Oprano Adult Industry Forums - View Single Post

*KK* · 07-01-2004

I've spent some time reading over this and talking to a few people whose opinions I am always interested in hearing.

Bottom line is that this is a very real problem for this industry. The draft was actually done on the 14th of this month and filed on the 24th. I'd be willing to bet that by Nov 15 there are multiple prosecutions in the works, regardless of who wins the election. I'd almost be willing to bet that by Nov 1, in time for the election, someone's in the hot seat... remember that Katherine Graham running for office in Michigan a couple of years ago -- it wasn't about prosecuting people that were doing something wrong, it was about media exposure for her campaign...

The parts of the document that pertain to cross indexing EVERY instance of your content is completely unworkable for images at the current time... the current DRM standards are very much video oriented and if you had to change your entire system over to .asp in order to use an image DRM you'd never get it done in time if you waited to see just how this amendment is worded when its finally part of the law.

If you bought content from someone that's out of business -- say Clutch Content for instance -- and you have no clue where or how to find them to get a valid copy of the releases, you could find yourself liable for EACH and EVERY image that you display. Since the jail time is now 5 years instead of 2 years for each conviction it's even worse. If you have affiliates using your content to promote your sites, you are now responsible for knowing every URL that your banners reside on -- even from affiliates that are no longer in your program, for instance. And you are responsible for keeping up with where every one of them is using your content, on a per image basis.

Video is a relatively easy matter to work out -- basically DRM allows you to not only include the 2257 in the video distribution -- in a text size that is equal to or greater than the largest credit in the video, as required by the addition, btw -- but to also keep easy records of what urls are attempting to access your video content at any given moment. But images have no such workaround that is cost effective and time friendly.

This certainly clarifies the secondary producer standards but it now creates a tertiary scenario with your affiliates -- they become the weakest point in the chain, especially the newbies who don't realize how important it is to keep good records. And with the way they come and go so easily, how many of them will actually help your record keeping process versus how many of them will potentially cause you harm?

On the upside, this might just create the clearing out that this industry needs. On the fools board, the immediate outcry was "move offshore! host elsewhere" and so on. But at the end of the day, processing is still going to be a huge issue for anyone thinking of moving offshore -- and just because your affiliates move offshore doesn't mean that you can move nearly as quickly or that you wouldn't still be in the crosshairs.

Personally I'm glad these things are getting to a point of definition. The people that prepare to do business in advance of the law actually becoming the law will be sitting way prettier than the ones that stick their heads in the sand and end up with 30 days to comply. I'm sure the DOJ has some targets in mind already and it won't take them 30 days to start handing out indictments...

07-01-2004	#10
KK Members Respin bullshit press Your Comments Are Welcomed Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 2,581	I've spent some time reading over this and talking to a few people whose opinions I am always interested in hearing. Bottom line is that this is a very real problem for this industry. The draft was actually done on the 14th of this month and filed on the 24th. I'd be willing to bet that by Nov 15 there are multiple prosecutions in the works, regardless of who wins the election. I'd almost be willing to bet that by Nov 1, in time for the election, someone's in the hot seat... remember that Katherine Graham running for office in Michigan a couple of years ago -- it wasn't about prosecuting people that were doing something wrong, it was about media exposure for her campaign... The parts of the document that pertain to cross indexing EVERY instance of your content is completely unworkable for images at the current time... the current DRM standards are very much video oriented and if you had to change your entire system over to .asp in order to use an image DRM you'd never get it done in time if you waited to see just how this amendment is worded when its finally part of the law. If you bought content from someone that's out of business -- say Clutch Content for instance -- and you have no clue where or how to find them to get a valid copy of the releases, you could find yourself liable for EACH and EVERY image that you display. Since the jail time is now 5 years instead of 2 years for each conviction it's even worse. If you have affiliates using your content to promote your sites, you are now responsible for knowing every URL that your banners reside on -- even from affiliates that are no longer in your program, for instance. And you are responsible for keeping up with where every one of them is using your content, on a per image basis. Video is a relatively easy matter to work out -- basically DRM allows you to not only include the 2257 in the video distribution -- in a text size that is equal to or greater than the largest credit in the video, as required by the addition, btw -- but to also keep easy records of what urls are attempting to access your video content at any given moment. But images have no such workaround that is cost effective and time friendly. This certainly clarifies the secondary producer standards but it now creates a tertiary scenario with your affiliates -- they become the weakest point in the chain, especially the newbies who don't realize how important it is to keep good records. And with the way they come and go so easily, how many of them will actually help your record keeping process versus how many of them will potentially cause you harm? On the upside, this might just create the clearing out that this industry needs. On the fools board, the immediate outcry was "move offshore! host elsewhere" and so on. But at the end of the day, processing is still going to be a huge issue for anyone thinking of moving offshore -- and just because your affiliates move offshore doesn't mean that you can move nearly as quickly or that you wouldn't still be in the crosshairs. Personally I'm glad these things are getting to a point of definition. The people that prepare to do business in advance of the law actually becoming the law will be sitting way prettier than the ones that stick their heads in the sand and end up with 30 days to comply. I'm sure the DOJ has some targets in mind already and it won't take them 30 days to start handing out indictments...