|
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 539
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Nickatilynx+May 20 2005, 10:29 AM-->| QUOTE (Nickatilynx @ May 20 2005, 10:29 AM) | |
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#9
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 15,115
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Lee+May 20 2005, 10:33 AM-->| QUOTE (Lee @ May 20 2005, 10:33 AM) |
Quote:
Originally posted by Nickatilynx@May 20 2005, 10:29 AM
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#10
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 539
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Nickatilynx+May 20 2005, 10:41 AM-->| QUOTE (Nickatilynx @ May 20 2005, 10:41 AM) |
Quote:
Originally posted by Lee@May 20 2005, 10:33 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Nickatilynx@May 20 2005, 10:29 AM
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#11
|
|
Members
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,085
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Lee+May 20 2005, 10:22 AM-->| QUOTE (Lee @ May 20 2005, 10:22 AM) | |
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#12
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 15,115
|
Quote:
Originally posted by JoesHO1+May 20 2005, 10:48 AM-->| QUOTE (JoesHO1 @ May 20 2005, 10:48 AM) |
Quote:
Originally posted by Lee@May 20 2005, 10:22 AM
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#13
|
|
Cramming 3 people in a Room to Attend Show
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Amid the Cornfields of Illinois
Posts: 5,366
|
So ... you are no longer uploading thumbs to the individual server?
__________________
SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites
Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#14
|
|
One Miiiiiiiiilllllliiiiiiooooonnnnn Dollars
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Panamá
Posts: 1,585
|
at the moment we are. no worries there.
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#15
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 906
|
Quote:
Originally posted by JoesHO1@May 20 2005, 08:51 AM
we at www.remotethumbs.com are fully equpppied to handle the situation for you.
option #1 continue to use, ( or sign up for ) our ground breaking product, that uses all Free Hotsed gallerys from the sponsors directly. and allows fo no submissions, therefore you are always in control of having the sponsors you choose and trust to promote, and utilize their 2257 protections for yourself as well ( as they host the gallerys for you and will need them to be compliant)
Option #2 We are fully capable of hosting your own built gallerys for you via our own data cneter ( not third party) www.siliconcanal.com we are located in Panama, and will keep the 2257 info for you, so you do not need to come out and give your info as the producer of record. ( we host them not you)
Option # 3 We will entertain ( big traffic pushers only) writing a customized solution for you allowing for submissions to take place, and FHG's to be used also allowing you to sell advertising spots and we will host the gallerys for your site to insure you are protected.
if you are interested in any further discussion with one of us on this matter we are available and you can reach me with your thoughts at 174842541
Thank you and have a great, productive day. ( be safe)
|
This does shit...I can appreciate you spinning your product but here's the 2257. You can't protect anyone.
It's fuckin' absurd.
Here's the 2257 shit - Left is old - right is new
Where the fuck do you get your legal advice, the drive through?
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#16
|
|
Fat Fucking Nobody
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Atlanta,Ga.
Posts: 17,795
|
Quote:
Originally posted by aeon+May 20 2005, 03:23 PM-->| QUOTE (aeon @ May 20 2005, 03:23 PM) |
__________________
We are putting the bastards of this world on notice; greed and corruption will always be met with "a voice made of ink and rage." "Never try and be like anyone else" - Hunter S. Thompson "The truth is the truth no matter how you try and package a lie" - Shellee Hale
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#17
|
|
Members
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,085
|
Quote:
Originally posted by aeon+May 20 2005, 12:23 PM-->| QUOTE (aeon @ May 20 2005, 12:23 PM) | |
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#18
|
|
Cunty
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,150
|
Quote:
Originally posted by aeon+May 20 2005, 09:23 PM-->| QUOTE (aeon @ May 20 2005, 09:23 PM) | |
__________________
Sucks to be you.
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#19
|
|
One Miiiiiiiiilllllliiiiiiooooonnnnn Dollars
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Panamá
Posts: 1,585
|
Quote:
Originally posted by aeon+May 20 2005, 03:23 PM-->| QUOTE (aeon @ May 20 2005, 03:23 PM) | |
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#20
|
|
Members
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 431
|
Here's 75.6c of the proposed regulations (I'd be incredibly surprised if they didn't go with this as-is). Please let me know how you'll handle the fact that the custodian of records must be an employee of the producer.
-----------------------------
If the producer is an organization, the statement shall also contain the name, title, and business address of the individual employed by such organization who is responsible for maintaining the records required by this part.
-----------------------------
If the custodian didn't have to be an employee, everyone would just have their attorney be their custodian of records, giving them something of an attorney-client privilege on the whole thing.
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#21
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 15,115
|
Quote:
Originally posted by ThrobX@May 20 2005, 02:05 PM
Here's 75.6c of the proposed regulations (I'd be incredibly surprised if they didn't go with this as-is). Please let me know how you'll handle the fact that the custodian of records must be an employee of the producer.
-----------------------------
If the producer is an organization, the statement shall also contain the name, title, and business address of the individual employed by such organization who is responsible for maintaining the records required by this part.
-----------------------------
If the custodian didn't have to be an employee, everyone would just have their attorney be their custodian of records, giving them something of an attorney-client privilege on the whole thing.
|
Why couldn't you have your lawyer employed by your corporation to be custodian?
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#22
|
|
Members
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,085
|
Quote:
Originally posted by ThrobX@May 20 2005, 02:05 PM
Here's 75.6c of the proposed regulations (I'd be incredibly surprised if they didn't go with this as-is). Please let me know how you'll handle the fact that the custodian of records must be an employee of the producer.
-----------------------------
If the producer is an organization, the statement shall also contain the name, title, and business address of the individual employed by such organization who is responsible for maintaining the records required by this part.
-----------------------------
If the custodian didn't have to be an employee, everyone would just have their attorney be their custodian of records, giving them something of an attorney-client privilege on the whole thing.
|
Well us as the company that is producing the image would be using one of our principles as the record keeper.
Coming from our servers make us the producer , and we will list our contact info and maintian the copy of records as required .
If it becomes a situation where we need to be the owners of the content , then it would be our intention to enter an agreement with the provider/user of the content.This would give us a written use license to produce the particular image on the particular site(s) that they deem it to be used for. We may need to buy this right for something like a dollar for example, and the license be limited to allow us to produce it only on a certain site as the terms of the lease/sale to us. we at that time would become the secondary producer and provide our contact details to comply
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#23
|
|
Members
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 431
|
Quote:
Originally posted by JoesHO1+May 20 2005, 02:36 PM-->| QUOTE (JoesHO1 @ May 20 2005, 02:36 PM) | |
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#24
|
|
Members
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 431
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Nickatilynx@May 20 2005, 02:23 PM
Why couldn't you have your lawyer employed by your corporation to be custodian?
|
I don't pay employees $250/hour, thank you. 
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#25
|
|
Members
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,085
|
Quote:
Originally posted by ThrobX+May 20 2005, 02:51 PM-->| QUOTE (ThrobX @ May 20 2005, 02:51 PM) |
Quote:
Originally posted by JoesHO1@May 20 2005, 02:36 PM
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#26
|
|
Members
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 431
|
Quote:
|
Seriously, consult legal council if you are interested in this, as it is understood by us, we are the producer that serves the gallerys of content from our servers ( we would not upload them to your servers they would come from ours)
|
The producer's the producer. If it's my site and I'm making the money from it, then I'm the producer. It matters not where the stuff is being served from. If I'm a US citizen and I'm making money from it, then I'm the producer.
There's a big misconception that simply moving your hosting offshore shields you from US law. Tell that to the people who tried to run gambling sites hosted offshore.
Quote:
|
of course you could always host in Panama with us, and then hire us as an employee to run your hosting and content managment as well we would be glad to do that for you.
|
Well, being that the regs specifically mention "INDIVIDUAL" (not "corporation," or "legal entity," or "shadow producer") when talking about the custodian of records, I don't believe I would be able to employ a hosting and content management company to be my custodian of records. That would be more akin to subcontracting, which is not "employing."
A simpler solution would be for someone in the adult business to have a real live office, with a real live custodian of records (yourself or a real live employee), and then they're following the law. Seems like a shorter distance between 2 points, and they're then on firm legal ground, to boot!
Sorry to be jerking around with you here, but offsite 2257 recordkeeping solutions don't really work, because they aren't compliant with the regs. Or at least they aren't compliant with the current regs. We'll see what the new regs are really like when they're published on Tuesday.
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#27
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 15,115
|
Sell all your websites to a Panamanian Corp
Put all your servers at silicon canal
And have yr corp employ one of the staff at siliconcanal $250 a yr to be custodian 
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#28
|
|
Members
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 431
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Nickatilynx@May 20 2005, 03:27 PM
Sell all your websites to a Panamanian Corp
Put all your servers at silicon canal
And have yr corp employ one of the staff at siliconcanal $250 a yr to be custodian
Viola...
|
As long as you keep all the money in Panama and never try to bring any of it into the country, then you probably have a great idea!
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#29
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 15,115
|
Quote:
Originally posted by ThrobX+May 20 2005, 03:29 PM-->| QUOTE (ThrobX @ May 20 2005, 03:29 PM) | |
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#30
|
|
Members
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 431
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Nickatilynx+May 20 2005, 03:31 PM-->| QUOTE (Nickatilynx @ May 20 2005, 03:31 PM) |
Quote:
Originally posted by ThrobX@May 20 2005, 03:29 PM
|
|
|
|
|
05-20-2005
|
#31
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 15,115
|
Quote:
Originally posted by ThrobX+May 20 2005, 03:43 PM-->| QUOTE (ThrobX @ May 20 2005, 03:43 PM) |
Quote:
Originally posted by Nickatilynx@May 20 2005, 03:31 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by ThrobX@May 20 2005, 03:29 PM
|
|
|
|
|
05-21-2005
|
#32
|
|
One Miiiiiiiiilllllliiiiiiooooonnnnn Dollars
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Panamá
Posts: 1,585
|
my 2 cents and it may sound kind of harsh. sorry about it but this is kind of dumb.
plain and simple if it goes through as is or not 2 things may happen
1. lots of people move out of USA (hosting) so government thinks twice before going after lawbreakers. big fish are going to be targets some small may fall but it will be a pain in the ass for government when they are soooo busy with other shit.
2. usa traffic will become shit because no one will want it just to no risk it. then all usa based processing will go to shit because no one will want to process in the usa, therefore the rest of the world which is much much bigger than usa will be a target and cc processor will have easier ways to process because they don´t have to worry about usa cause usa sucks thanks to its religous and bush administration and tata we have 1990´s again. lots of big and small will die most of the world outside usa will live.
and bonus we get even richer cause a lot of people will move their shit to us LOL.
pornwill not die. usa porn biz may die but there is soo much other land and countries in planet earth who gives a fuck about usa. hell lately usa traffic is sucking ass europe is starting to pick up and don´t tell anyone but central and south america have faster interenet connections and more availability than vancouver or other states in the usa. all you have to do is be able to process cc from that country which will become easier as i said before and talk spanish
coño que bueno que hablo español babble fish that one.
the only thing i see happening is lots of suicides and divorces in USA cause men wont be able to get jerk off at porn anymore. thats a scary thought.
freee minibon
|
|
|
|
|
05-21-2005
|
#33
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 906
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Inabon+May 20 2005, 01:16 PM-->| QUOTE (Inabon @ May 20 2005, 01:16 PM) |
Quote:
Originally posted by aeon@May 20 2005, 03:23 PM
|
|
|
|
|
05-21-2005
|
#34
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 539
|
Quote:
Originally posted by aeon@May 20 2005, 08:29 PM
[Have you even read the statute? You have to have the documentation available at your place of business. Not in fuckin' panama or Timbuktu.
At least this throbx has read the fuckin' thing. Hosting and keeping records offshore is absolutely irrelevant if you are a US citizen.
|
Actually, not to be the bearer of bad nws or anything but..
The new regs havent even been published yet so, that being said, nobody but the DOJ has read them.
Many people have read last years proposed regs but the chances they may have changed are great since they were first suggested.
The turth of the matter is, until the new regs are published, nobody is any the wiser than they were last month, including all the lawyers in the adult industry making un-educated guesses.
|
|
|
|
|
05-21-2005
|
#35
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 906
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Lee+May 20 2005, 08:46 PM-->| QUOTE (Lee @ May 20 2005, 08:46 PM) | |
|
|
|
|
|
05-21-2005
|
#36
|
|
Members
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 431
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Inabon@May 20 2005, 08:24 PM
1. lots of people move out of USA (hosting) so government thinks twice before going after lawbreakers. big fish are going to be targets some small may fall but it will be a pain in the ass for government when they are soooo busy with other shit.
|
With all due respect, you must not be very familiar with the way our government works. When a no-lose issue comes up that can win votes, in this case "protecting the children," all other shit gets pushed aside, so a good show can be made.
Workload due to 9/11 may have delayed action on "obscenity," but that was a REALLY unusual case. What's the workload now?
Dealing with daily carbombings in Iraq? Hell, that ain't even in this country, most voters who want porn to be stopped aren't even aware that there are other countries besides the U.S. Fighting porn is sexier. (pun intended) That can be put aside for a no-lose vote-gaining issue.
The debate over filibusters during federal judgeship nominations? Piffle, that's just political posturing. That can be put aside for a no-lose vote-gaining issue.
Steroids in sports? There's a non-issue that can be put aside for a no-lose vote-gaining issue.
There's NOTHING in our governmental system that is more important than either A: money or B: votes.
|
|
|
|
|
05-21-2005
|
#37
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 15,115
|
Why an ambitious DA hasn't attacked pornographers hard already I'll never know.
I'd pick 10 or 20 mouthy grfyers in my jurisdiction without the resources for a decent lawyer but with a high profile locally.
And come down on them like a ton of bricks..
|
|
|
|
|
05-21-2005
|
#38
|
|
Members
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 431
|
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Lee+May 20 2005, 08:46 PM--> | | | | |
| | | |
| | |
| | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | |
| | | |
