sites win reprieve from new federal rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay Zeno
    Just to avoid confusion, there is no such thing as a "Department of Justice" in the Colorado state government. The Department of Justice is a Federal agency. The subject group filed its action in U.S. District Court in the Federal Courthouse in Denver against the U.S. Department of Justice.
    Well, if you want to get all freaky on me, Jay, the action was filed in the United States District Court, District of Colorado. Federal Court venues are defined by district, not buildings.

    Yes the DOJ is a Federal Agency with offices in Colorado. Is the high school civics lesson really necessary?

    I'm sure the AUSA's in Denver are reasonably competant attorney's. I didn't mean to imply they were a bunch of backcountry dumbshits. Fact is most AUSA's are rarely challenged like this, and pad their records with easy victories. This won't be one of them.

  8. #8
    Jay Zeno
    Guest

    Default Re: Sex sites win reprieve from new federal rules

    Naw, I don't wanna get freaky, stant. I knew what you were saying - I just didn't want a casual reader to infer that the Colorado state government was involved. It was an amplification, that's all.

  9. #9
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Sex sites win reprieve from new federal rules

    Creating a regulation for record keeping that is virtually impossible to comply with is a bullshit backdoor for religious zealots to advance their agenda of repression.
    Again, a significant point is being ignored here. Large, well organized, well funded US porn producers and websites look upon Section 2257 with 'open arms' because, from a corporate profits standpoint, it works in their favor. The reason for this is because the compliance requirements are a 'small potatoes' matter for the huge porn producers and websites, but are an onerous burden for small independent competitors and foreign competitors. Therefore, from a standpoint of political strategy, Section 2257 is a win for the gov't and a win for US porn corporations at the same time. The only real losers are those small independent competitors (like myself!) and offshore competitors.

  10. #10
    Veteran Member stant's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    613
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Sex sites win reprieve from new federal rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie
    Again, a significant point is being ignored here. Large, well organized, well funded US porn producers and websites look upon Section 2257 with 'open arms' because, from a corporate profits standpoint, it works in their favor. .....
    The financial outcome may be mixed for large producers in the short term. Large portions of their intellectual (porn) property will be made unpublishable overnight. On the other hand this will create a new demand for documented content. Foreign producers will be hit very hard. And most importantly, don't forget this gives the Feds the right to do surprise inspections of even the largest producer. The Fed is insisting the records be kept at the production site. Producers cannot be happy about this.

    Who knows what this is really about. One thing is for damn sure, it aint about protecting children.

  11. #11
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Sex sites win reprieve from new federal rules

    Who knows what this is really about. One thing is for damn sure, it aint about protecting children.
    I'm firmly convinced that what this is REALLY about is a means of investigating the financial and personal lives of persons involved in the adult industry ... WITHOUT the need for probable cause or evidence of wrongdoing. IMHO the IRS is going to have an absolute 'field day' with Section 2257, since they will now be able to access the real names and addresses of persons involved in the adult video and adult internet industry with nothing more invested than a fax or a phone call to the Custodian of Records/Webmaster - from million dollar porn starlets all the way down to dancers appearing on strip club websites.

  12. #12
    God/dess threlayer's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Syracuse
    Posts
    5,921
    Thanks
    369
    Thanked 419 Times in 290 Posts
    My Mood
    Fine

    Default Re: Sex sites win reprieve from new federal rules

    Maybe I am wrong but 257 used to apply to producers of video material and it applies to producers and webmasters of digital material in any form. The video producers filed such model information at sites (often lawyer offices) and posted these locations in their material, though not distinguishing which models information was at any specific location listed and not displaying that information on the media. And the revision/expansion would have them post the locations for model information, probably often at lawyer offices. Presumably the Fed marshalls etc. would peruse this information, somehow verify it and compute the ages of the models.

    So the change is in applying the 2257 law now to digital images/movies (on the internet) and applying to the porn producer and the website which may have contracted to license/purchase that material. Or are other changes applicable too?

    What about newsgroups? Or just http// and ftp// protocols and not news//?
    I loved going to strip clubs; I actually made some friends there. Now things are different for the clubs and for me. As a result I am not as happy.

    Customers are not entitled to grope, disrespect, or rob strippers. This is their job, not their hobby, and they all need income. Clubs are not just some erotic show for guys to view while drinking.

    NOTE: anything I post here, outside of a direct quote, is my opinion only, which I am entitled to. Take it for what you estimate it is worth.

Similar Threads

  1. Good sites for cam girls (not camming sites like lj or mfc)
    By KinkyKatrina in forum Camming Connection
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 02-15-2016, 02:20 PM
  2. Phone sex sites other than niteflirt
    By melanielive in forum Other Work
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 12-07-2011, 03:35 AM
  3. Good sites for cam girls (not camming sites like lj or mfc)
    By KinkyKatrina in forum Stripping (was Stripping General)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-16-2011, 10:28 PM
  4. Senate plans more rules for adult web sites
    By Deogol in forum Other Work
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-19-2006, 08:58 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •