• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

The ills of over-broad legislation

Son Goku

No lover of dogma
#1
Saw this on another board:

Rule 2257 going into affect June 23, 2005 may make it impractical to have any explicit sexual pictures on escort sites, yahoo groups, or any website, video or box of a video with any sexually explicit pictures. Violation of the new law can result in a 10 year Federal prison sentence. The Religious Right is again rejoicing over their Bush Admin morality squad - in the Dept of Justice.

The requirements of 2257 are enormous. Even if the picture is obviously of an elderly couple that is sexually explicit there is a huge amount of data you have to have on file and available for a Dept of Justice inspection all to prove the pictures are not of under aged children. This is a very creative attempt by the DOJ/Bush Administration to stop adult porn using the excuse of stopping child porn.

A few of the requirements include government issued ID photo, model release form, all aliases, nicknames and get this.. performers MAIDEN name, home address, copy of the photo or video on file. Would apply even if its you on your own website. Or, a husband and wife couple required to have this information on file in proper format on each other. Here is an example of the required 18 U.S.C. 2257 Record-Keeping Requirements Compliance Statement. Sample at http://www.universalfilmworks.com/2257.html More details at www.avn.com/2257.

And it gets worse, much worse.

Under the secondary producer rules, even if you only LINK to a site with sexually explicit material, even if YOU have NO sexually explicit material YOU are REQUIRED to have all the same documentation as the linked to website! It makes no difference it the link is to a free or pay site. If it has sexually explicit pictures both you and the site you link to have to have the required records and compliance statement.

According to the DOJ, yahoo groups have to comply and gave this example: If you have 50 photo albums and in those are 50 people some with others comprising say 75 individuals, you would need to have all the proper documentation and databases for EVERY picture that is posted in those photo albums. Both the group owner and yahoo have the same responsibility. As someone said, "More then likely they said, these companies, to
stay out of it, will remove online public storage areas, and in that case only sending it through email will be the only choice of sharing those images."
And mention of the bill:

2257 ADVERTISING STANDARDS CHECKLIST

Complete 18 U.S.C. 2257 and 28 C.F.R. Part 75 documentation any visual depiction in an advertisement (including box covers) that portrays actual sexually explicit conduct, must be submitted to AVN with the proposed advertisement(s). Failure to submit the required information along with the proposed advertisement(s) may prevent AVN from including the advertisements in the magazine issues or on the web properties desired by the advertiser.

If softcore advertising depicting only nudity without actual sexually explicit conduct is submitted to AVN, the information listed below will not be required.

For the full explanation of AVN Sexually Explicit Advertising Standards go to: www.avn.com/2257

This checklist details the documents necessary for compliance with the law.


A photocopy or digital scan (preferred) of the performer’s valid picture identification card issued by the United States government or a State government.

The appropriate model release for every performer engaged or assisting in sexually explicit conduct in the image submitted.
The performer’s legal name and date of birth

The performer’s stage names

The performer’s professional names

The performer’s aliases

The performer’s nicknames

The performer’s maiden name

A digital copy of the depiction of sexually explicit conduct in which the performer appears, bearing the title or identifying number, if any

The business address of the submitter (must not be a post office box), and the name and title of the submitter’s custodian of 2257 records

Material produced prior to July 3, 1995, should be accompanied by a statement of exemption.
My main contentions are:

1. If they get over-broad, they won't stop anything. Take a look what has happened with spam. US ISPs (and for good reason) don't want it on their servers, so the spammers take to making accounts in other countries like China.

Same could happen here. People simply move their sites away from US based ISPs, and go overseas. Only way these people could prevent anyone (and mind you this includes adults) from seeing what they don't want them to see, is for the government to require the instillation of mandatory web filtering software (perhaps at the ISP) that blocks non-US based sites from being visable in the US.

Mind you, this could carry certain ridicule with it... Isn't that what China and North Korea does to prevent it's citizens from seeing things the government over there doesn't want them to see?

2. People's definition of "smut" can very. For some people it might be full nudity. For other's it could be someone in a bathing suite, showing a little thigh...

3. If they really go overboard on the "linking to another site" part...they could well end up with an unacceptable and overly burdensome situation in which if www.cnn.com showed a news article with a picture that didn't agree with certain someone's; to link to an entirely different and unrelated news story, one would need a complete dosier on everything cnn.com ever published to link to just one story :down:

4. A measure to deal with/prevent the exploitation of children in child pornography is reasonable and proper. But it should also be carefully defined so as not to get overly broad in matters that don't really have to deal with children (and could per chance, depending on the limits placed upon it) have nothing to do with sex either...
 
#3
This story has all the excitement of an End-User License Agreement.

Honestly, though, I didn't see many red flags go up when left-wing environmental laws passed that have almost made it almost impossible to do honest business in California (which is why big businesses are becoming more like rats from a sinking ship out here) and other parts of the nation.

My points are simple: We don't need more laws, just enforce the existing ones. And allow me to have oil in a locker even though it's more than 12 months old without fining me $200,000. And allow me to have dead batteries around my shop for longer than 90 days without fining me $200,000.
 

Admiral Michael

Michaelsoft Systems CEO
#4
This would just be a US thing right? Not affecting Canada.

I host a site for a friend thats a **COUGH**Hentai**COUGH** site. I will shut it down if it would be a problem.
 
#5
Admiral Michael said:
This would just be a US thing right? Not affecting Canada.

I host a site for a friend thats a **COUGH**Hentai**COUGH** site. I will shut it down if it would be a problem.
If a similar law makes it to Maple Leaf Land, you will have to keep good records of the drawings' ages. And they better be over 18.

perris said:
now that would be scary

we'd be turning into a thocracy of taliban like politicians
And a moral society isn't necessarily a Taliban-like theocracy. We weren't a theocracy back when we were a moral society, so it's difficult to draw those conclusions.
 

Admiral Michael

Michaelsoft Systems CEO
#6
Unwonted said:
If a similar law makes it to Maple Leaf Land, you will have to keep good records of the drawings' ages. And they better be over 18.
If it makes it here the site is bye-bye. I told the owner no underage-looking pics. I've been itching to remove it, but my friend's boyfriend (I host a site for him too) wants me to keep it, I decided I will until I have a reason to remove it.
 

Perris Calderon

Administrator
Staff member
Political User
#8
Unwonted said:
a moral society isn't necessarily a Taliban-like theocracy. We weren't a theocracy back when we were a moral society, so it's difficult to draw those conclusions.
your definition of morals is hardly everybody's definition is it...today we are far more moral then any time past

what some people concider clearly moreal, others concider intolerable, appalling and imoral to the point of damnation
 
Last edited:

ThePatriot

-=[BOHICA!]=-
Political User
#9
Unwonted said:
And a moral society isn't necessarily a Taliban-like theocracy. We weren't a theocracy back when we were a moral society, so it's difficult to draw those conclusions.
Morals...now there's a lost cause. What ever happened to them?:ermm:
 

Perris Calderon

Administrator
Staff member
Political User
#10
Morals...now there's a lost cause. What ever happened to them?
I will stand and hold against anyone that supposes our society has fewer morals and is "less good" then any society in the past

show me a moral you think is violated today and not in the past, I'll show you 5 that is supported today and not in the past

show me some who are damned, I'll show you more who are blessed

show me a single person that would rather live any time past, I'll show you ten thousand that would choose today and tomorrow
 

ThePatriot

-=[BOHICA!]=-
Political User
#11
perris said:
I will stand and hold against anyone that supposes our society has fewer morals and is "less good" then any society in the past

show me a moral you think is violated today and not in the past, I'll show you one that is supported today and not in the past
Well, lets see, where do I start. The obnoxious teens who hang out across the street from my house all summer screaming the f-bomb, among many other colorful words to their 'friends'? That kind of behaviour wasn't happening when I was 16-ish...most certainly not in the frequency it does now. Or how about the total lack of morality on the TV? Is it really neccesary to broadcast nudity at prime-time? It wasn't when I was growing up...and the shows were alot better, too! Oh, here's a favorite...goes right along with morals...respect...I coached Jr. Football for 6 years and I would NEVER have thought of talking to my coaches...or any adult for that matter...the way kids do today. Morals are very rapidly drifting off into la-la land, and there is NO WAY you can tell me any different...I live it on a daily basis.
 

Perris Calderon

Administrator
Staff member
Political User
#12
it's hard to believe you didn't stand around and annoy your elders thepatriot, I did, and there's less of it today then when I was young..when I was young, we were on every corner and every schoolyard...every sentence had a curse from someone...today, it's hard for me to find kids cursing at all...and yes, I travel all around the country, inner city and suburb, Harlem to the Hampton's

1) I don't ever see kids doing what my peers were doing when I was growing up

2) the lack of morality on TV?

morality or lack of it on TV are stories told in the venue of these times, let's compare the "immoral behavior" to literature of the past as an equal test, have you read even the bible for your test of immoral behavior?

3) coaches?

every young athlete I know respects there coaches as their fathers, when I was young, the coaches were treated like teachers, I'd seen coaches get slapped in the face by students when I was young.

it's where you live versus where you have lived, it's not the times of our day,
it's your point of view as an adult as opposed to your point of view as a child

it's on the outside looking in versus being on the inside looking out
 
Last edited:

ThePatriot

-=[BOHICA!]=-
Political User
#13
Aggrivate my elders, yes. Stand on the corner at 1:00 am and curse at the top of my lungs, no, not I nor anyone I know did that, nor did I ever see it happen as frequently as it does nowdays.

Yes, lack of morality on TV...I never saw, or needed to see Fred Sanfords ass to make it an interesting show. I also never had to see one of Charlie's Angels bare breasts to make me want to watch the show again. And I NEVER heard the obscene language on prime-time TV like I do today. I may be old, but I'm not forgetful or senile.

And don't even try to sway me on coaches...I lived it from both sides. It just ain't the same as when I was the athlete.

It's not where but HOW we live....and today we live with a hell of a lot less morally.
 

ThePatriot

-=[BOHICA!]=-
Political User
#14
I should point out, however, that I don't think we need this law. As stated, we need to enforce what we have...and parents REALLY need to be parents...now there's another lost art...parenting...don't get me started!:lick:
 

Perris Calderon

Administrator
Staff member
Political User
#15
Aggrivate my elders, yes. Stand on the corner at 1:00 am and curse at the top of my lungs, no, not I nor anyone I know did that, nor did I ever see it happen as frequently as it does nowdays.

Yes, lack of morality on TV...I never saw, or needed to see Fred Sanfords ass to make it an interesting show. I also never had to see one of Charlie's Angels bare breasts to make me want to watch the show again. And I NEVER heard the obscene language on prime-time TV like I do today. I may be old, but I'm not forgetful or senile.

And don't even try to sway me on coaches...I lived it from both sides. It just ain't the same as when I was the athlete.

It's not where but HOW we live....and today we live with a hell of a lot less morally.
every incident you talk about is just your respective point of view

I hardly see anyone cursing, not nearly as much as when I was growing up...who's bare breast have you seen on tv by the way?

if you're talking about live tv, there were more slips back then then now, only not the big deal made about it when it happened, I used to stay up and watch anything live...johnny carson comes to mind.

charleys angels?

they wore cloths as good as a naked butt and breast with paint on it....and I dream of genie was pure t and a...and I remember movies broadcast with mipple slips as well.

it's just your respective point of view

for instance, when we were growing up, elvis and the beetles were the work of the devil...now rock and roll is part of the religous experience

and I bet you think some of the younger forms of music is "just noise", just like our parents thought the rolling stones were "just noise"

all it is is perspective
 

Perris Calderon

Administrator
Staff member
Political User
#16
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I should point out, however, that I don't think we need this law. As stated, we need to enforce what we have...and parents REALLY need to be parents...now there's another lost art...parenting...don't get me started
/agrees 100%

bed time for me
 
Last edited:

Tittles

Dabba Dooba
Political User
#17
I honestly think that we are all gonna see or here something bad in our lifetime so whats the big deal? Does someone really change there lifes over a curse word or a nipple? My dad let me watch that howard stern move Private Parts at like what 7 or 8 maybe. I never used those words around my parents at that age because i knew it was bad but now i start to do it more because one i am a teenager and thats what most teenagers do but thats just my opinion.
 

Son Goku

No lover of dogma
#18
Well ThePatriot, I notice a pic from South Park in your sig. I'm sure that some of the more Puritanic types in our society could take issue with South Park, the mouth on Eric Cartman, etc... And don't get me wrong as I've watched South Park and find it funny myself :D

That said, someone took issue with Lord of the Rings even. I'm talking about this one guy who created an account on Netscape's newsgroups for the Fellowship of the Ring movie, called "TrustAndObeyGod" He then proceeded to reply to every single post anyone made pronouncing that 9/11 was the judgement of God for the release of that movie. (Remember that Fellowship came out in December 2001...) He then went to say that "no real Christian would let there family see this movie, because Gandalf is a wizard..." He then proceeded to quote from Deuteromany concerning necromancers, and was like "see, the Bible says so..."

People tried to patiently explain to him that J.R.R. Tolkein was a Christian, and personally knew CS Lewis. In fact, J.R.R. Tolkein had a part to plan in CS Lewis not remaining an atheist. He didn't care, as he went his trolling way pronouncing damnation on all (and even the nation itself) all because "Gandalf is a wizard"...

I think part of the problem is that some of the more puritanic types like to mind the business of everyone else (including matters of what they watch or do in the privacy of their own home), rather then mind their own business... Passing laws that require people to have complete dosiers on every site there might be a link to as well, could be a bit burdensome.

Just imagine what could happen on this site alone. We're sitting here in the forums, and making a post replying to someone elses argument. We provide a link to help back up our argument. But per chance the site we're linking to has an image burried somewhere else that neither we, nor the staff here are aware of. Are they supposed to have to have a complete dosier for every site we might link to in the course of our discussions; or start deleting all forum posters links?

And if we couldn't link to other sites (lest the staff here could get slaped with the back hand of this law), how could we argue if we couldn't introduce anything that helps backup/substantiate the case we're making?

I do agree that parents should, well be parents, and not expect the television, Internet, or whatever else to raise their kids in their own place...
 

Admiral Michael

Michaelsoft Systems CEO
#19
Son Goku said:
I do agree that parents should, well be parents, and not expect the television, Internet, or whatever else to raise their kids in their own place...
I myself somewhat agree. Parents should be the ones raising there kids, but there is ALOT of junk on the internet and tv.

I do think this rule would be really stupid. I agree with the replies about forgetting making new ones and start enforcing the old ones.


**How about a law against adware and spyware, which is so bad, expecially with some of the porn popups some generate.
 

Son Goku

No lover of dogma
#20
Admiral Michael said:
I myself somewhat agree. Parents should be the ones raising there kids, but there is ALOT of junk on the internet and tv.
The problem is that one person's standard of what constitutes junk, is not necessarily anothers, nor should it necessarily be. When someone tries to "legislate morality" and impose their views on another; we have something, which isn't exactly akin to a freedom loving country.

If someone doesn't like something, it is their perogative not to watch it, play it, view it. In the case of parents, it is their perogative to be the parent in their own home. It's another matter entirely, when someone tries to dictate the affairs of society, or everyone in it to their own liking...

**How about a law against adware and spyware, which is so bad, expecially with some of the porn popups some generate.
Or one could add to this list spam, and marketing gimicks that find their way to us. And though some laws have been passed (and of course some spammers have moved over-seas), I think there is a cross current going on. Look at the instance of junk (snail) mail for instance. I've sometimes joked about what would happen if an environmental impact fee were imposed on businesses for all the waisted paper (trees cut down) for all the junk they litter everyone's mail boxes with.

On a more basic level, I don't think there'd be a will to make too many waves on something that could impact unsolicited advertizing/the businesses of those who might contribute campaign funds. That said (and in the case of spam) there can be the counter-argument from business that the time their employees spend sifting through the spam in their inboxes, hurts corporate productivity...
 

Members online

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

Perris Calderon wrote on Electronic Punk's profile.
Ep, glad to see you come back and tidy up...did want to ask a one day favor, I want to enhance my resume , was hoping you could make me administrator for a day, if so, take me right off since I won't be here to do anything, and don't know the slightest about the board, but it would be nice putting "served administrator osnn", if can do, THANKS

Been running around Quora lately, luv it there https://tinyurl.com/ycpxl
Electronic Punk wrote on Perris Calderon's profile.
All good still mate?
Hello, is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me ...
Xie
What a long strange trip it's been. =)

Forum statistics

Threads
61,962
Messages
673,240
Members
89,017
Latest member
keithgonzaal