VOD sites not asking for 2257 anymore - JustBlowMe.com Adult Webmaster Forum

#1 Post Number 1597451

VOD sites not asking for 2257 anymore

10-17-2009, 08:48 AM

jay23

Senior Member

Post Rank# 67

Join Date: May 2004

Posts: 5,164

I know 2 very large VOD sites are not asking for 2257 docs any more, as long as you sign a contract stating you got the 2257 for the content you are selling.

So the whole secondary producer thing is dead ?

#2 Post Number 1597453

10-17-2009, 09:19 AM

pornlaw

Senior Member

Post Rank# 781

Join Date: Feb 2007

Posts: 161

Actually the whole secondary producer thing is more alive than ever. If you are talking about AEBN - from what I have been told is they are making the primary producers their third party record keeper on each movie. They are putting into their studio contracts an agreement that the primary (studio) will hold the records and contractually be the custodian. Its more than a statement that you have the records. And its not just a link back to the studios, it is an actual contractual agreement which is now allowed under 2257 under third party record keepers.

__________________
Michael

Last edited by pornlaw : 10-17-2009 at 09:21 AM.

#3 Post Number 1597456

10-17-2009, 09:44 AM

Relentless

www.EngineFood.com

Post Rank# 47

Join Date: Jan 2006

Posts: 7,535

Quote:

Originally Posted by pornlaw

Even with a contractual agreement on 2257 docs, how would that protect someone who publishes a movie that happens to star someone who is 17 years old? I understand the 2257 laws changed to allow contractual record keeping - but isn't the burden still on the publishing site (secondary or otherwise) if the underlying content actually includes someone underage or without valid consent etc... ?

__________________

Engine Food Webmaster Score Website Secure
ICQ# 266-942-896

#4 Post Number 1597458

10-17-2009, 09:49 AM

jay23

Senior Member

Post Rank# 67

Join Date: May 2004

Posts: 5,164

Quote:

Originally Posted by pornlaw

If that the case it will make a lot of people life easy. I work for a client now who has 6 people in staff , all they do is collect 2257 from studios.

The big question is if the government comes at a VOD site and if they refer them back to the studio and if the studio does not have the records, who is at fault

Jay

#5 Post Number 1597497

10-17-2009, 10:31 AM

pornlaw

Senior Member

Post Rank# 781

Join Date: Feb 2007

Posts: 161

Quote:

That is an issue that has not been worked out, but a secondary producer can rely on the records secured by the primary in so much that if a primary certifies under the penalty of perjury that he/she has examined the IDs and they are correct. I do not think that the secondary would be prosecuted.

But that would require the secondary to have at least reviewed the docs and IDs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jay23

Both... would be my educated guess but since the secondary is being inspected at that time then it would be the secondary.

You have to keep in mind that even though someone uses a third party record keeper - they are still ultimately responsible for their own records. Thats why we designed www.2257Safe.com as it is. We are a hybrid third party custodian. We house the records, you use our info, but you keep and maintain the records. We never touch our client's records.

__________________
Michael

#6 Post Number 1597519

10-17-2009, 11:47 AM

Relentless

www.EngineFood.com

Post Rank# 47

Join Date: Jan 2006

Posts: 7,535

Quote:

Originally Posted by pornlaw

That is an issue that has not been worked out, but a secondary producer can rely on the records secured by the primary in so much that if a primary certifies under the penalty of perjury that he/she has examined the IDs and they are correct. I do not think that the secondary would be prosecuted. But that would require the secondary to have at least reviewed the docs and IDs.

That's what I'm getting at really. If the secondary would need to have viewed the docs and IDs to be protected against more serious charges stemming from underage performers or lack of consent etc... then aren't I better off just storing the records sent to me as well? The alternative seems to be "Send me the IDs, then I'll shred them but at least I know you really have them" - in which case if I ever get inspected I'm giving my word that I had gotten the docs and looked them over but no longer have them...

If ever I end up in court over a 2257 or related charge I think I'd be a lot more comfortable saying 'look your honor, here are the actual documents sent to me that I relied on which include a valid 'looking' ID and consent form from someone known as a reputable primary producer.' Rather than saying 'I saw the docs but I don't have them any more, and I had no idea she was 16... I relied on the other guy saying she was 18 and I also relied on his contractual promise to store docs proving it... even though it turns out that he hasn't done so.'

Am I missing something?

__________________

Engine Food Webmaster Score Website Secure
ICQ# 266-942-896

Last edited by Relentless : 10-17-2009 at 11:48 AM.

#7 Post Number 1597528

10-17-2009, 01:13 PM

pornlaw

Senior Member

Post Rank# 781

Join Date: Feb 2007

Posts: 161

Quote:

Originally Posted by Relentless

No you're not missing something. You would be better off. However, there will be people in this industry that will play the risk. With so many that are not compliant many think that trying to be compliant is enough. And people are trying to find the loopholes in the law that will make it easier to appear compliant than actually be compliant.

There is always strict letter of law and the practical application of such laws. Strict adherence is always more difficult but always safer. Practical is less restrictive but comes with greater risk.

__________________
Michael

#8 Post Number 1597536

10-17-2009, 02:01 PM

jay23

Senior Member

Post Rank# 67

Join Date: May 2004

Posts: 5,164

Quote:

Originally Posted by pornlaw

Some of the largest secondary producers in the industry have stopped asking for 2257, so they are taking a risk ?

#9 Post Number 1597540

10-17-2009, 02:51 PM

pornlaw

Senior Member

Post Rank# 781

Join Date: Feb 2007

Posts: 161

Quote:

Originally Posted by jay23

Some of the largest secondary producers in the industry have stopped asking for 2257, so they are taking a risk ?

Here is the definition of secondary producer from 28 CFR 75...

Quote:

(2) Secondary producer is any person who produces, assembles, manufactures, publishes, duplicates, reproduces, or reissues a book, magazine, periodical, film, videotape, or digitally- or computer-manipulated image, picture, or other matter intended for commercial distribution that contains a visual depiction of an actual human being engaged in actual or simulated sexually explicit conduct, or who inserts on a computer site or service a digital image of, or otherwise manages the sexually explicit content of a computer site or service that contains a visual depiction of, an actual human being engaged in actual or simulated sexually explicit conduct, including any person who enters into a contract, agreement, or conspiracy to do any of the foregoing. When a corporation or other organization is the secondary producer of any particular image or picture, then no individual of that corporation or other organization will be considered to be the secondary producer of that image or picture.

and here's where 28 CFR 75 defines what a secondary producer has to do to be compliant...

Quote:

(b) A producer who is a secondary producer as defined in §75.1(c) may satisfy the requirements of this part to create and maintain records by accepting from the primary producer, as defined in §75.1(c), copies of the records described in paragraph (a) of this section. Such a secondary producer shall also keep records of the name and address of the primary producer from whom he received copies of the records. The copies of the records may be redacted to eliminate non-essential information, including addresses, phone numbers, social security numbers, and other information not necessary to confirm the name and age of the performer. However, the identification number of the picture identification card presented to confirm the name and age may not be redacted.

So I would have to say under a strict reading of the law - yes its risky.

__________________
Michael

#10 Post Number 1598308

10-19-2009, 08:59 PM

missjody

Member

Post Rank# 1925

Join Date: Jul 2007

Posts: 36

interesting, would seem silly not to hold all documents yourself as not to have to rely on someone else where you could be held liable

__________________
New Sites: AsiaBukkake.com | LegalPinkVideos.com | GermanGooGirls.com| HardcoreMax.com
NEW: 40$ per Trial & Up to 75% RevShare at EuroRevenue
ICQ - 10-731-020

#11 Post Number 1630832

02-09-2010, 07:43 PM

AFSC

Member

Post Rank# 2184

Join Date: Feb 2010

Location: Rhode Island

Posts: 30

We do that as well. We have a lot of people asking us to be the 2257 holder.

__________________
Kelly
AdultFilmStarContent.com
High Quality Content - Below Industry Pricing
Always Check for our NEW Specials
*CHECK OUT OUR 300 SETS FOR $300 DEAL**
ICQ:583968101

#12 Post Number 1631738

02-14-2010, 06:59 PM

jackbdirty

Jack B. Dirty

Post Rank# 898

Join Date: Mar 2007

Location: Tampa, Florida

Posts: 128

I know that when producers approach us, we have them signing an agreement of 2257 documentation since we aren't the primary producers

__________________

PervyCash Pays 60% on all sales...
Exclusive amateurs and Porn Stars

#13 Post Number 1659623

06-13-2010, 02:12 AM

Wetdog

I let the dogs out

Post Rank# 7

Join Date: Aug 2004

Location: Mizzou

Posts: 27,424

Porns sites rest in peace. the tubes have destroyed the biz.

__________________

Webmasters Click Here // New Dating Program up to $50.00 Per Sale
==================================================

#14 Post Number 1659643

06-13-2010, 11:06 AM

MFM

Like a lollipop

Post Rank# 34

Join Date: Jul 2005

Posts: 11,393

What's 2257?

#15 Post Number 1659844

06-14-2010, 12:25 PM

Paul Markham

Paul Markham

Post Rank# 102

Join Date: Mar 2004

Location: Cloud Nine

Posts: 3,177

I'm always amazed at people who put their liberty and business at risk for the sake of a bit of filing.

__________________
Paul Markham Content Store.
Quality content for your members area.

ICQ 213 327 873 or Skype paulmarkham1

#16 Post Number 1668274

07-28-2010, 01:49 PM

FreshDVDRich

Rich Olson

Post Rank# 9752

Join Date: Jul 2010

Location: Oregon

Posts: 1

We require all of our content providers supply copies of their performers id's. When we catalog a new title into our system we catalog ID's along with it.

We even wrote a 2257 management system into our streaming platform to keep track of everything and generate inspection reports if we ever need them.

In addition to keeping actual ID's for all of the actors we also show a 2257 link in the frame of our video player to display studio specific 2257 statements. For example, if a Metro title is playing we show Metro's 2257 statement, Venom statements for Venom titles, etc.

I am new to this board but have been in this business forever - in my opinion you can never be too careful when it comes to 2257.

__________________
FreshDVDFeeds.com

Per GB or Flat Rate!