It is currently Mon Jun 25, 2018 6:09 am

Forum Rules,TOS and Privacy Policy | By visiting this website and viewing the pages within, you accept and agree to be bound by and comply with our Rules Of Conduct, Terms Of Use and Privacy Policy.


Additional Forum Rules,TOS and Privacy Policy


Please click on either selection to view: Rules Of Conduct | Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy




 Page 1 of 5 [ 69 posts ]  
Search for:
Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
   
 Post subject: 18 U.S.C. section 2257 compliance.
PostPosted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 11:20 am 
Forum Founder
Forum Founder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2001 12:00 am
Posts: 6547
Location: Kansas
All nude photos of real people doing actual sexually explicit conduct will be removed by midnight tonight from the Doll Album and the Doll Forum because we don't have the records required pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 2257 and 28 C.F.R. 75.

No more nude photos of real people doing actual sexually explicit conduct and no links to them on any other site.

Only Dolls, folks.
It is the Doll Forum. Life is good.



_____________________________
Image
 AIM Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 11:30 am 
Doll Advisor
Doll Advisor
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 1:00 am
Posts: 613
Location: The city on the edge of forever.
Must be those darn "morally correct" Republicans in Congress (good thing for them corporate payoffs aren't a sin). Better watch out! Next thing you know is they will outlaw marrying anyone you aren't related to. Maybe they'll go to stoning anyone who has sex outside of marriage while they're at it! I sure am glad God gave them the authority to decide what is right and wrong for everyone, things are so much better since they've been in power.



_____________________________
http://www.dollalbum.com/gallery/leslie


I want to be the kind of person my cat thinks I am.
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: This can be done
PostPosted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:31 pm 
Manufacturer
Manufacturer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 1:00 am
Posts: 300
Location: TX
This law is alot of work
http://openmindmedia.com/records/


 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Exceptions?
PostPosted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:48 pm 
Senior Member
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 12:00 am
Posts: 207
Will I be able to have pictures of me with my doll if I wear my Big Bird costume?
Just kidding Bill, I understand the forums concerns, no one here wants to see you recieving your pension checks in the pen. I really enjoy seeing the pictures of owners with their dolls though. What a shame.


 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 3:05 pm 
Active Member
Active Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 1:00 am
Posts: 127
I wouldn't think that the owners with their dolls would be affected. Wouldn't it only be people with other people?

Doll's with their owners isn't really sex on a technical level, it's really advanced masturbation.

Darkland :)

---
Chiaki's Gallery:
http://www.dollalbum.com/gallery/chiaki


 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 3:20 pm 
Forum Founder
Forum Founder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2001 12:00 am
Posts: 6547
Location: Kansas
Masturbation is not allowed under the old law without age information by the producers of the photos but now web sites have to have the information.

It is just about real people for now so don't masturbate in public unless you can prove your age. Do it in the sanctuary of a church.



_____________________________
Image
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2257
PostPosted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 3:35 pm 
Active Member
Active Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 1:00 am
Posts: 127
I'm far from an expert on this subject, but I did take a little law in school.

This entire subject screams of saber rattling to me. There's a critical note that I got out of all that was quoted about this law. That basically this thing has already been in effect for 10 years, they're just sharpening the definition and piling on ludicrous penalties and unreasonable burdens of proof to try to scare the crap out of people.

But if you look at what was quoted, in the ten years that the earlier form of the law was around, the DOJ never ONCE prosecuted a single case under it. It's like trying to stop music swapping and file sharing. It's totally impractical from a prosecution standpoint, cause EVERYONE is doing it. You can't arrest or jail the whole country.

It seems to me the law itself has no teeth. They just want to make a big noise about it existing in an effort to frighten people into complying with a ludicrous requirement. Actual enforcement is nearly impossible, it's the fear of being "made an example of" that is the only true effect of such a law.

Hey, whaddya know. Our government is using terror tactics on US. When direct confrontation fails, scare the crap out of them.

Isn't that a cheery thought.

Anyway. Even if every single member of the federal government was reassigned to try to enforce this, it couldn't be done. It's everywhere. It's like banning alcohol, you can't stop something everyone is doing and everyone loves to do, except a small but noisy minority.

The odds of anyone in particular being picked on is like winning the lottery jackpot in reverse. You have to be THAT unlucky for them to even try anything. You are in vastly more danger just driving to work than you'd ever be from this law. Actually you are far more likely to be struck by lightning in any given year than you are to be prosecuted under this law.

And chances are the first person they go after will, by necessity, be the worst offenders, meaning some huge porn producer, who already has a fleet of lawyers that will get it shot down, as it's clearly unconstitutional.

The government has tried this shit before. It just doesn't work from an actual enforcement standpoint. It's the fear instilled by the law that is their only truly effective weapon. I don't want to suggest anything that would get anyone into trouble, but to a certain degree, allowing ourselves to be scared into making a lot of radical and unreasonable changes because of this thing basically means they won. They scared us into complying with an unjust law.

My own adult website is all cartoons, so I don't have anything to worry about personally. But even if it wasn't, I wouldn't change a thing. A government and it's citizens should be working together to build a better world. This smacks of a government working against it's own people, which must never be accepted.

Just my thoughts on the subject.

Darkland :)
---
Chiaki's Gallery:
http://www.dollalbum.com/gallery/chiaki


 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 4:26 pm 
Doll Patriarch
Doll Patriarch
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 25, 2003 1:00 am
Posts: 3538
Location: Ohio
I guess this means Sexy U. is doomed to be burned to the ground to protect the children from sexual images. :(

Oh well, at least children will still be able to get slasher flicks made by "legitamate" producers. It's so much more healthy for them to see pretty young women tortured and murdered for pleasure. :evil:

Isn't it great to live in such a moral society?

And these people think there's something wrong with us.

Mahtek & Phoebe



_____________________________
All I ever wanted, all I ever needed is here, in my arms. Words are very unnecessary, they can only do harm.
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: All my work, up in smoke...
PostPosted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 4:45 pm 
Ex-Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 1:00 am
Posts: 73
What a terrible pity.
Most of the albums I've posted of Tina are sexually explicit with me in them having sex with her. I had an album in the works that also has my girlfriend in it. So all the work creating, setting up and executing these photo shoots was wasted. I'm really disappointed. Do I here Canada beconing...
I'll put the albums at Yahoo and let everyone know when (and yes I'm aware of the pitfalls of putting them on Yahoo).
Moon



_____________________________
No mater where you go, there you are.
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2257
PostPosted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 6:01 pm 
Senior Member
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 1:00 am
Posts: 432
Darkland wrote:
My own adult website is all cartoons, so I don't have anything to worry about personally.


Ahh!! 8O You Have A Cartoon Site !!?? Kool!!, Can I See !!?? :D

Ramiko@AOL.Com

June 19th,2005
6:02pm


 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 6:06 pm 
Forum Founder
Forum Founder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2001 12:00 am
Posts: 6547
Location: Kansas
Yes, what will Yahoo do with its groups to comply with the new rules. Will they dump the groups with sexually explicit photos???



_____________________________
Image
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 6:54 pm 
Doll Advisor
Doll Advisor
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 12:00 am
Posts: 980
Location: California, USA
Perhaps it will be turn out to be a big scare tactic that goes nowhere, but there's no sense in taking any risks during the onset of these new regulations. As with the legislation against free music downloads, I have a feeling the gov't and prosecutors will make a big deal about it and flood the media with high-profile cases and debates until the whole thing eventually blows over out of it's own inefficiency.



_____________________________
Goldman
www.torsodoll.com
 AIM Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2257
PostPosted: Mon Jun 20, 2005 3:28 am 
~ Member ~
~ Member ~
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2001 12:00 am
Posts: 4321
Darkland wrote:
It seems to me the law itself has no teeth. They just want to make a big noise about it existing in an effort to frighten people into complying with a ludicrous requirement.

Each violation can result in 10 years in prison. I think the law is off of the charts when it come to cruel and unusual punishment.

10 years in prison due to lack of paperwork on one photo, and it doesn't matter if the person in the photo is of age or not. Life in prison for a page full.

This law has teeth. :?



_____________________________
"Reality is a crutch for people who can't cope with drugs." ~Lily Tomlin
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: re: teeth
PostPosted: Mon Jun 20, 2005 4:05 am 
Active Member
Active Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 1:00 am
Posts: 127
That wasn't really what I meant, Ishtaria.

I wasn't saying that the penalties are a joke, I'm saying that the law is SO out of proportion, that it is unenforceable. The moment they tried to prosecute anyone on this, it would be overturned by almost any jury, because it's so unfair.

I mean there are literally tens of thousands of adult sites on the net. They can't possibly go after even 1/10th of one percent.

Personally I'd much prefer it if everyone here were able to treat this entire thing with the total contempt it deserves, and change nothing. Act like the thing doesn't exist, that is victory over such totaliarianistic scare tactics. They can't prosecute this nonsense, it's the fear the existence of such a thing creates that is the only true weapon they have to employ. That's why they jacked the penalties through the roof. On paper they can make it anything they want to try and frighten people, if they have no intention of pursuing it, it gives no court the opportunity to overturn it.

No jury in america is going to give a 10 year sentence for a paperwork mistake. The DOJ knows this. It's pure governmental terror tactics.

It pains me really to see that the scare factor has affected you and Bill. Not to mention deeply offends me that the government stoops to such underhanded methods against good people such as yourselves, just sharing the love with friends. As I said in my last post, this smacks of government fighting against the will of its own citizens, which must never be knuckled under to. In your place I'd feel it was my moral duty to resist this orwellian big brother crap.

However, that said, it IS your and Bill's site, and you must do what you feel is appropriate. I'm sure I can speak for everyone here when I say, whether we agree with your approach to dealing with this or not, we'll all support your decision.

Darkland :)


 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 20, 2005 5:14 am 
Senior Member
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2003 1:00 am
Posts: 393
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Actually, I'll bet there will be a couple of show cases right off the bat: Just like the IRS does every few years.

Some guy who copys and reposts images from the net onto his website will really go to prison to scare the rest of us straight.

It will be unfair, but like the seatbelt law there will be NO mercy!

Too bad the internet police can't go after identity theft of some real crime-that might be a usefull service.

I think this law is designed to shut down all the free services out there.


 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 1 of 5 [ 69 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who Is Online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

Chatting users:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum