Victory for the Free Speech Coalition against 2257 regs

[BigD]

The judge has made a ruling in the FSC case against the new USC 2257 regulations introduced earlier this year.

Full article here (http://www.avn.com/index.php?Primary_Navigation=Articles&Action=View_Article&Content_ID=252970) (long read)

Quote from text:

"This is a blockbuster of a ruling! It appears to say that, for example, a content producer which does not maintain its own websites but merely sells content to others is required to keep 2257 records of the performers it hires, but the webmasters who post that material on the Web are not. Further, in such a situation, the content producer is not required to keep lists of any URLs, since none of the sites on which the materials appear are under its control, and the webmasters, who are not "producers" under this ruling, also are not required to keep lists of the URLs where the material appears, nor are they required to keep the identification records"

No doubt the US governmernt will appeal :mad:

[cafeman]

Wow, that's big news.

[Sarah_Webinc]

I think people are jumping for joy too soon without us knowing what the real case is to be.

[Paul Markham]

Still make sure you get the documents when you buy. Trusting others to do it right is not an excuse.

[JT]

Still make sure you get the documents when you buy. Trusting others to do it right is not an excuse.


Yep agreed. For to long secondary producers have had to take content and relly on the producer (except from the few good producers) Thats the only good thing to come out of this whole thing. The good producers now give docs with content

[BigD]

:agree:

I've also been finding recently that some content providers, who say they will supply the documents on their websites, refuse to supply them after ordering. :mad:

[Sarah_Webinc]

:agree:

I've also been finding recently that some content providers, who say they will supply the documents on their websites, refuse to supply them after ordering. :mad:

out any company that does that..it is for the good of the industry

[-HF]

:agree:

I've also been finding recently that some content providers, who say they will supply the documents on their websites, refuse to supply them after ordering. :mad:
they are clearly in breach of contract, charge back, send back whatever you received and out the cunts.

[Paul Markham]

they are clearly in breach of contract, charge back, send back whatever you received and out the cunts.
Agreed. The future is way to unsure to be dealing with companies like this and people need to know who they are.

[mOBSCENE]

out any company that does that..it is for the good of the industry

:agree: