Adult Webmaster Blog

It's logical to think adult webmasters need to maintain records of their models' age to make sure they just deploy images and movies of legal adults on their sites. Most European countries maintain strict laws regarding underage content. Publishers are fully responsible for all content on their site - no matter if producers, secondary publishers or normal bloggers. If investigated they will need to prove legal age of models beyond any doubt - even when just holinked. There have been various legal cases in UK and Germany where webmasters were ordered to pay high fines as they had "juvenile models" on their site and were unable to prove age. I believe they just copy/pasted content from others. While this European systems works well, there is no record keeping requirement that mandates a formal arrangement of data. In the USA things are more complicated. Of course it is illegal to post non-legal content and doing so will be prosecuted.

...

To enforce elimination of such content, the US government once came up with a genuine idea of a record keeping law USC 18 Section 2257 and 2256 that mandates keeping files of models' documents by producers and other people involved in the process of publishing sexually explicit materials.

Good idea, but not executable in Reality

Originally, it was designed to allow inspections by the FBI of commercial porn producers who were in question, but until today only very few of those FBI inspections took place. The regulations are very demanding and a burden on smaller companies. But the biggest problem: It is questionable to whom the rules apply. Nobody really knows what is defined as a secondary producer and if laws interfere with privacy legislation and DMCA. Does a blogger who showcases sample images need to maintain records or can he refer to a program's 2257 statement of listed producers?

Privacy Issues of models are a big concern

Can model IDs be sanitized? Many adult models will certainly not like to have their IDs with addresses floating around the net as they would be in danger of being approached by stalkers and sexual offenders. And how about Hollywood celebrities who appear in steamy sex scenes? Will they need to give a copy of their driver's license to each cinema manager in case their premisses might be inspected by the FBI? A lot of question that were left open after the last change to 2257 legislation. That's why this law is going to need a revision again: 2257 will undergo changes as announced by attorney J.D. Obenberger on his site XXX Law. People for the industry are invited to take part in the decision making and are able to voice their opinions. Obviously, most producers and paysite owners do comply with 2257 record keeping laws. There has never been a case of American online porn producers going out of business because they were closed down after an FBI inspection. But a lot of small website operators are not sure how much this law and future changes will affect them.

Opportunity to voice your concern to Lawmakers

Now, is a good time to brush up your insight of Section 2257 and voice your concerns to lawmakers. According to a recent discussion on GFY about Section 2257 it is felt by many observers as a flawed law. It does not deal it's purpose to prevent illegal porn publications due to the way it is implemented. There is little hope a revision of this section will create more certainty among webmasters because in it's current form it's still made for linear publications such as printed magazines and video movies. Let's see what happens. It's certainly worth following this topic as it could have great affect on the way business will be conducted in the future. More Sources: AVN on DOJ proposals for 2257

Create Hot Revenue with Cams from Emerging Market