USC 2257 :: the end of internet porn.

[TheDirtSyndicate]

EVERYONE READ THIS:::::
http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,67869,00.html

i just found out about 2257
this isn't right.
im a graphic designer/webmaster, and this is like an attack on me. on all of us designers.

webmasters are just doing the job they were hired to do by the people who shot the porn.
they run a website, thats all. they dont have info on these people because they dont need it, that is not their job, they shouldn't be responsible for that. thats the company that shot the porn's responsibility.

i'm currently working on a movie website right now. it has a trailer, clips, photos of all the actors, etc. but do i have information on all the actors? no i dont. do i have signed consent forms? no i dont. i was hired by the people who produce the film to do the website, they have that info. not me. and i'd say thats the way it is for just about EVERY website on the internet.
what this law is going to do is make it illegal for graphic designers/webmasters to do their job for an industry that is HUGE.
i didn't shoot the porn, but i'm gonna go to jail for being hired by the people who did, to make a website for them? this is stupid.
thats like arresting clothing store owners for prostitution.....prostitutes wear some clothes dont they?
"this shirt was bought at your store sir, your being arrested for helping her become a prostitute"
thats retarded!

i've emailed the president at the Free Speach Coalition (http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/) about this with the hopes that i can do something to help. im posting this here hoping that i can get other designers/webmsters involved. when i get more info i will let you guys know, right now i dont know what steps can be taken, but when i find out i'll let you guys know.
if your interested in helping, please respond to this thread, let me know.

[stoph]

my advice? find a job that doesnt require you to host and maintain porn sights :\

[Presence]

exactly

[John]

My advice? Come to europe. The dutch are especially filthy. :perv:

[SJ Bennighof]

I just like what Marigold says in there: If the people are too ashamed to openly support porn, then the people don't need the porn that badly. Will we see demonstrators in the streets with signs like "Save Porn" and "I Like to Watch"?

[waronmars]

i will demonstrate for porn

[Aerythes]

Porn is overrated

[Balooga]

i will demonstrate for porn

Me too!

[figure2]

In an industry that's faced little oversight, the change in policy will spawn mountains of paperwork. But that's not all: Sites may be forced to remove some or all of their racy content because the original records belong to someone else or never existed. Those who can't comply -- including many free sites that rely on stolen content -- will have to shut down or risk a visit from federal investigators.The statement above just leapt out at me. Aside from the issue of having a valid release form from the models & performers, there is the issue of the theft. As artists, we are in the business of creating unique works of visual intellectual property and then hopefully earning a living off of that skill. Any of us would be furious if we discovered that someone else was using our images without permission. It would be even worse if we discovered the thief was profiting from our stolen work. This appears to be the entire business model of of many of the sites that are being targeted in the article: selling content without permission that legally belongs to someone else. From my point of view, it is hard to feel sympathy for any of these providers that get nailed.

As far as the webmasters are concerned, they are just easier targets since finding the owners of these shady sites can lead to a series of dead ends. A webmaster who hosts a site without collecting proper contact info for the site owner is just plain idiotic. It sounds to me like the feds are trying to force web hosts to ask more questions and think twice so that sites that profit from stolen content won't be able to easily find a home.

[look]

As far as the webmasters are concerned, they are just easier targets since finding the owners of these shady sites can lead to a series of dead ends. A webmaster who hosts a site without collecting proper contact info for the site owner is just plain idiotic. It sounds to me like the feds are trying to force web hosts to ask more questions and think twice so that sites that profit from stolen content won't be able to easily find a home.
I was thinking the same. A lot of hosts already have regulations regarding copyright law and pornography, so it's not like a brand new thing.
If you are only hired to do the design aspect of the site, not hosting it, I don't see why the feds would bother you.

[IceMoon]

Lol who cares. I'll get my porn from europe/asia anyway :D

[fukifino]

I don't see this as a problem.

[rick_hershey]

I don't really care either, doesn't bother me since I make my own porn.

oh, if any body wants a film let me know and I'll send you one. I'm the guy with the leather mask, nipple clamps, wearing a diaper. :)

[prostate sunrise]

well this sucks.

[S.C. Watson]

Heh. If you're married, you don't need to watch porn :bashful:

[wassermelone]

You have to remember that website developers are people too.

Just as illustrators may not WANT to do a certain job... its the money behind it that makes us do it. I don't suppose a website guy would see getting some needed/extra mula as a problem... and it shouldn't be. He shouldn't have to keep records of everything on the site cause its NOT his site. Yet according to this law he will be listed as a secondary producer.

Thats inane.

I looks to me like that no one will fully be able to comply with this law and thus the gov can go after anyone they want.

[TheDirtSyndicate]

Porn is overrated

you just haven't found the right porn. :)

and yeah, i dont personally care for porn so much as freedom of speech.
the government knows that more than half of the sites out there dont have that kind of info on these people. theres much more going on. they are trying to destroy that industry altogeather.
but it wont happen.

the porn industry will find a way
it allways has in the past.
even if it means comapnies like vivid will be reloacting outside of the us.
just because a site is hosted/operated in the UK, doesn't mean i cant visit it here in the US.
^ theres one loophole.

[TheDirtSyndicate]

The statement above just leapt out at me. Aside from the issue of having a valid release form from the models & performers, there is the issue of the theft. As artists, we are in the business of creating unique works of visual intellectual property and then hopefully earning a living off of that skill. Any of us would be furious if we discovered that someone else was using our images without permission. It would be even worse if we discovered the thief was profiting from our stolen work. This appears to be the entire business model of of many of the sites that are being targeted in the article: selling content without permission that legally belongs to someone else. From my point of view, it is hard to feel sympathy for any of these providers that get nailed.

As far as the webmasters are concerned, they are just easier targets since finding the owners of these shady sites can lead to a series of dead ends. A webmaster who hosts a site without collecting proper contact info for the site owner is just plain idiotic. It sounds to me like the feds are trying to force web hosts to ask more questions and think twice so that sites that profit from stolen content won't be able to easily find a home.

thats one of the benefits about it

[Qitsune]

It's a legislation that affects only the US which is dumb considering the way the net works. You could have pics taken in the US hosted in any other country and there is nothing that could be done about it.

[bRyaN]

there is soo much dough in site designing for porn it's ridiculous....
i heard a few stories about the money that can be made from it...amazing...

if my skills were up to par i would do it...

[JERI]

Heh. If you're married, you don't need to watch porn :bashful:

Well, if you're married to Slutty Betty I suppose. Sometimes porn is necessary to catalyse sexual stimulation among couples.

[Sammy]

The $$$$ behind the porn industry is 2nd only to the military --- porn will find a way, it always does.

"Porn, that wasn't a magical WirelessRouter --- The magic was in you all along."

[MuffinMan]

Porn is stupid shit.

[Blackhawk]

Porn is like prostitution and drugs, the demand is there, it will always find a way no matter how much legislation or legal hurdles you throw at it. It's like internet gambling, if it becomes too much of a hassle to do the business in the US, they'll just relocate the servers to a country friendlier to their business that wouldn't mind a piece of the cashflow.