There are currently negotiations going on between industry lawyers and the government. The deadline for compliance to the new “interpretation” of 2257 has been extended to August.
We will be following a path similar to what DVD Empire appears to have implemented. We are in the process of reviewing ALL of our box covers and have a system in place to approve/disqualify images.
When our review is done you'll see a lot of box covers disappear from ADT again, most likely well in advance of the Sept 7th deadline. I think the terms of the settlement indicate that even members of the FSC should be complying with the new rules even though they are exempt from the inspections until Sept. 7th. I haven't seen the actual terms of the agreement but this is what I've read elsewhere.
We've decided to only display covers that have been reviewed and approved. There's still tons of them to review but at least this way we're in compliance.
I bought DVDs from your store because your store has good screen shots and from these screen shots I was able to decide whether I like the movie or not.
It is quite unlikely that I will buy a movie from a new series as without the screenshots, I can't tell if the movie is good. A picture is worth a thousand words. I think I may have to stick to old series (Barely Legal, Teen Tryouts etc) as I know what to expect from these known series.
I hope you will bring back the screen shots and box covers as when you see fit. Perhaps registered account holders will be able to view explicit screen shots and box covers.
I don't have the exact details about this new law but it's silly in the sense that how can a porn store be a producer when it's clear that the store is selling some movies from established studios and not some home made movies or bootleg copies. They might as well ban porn movies if they get so paranoid about child porn.
I agree with how DVD Empire is going about trying to comply with the new rules for doing business with adult products. They always seem more proactive than most when it comes to protecting themselves, which in the long run will prove a greater payoff and not landing in court or maybe even prison. They're one of the larger dvd retailers (if not the largest) on the net and employ more people than say XRentdvd. They're just looking after themselves and their employees, so I applaud them for doing so. If they loose business, it's better than having to fight for your freedom in a courtroom and much cheaper. Just my 2 cents.
If you read the article they posted on their site it provides all of the details on their implementation of the new regulations.
Please keep in mind that their actions are absolutely necessary and come from advice they have received from their lawyers. It's not about registered users/unregistered users. It's about posting regulated content on the internet. Post explict images without documentation, even for registered users only, and the website operator can end up in jail for a very long time.
I know we're going to get a lot of people complaining about how much it sucks and inappropriately venting their frustration at the retailers. That is not who is to blame. The people that are to blame are the ones that enabled this situation to exist by voting this faith-based administration into office. You want to complain to someone write to your Congressmen and Senators.
Uh, yeah but what if our Congressman and Senators are faith-based too?
[Link]
dvddude Deactivated User
45 Posts 3/05
Posted - Jun 25 2005 : 12:44AM
I just read the actual settlement (thanks to Drew on another forum thread). The settlement states that just because they can't come after you now, they can after the settlement date has expired for infractions after June 23rd. So it sounds like if you're not in compliance now and then take down the images just prior to the last day of the settlement period, then you are still responsible for providing the records and be in compliance. This is what I got out of it anyway, I maybe wrong. So DVD Empire is the only ones actually following the guidelines of the settlement. So if for some reason they don't get this whole thing resolved by the September date, they can go after everyone that hasn't complied, which includes XRentDVD, who I would imagine is not in compliance. For those companies that don't read the fine print, they might be getting screwed without knowing it.
Porno movies, sexy videos, xxx. Adult DVD Talk at your service. 6409 Posts 11/99
Posted - Jun 25 2005 : 11:22AM
Pandering to and being aren't the same. They need your vote. As long as porn watchers are hiding that they watch porn the government can continue to target the industry without fear of reprisal.
Yep, this is exactly what the deal between the FSC and the DOJ says...it won't go after anyone in the FSC until the legal case is settled...but if it's settled in the DOJ's favor, they can go after any member of the FSC who wasn't compliant as of June 23rd. So those waiting to become complaint hoping that the FSC will win their case are taking a BIG risk.
It's not safe to assume that they are not in compliance. Remember that the original draft of the new rules came out in June of 2004. Some sites started working towards compliance long time ago. Other sites might still have some work to do. There's absolutely no point in arm chair quarterbacking the situation in comparing one retailer to another. Unless you work for the retailer and know their situation making guesses or statements that Retailer X is not complying is essentially the same as saying "I think Retailer X is breaking the law." That's really not a fair statement to make with no facts to back the statement up.
It's 100% legal to display box covers (or any images for that matter) for which you have the apropriate records indexed in the prescribed manner.
How on earth does one go about getting all this info for 20,000+ movies?
Certainly nobody can simply contact Anabolic or whoever and request the documentation for hundreds of titles.
Isn't it possible that if you request the information from a producer they can refuse to give you the required info even if you're an adult DVD retailer?
What does the government say about retailers who buy products from Japan or Europe where the documentation is in another language? Do they expect us to go and learn Japanese for them?
I seriously have no clue how this helps the fight with child pornography. Needing over 18 documentation for granny porn production is just silly. They should have it where adult websites HAVE to supply the address for the holder of these records. The producer. If they can not supply the information for that producer then they shouldn't have the material up.
If the website actually makes the material themselves, then of course they have to have their own records available.
So what are they going to do, go after and sue the webmasters of hundreds of thousands of websites? That's impossible.
Hell, if I have to i'll just move to another country. It'll still be worth it. At least then my business will still be up and running. 50% of my customers are outside of the USA anyway. Let's just say that for me as a import DVD retailer it's impossible for me to obtain this info.
I doubt they'll go after many. Probably only go after those that sell material with preformers that may appear underage. I have titles with young looking woman in them, but who doesn't? I guess at the very least I could just remove those.
Funny, they had warnings about 9/11 way ahead of time and they did nothing. What makes everyone think they'd actualy go out and do something about these hundreds of thousands of websites if they can't even manage to do something about that "possible" terrorist attack? Completely diferent things, but still....i'd be surprised if they ever went after people. Maybe a few. With all the taxes me and everyone else pay to Uncle Sam it's surprising that they want to shut so many people down.
Little Puck Interview
Posted - Jun 24 2005 : 9:25AM
