Did you join FSC?

[Hell Puppy]

Call it a ransom, call it rewarding them for a job well done. Either way, did you pay?

[Lee]

Nope.

[Vick]

I wouldn't belong to a club that would have me as a member :groucho:

[Trev]

Originally posted by Vick@Jun 26 2005, 02:11 PM
I wouldn't belong to a club that would have me as a member :groucho:
:lol:

[Trev]

I should have also put that I would never join, even a UK equivalent wouldn’t get my $$$

[gonzo]

I gave em some money. Im still surprised at the number of you that dont think this effects you. Unless you dont have websites your going to find out.

And if you dont...what the fuck are you doing here?

[Trev]

Originally posted by gonzo@Jun 26 2005, 10:42 PM
I gave em some money. Im still surprised at the number of you that dont think this effects you. Unless you dont have websites your going to find out.

And if you dont...what the fuck are you doing here?
The numbers above are indeed interesting....

I'd like to hear a little more on the "I’m still surprised at the number of you that don’t think this effects you" statement, if you could be so gracious to clarify it a little for me :)

[gonzo]

Originally posted by Trev+Jun 26 2005, 04:51 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Trev @ Jun 26 2005, 04:51 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-gonzo@Jun 26 2005, 10:42 PM
I gave em some money. Im still surprised at the number of you that dont think this effects you. Unless you dont have websites your going to find out.

And if you dont...what the fuck are you doing here?
The numbers above are indeed interesting....

I'd like to hear a little more on the "I’m still surprised at the number of you that don’t think this effects you" statement, if you could be so gracious to clarify it a little for me :) [/b][/quote]
You doing biz with anyone in the US?

[Titan]

nope

[Rolo]

Originally posted by Trev
I'd like to hear a little more on the "I’m still surprised at the number of you that don’t think this effects you" statement, if you could be so gracious to clarify it a little for me
You do not make money from US surfers?

[Trev]

Gonzo and Rolo,


Yes I do, now tell me why I should worry :)

[Rolo]

Originally posted by Trev@Jun 26 2005, 02:33 PM
Yes I do, now tell me why I should worry :)
You should not worry - life is too short for worries ;-))

However you should be aware that the 2257 is just one thing that they will throw at the industry - it doesn´t start and stop with new 2257 rules.

I say its better to fight them each time they show their heads, then it is to wait until they got every US surfer under control.

Chaos is what drives the internet - order is the breaks... From Stewart Dalzell/ACLU vs. Janet Reno COPA 1996


True it is that many find some of the speech on the Internet to be offensive, and amid the din of cyberspace many hear discordant voices that they regard as indecent. The absence of governmental regulation of Internet content has unquestionably produced a kind of chaos, but as one of plaintiffs' experts put it with such resonance at the hearing: "What achieved success was the very chaos that the Internet is. The strength of the Internet is that chaos." Just as the strength of the Internet is chaos, so the strength of our liberty depends upon the chaos and cacophony of the unfettered speech the First Amendment protects. For these reasons, I without hesitation hold that the [Communications Decency Act] is unconstitutional on its face."

[Trev]

Originally posted by Rolo+Jun 26 2005, 11:45 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rolo @ Jun 26 2005, 11:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Trev@Jun 26 2005, 02:33 PM
Yes I do, now tell me why I should worry :)
You should not worry - life is too short for worries ;-))

However you should be aware that the 2257 is just one thing that they will throw at the industry - it doesn´t start and stop with new 2257 rules.

I say its better to fight them each time they show their heads, then it is to wait until they got every US surfer under control.

Chaos is what drives the internet - order is the breaks... From Stewart Dalzell/ACLU vs. Janet Reno COPA 1996


True it is that many find some of the speech on the Internet to be offensive, and amid the din of cyberspace many hear discordant voices that they regard as indecent. The absence of governmental regulation of Internet content has unquestionably produced a kind of chaos, but as one of plaintiffs' experts put it with such resonance at the hearing: "What achieved success was the very chaos that the Internet is. The strength of the Internet is that chaos." Just as the strength of the Internet is chaos, so the strength of our liberty depends upon the chaos and cacophony of the unfettered speech the First Amendment protects. For these reasons, I without hesitation hold that the is unconstitutional on its face."
[/b][/quote]
Excuse me if I come of a little cunty here, but I’m only thinking about my business and I'm legal to run my business from the UK.

When you say "they" you refer to the US government, not mine and not yours. Let all the US webmasters get inline (which is still a wider line than mine) and comply, fight or just give up!

This is not my fight! This is my chance at a bigger slice of a pie the US has had in front of them for along time.

Also we both know there is no way of totally controlling the surfers, only the webmasters. Unless the US is trying to become the new China <_<

[Rolo]

Originally posted by Trev@Jun 26 2005, 03:00 PM
but I’m only thinking about my business and I'm legal to run my business from the UK.
And I also think that US webmasters and business who do not think outside the US borders are missing the bigger picture.

We are on the internet - this is not brick and mortar. The opportunities and problems are just one click away from all of us. If we think that our business can only exist via regulation and rules, then we are in no better shape than farmers getting subsidies.

Sure it will be nice to have ½ of the webmasters removed from the game, but it should be via competition and not goverment regulations.

[Rolo]

Originally posted by Trev@Jun 26 2005, 03:00 PM
Also we both know there is no way of totally controlling the surfers, only the webmasters. Unless the US is trying to become the new China <_<
Just look at how the US is dealing with the online casino, drugs etc. industries, and you have a very good idea on how much the US can and will do regarding business on the internet.

China is different subject, but I also think that their porn law suck ;-)))

[Trev]

Originally posted by Rolo+Jun 27 2005, 12:25 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rolo @ Jun 27 2005, 12:25 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Trev@Jun 26 2005, 03:00 PM
but I’m only thinking about my business and I'm legal to run my business from the UK.
And I also think that US webmasters and business who do not think outside the US borders are missing the bigger picture.

We are on the internet - this is not brick and mortar. The opportunities and problems are just one click away from all of us. If we think that our business can only exist via regulation and rules, then we are in no better shape than farmers getting subsidies.

Sure it will be nice to have ½ of the webmasters removed from the game, but it should be via competition and not goverment regulations. [/b][/quote]
I think it's foolish to look at the current situation without being more than nervous! I've had my house looked at and I'm in no way compliant to the new 2257 on at least 3 domains I own, I'm legal on all of my domains in the UK however so they will run.

Your "one click" term is something I fear more... not the term but the fact that because one Country moves to the right, people fear and panic monger about the possibility that the whole world will. It doesn't work that way.

Plus ½ of the "webmasters" in this "game" see it only as a game... it's business for me and if some fall(and I hope a lot do) then all the better for the rest of us.

[Trev]

Originally posted by Rolo+Jun 27 2005, 12:32 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rolo @ Jun 27 2005, 12:32 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Trev@Jun 26 2005, 03:00 PM
Also we both know there is no way of totally controlling the surfers, only the webmasters. Unless the US is trying to become the new China <_<
Just look at how the US is dealing with the online casino, drugs etc. industries, and you have a very good idea on how much the US can and will do regarding business on the internet.

China is different subject, but I also think that their porn law suck ;-))) [/b][/quote]
A good point, but even with the laws standing as they do most of my casino traffic is US and they spend :)

[Rolo]

Originally posted by Trev@Jun 26 2005, 03:48 PM
Your "one click" term is something I fear more... not the term but the fact that because one Country moves to the right, people fear and panic monger about the possibility that the whole world will. It doesn't work that way.
The US is a very big piece of the pie ;-))

[Trev]

Originally posted by Rolo+Jun 27 2005, 12:56 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rolo @ Jun 27 2005, 12:56 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Trev@Jun 26 2005, 03:48 PM
Your "one click" term is something I fear more... not the term but the fact that because one Country moves to the right, people fear and panic monger about the possibility that the whole world will. It doesn't work that way.
The US is a very big piece of the pie ;-)) [/b][/quote]
Not for long, and we've seen from the reports how my PM pw3ns the US ;)

[Peaches]

Originally posted by gonzo@Jun 26 2005, 05:42 PM
I gave em some money. Im still surprised at the number of you that dont think this effects you. Unless you dont have websites your going to find out.

And if you dont...what the fuck are you doing here?
Hmmm - I took all the photos off all my sites and I'm still here :P

[Dravyk]

I have no need right now to join the FSC. All my ducks are in a row.

tangent mode ///

I also don't "believe" in rushing in like some drowning victim clutching for a damned life line. That's not any reason to join any organization! And anyone who puts themselves or their company in that position is a fucking suck-off non-business person who should go the fuck back to asking "want fries with that?"

end tangent ////

However, in the near future, I will. Not because of the compliancy, delay tactics, government shell game and all that crap, but because I believe in supporting them.

Do I need to join the FSC for 2257 protection? Fuck no. Will I join then when all the clamour calms down and the "long lines" go back to normal? Yes, because it's good business.