Quote:
Originally posted by Digipimp@Nov 13 2003, 05:32 PM
I think you're on to part of the basic principle. But what 2257 is really all about is just being able to prove that the girl is of age. When shooting videos of average girls that no one would know from anyone else you need to have your papers tight, but something like Paris Hilton, Pamela Anderson and so on it's not like that. That is because it's all about being able to prove age, now if the girl is unknown and you don't have documentation how do you easily prove she is of age. Well you call, she moved, phone number changed, bla bla bla, the police don't know who she is, so it's your word against theirs if it's suspect. However with a celebrity of public figure age is easily attainable because of the persons star status so it's technically a violation of 2257 but it wouldn't hold up because age is easily verifiable on a star.
|
Even though you are correct, in the same way that bars/liquor stores do not
card people buying liquor that appear to be over thirty, I do not think that
would hold up if brought up in a court case.
I have shot several recognizable models that are well known... Tera Patrick,
Nikki Nova, Brittany Andrews... but I still have to get ID documentation for
2257, as well as model releases. Nowhere in 2257 does it even remotely imply
that if the subject is "well known" that the producer is exempt. Hell, even the
mature sites need the same documentation, even though its obvious that
the model is "of age".
Last edited by nlphoto at Nov 13 2003, 05:58 PM