It is currently Sun Dec 09, 2018 11:07 pm

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 4 of 5 [ 69 posts ]  
Search for:
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
   
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 2:42 am 
Doll Guru
Doll Guru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 1:00 am
Posts: 5820
Location: Pine Street Inn
If you are "publishing" to a web site and the originator of the photos, you are not merely a "distributer" - is that not the case? Wouldn't there be liability if you are producing the works?

Only way out of it if you produce the works is to have proof of age on file.



_____________________________
<div>So long, and thanks for all the fish!<br>- Douglas Adams</div>
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 6:55 am 
Doll Guru
Doll Guru
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 12:00 am
Posts: 5413
Location: right here
To be honest, I didn't read the entire thread, more than 4 sites of replies already, so excuse me if some of this had been mentioned before. This legal issue here makes me think about three things :

1)
This law suck and it's stupid bullshit, just made to cut off people's freedom, it's harassment to destroy fun about the internet, and everybody should be considered "adult" enough to decide on what he/she loads or uploads... But this will have been stated before for sure...

2)
If you have to remove all pics that show more than the doll, to be more precise, pics that show your *thingy* in whatever position or "mood", then it should be logical you have to remove all pics as well showing whatever "remains" your *thingy* has left behind.

3)
I don't know about US law or international law, concerning links posted on your site with German law, since a few years it's like this : With <I>every</I> internet website you have, you have to dissociate yourself from <I>every</I> linked content whatsoever. In other words : Once you create a link to another site, you can be hold responsible for whatever bad, radical, mean or whatever content on that other site, even if you're in no way responsible for those uploads and contents. So whenever you create a link, even if it's to the business server of the Pope, add a text like this :
<I>As the publisher of an internet website can be hold responsible for the contents of linked websites, I have to dissociate myself from the content of the linked websites, although I think this is juridical bullshit. I only link to sites after having visited them myself. It's up to me if a site is added to my link section or not, but of course I can't have new look at all sites every day to see if the contents might have changed.</I>



_____________________________
Vanessa
proud to be a fully transitioned trans-girl after sex reassignment surgery :D
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 7:32 am 
Doll Guru
Doll Guru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 1:00 am
Posts: 5820
Location: Pine Street Inn
1) I'm not sure the law sucks. All web sites I go to simply have a statement saying they are following that law. Child porn is big business and they wanted to stop child porn. I'm one of the first ones IRL to be concerned about them passing a law due to some lame excuse.

Our view of the law has nothing to do with not complying. If you want to fight the law and accept the consequences, then put up your own server and take your own risks. It's nothing personal, and I don't think I'm being an asshole saying it.

2) I'm not sure I understand point (2) and I've never understood why someone wants to look at that.

3) The same thing happens with magazines having advertisement. They choose the advertisers, but not the content of the ads. I think this is especially true with an online forum. I would prefer to add a disclaimer rather than be pestered by every lame asshole who gets offended every time someone mentions eating meat, that all women are not angelic, or maybe we shouldn't go into other countries and kill people - to mention only a couple examples.



_____________________________
<div>So long, and thanks for all the fish!<br>- Douglas Adams</div>
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 7:47 am 
Doll Advisor
Doll Advisor
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2002 1:00 am
Posts: 539
Location: Kansas
Thank you Inkling for staying on topic.
Since I, for example, am not "producing" for a profit any explicit activity with my doll, it is purely for fun and to share with registered members of TDF who have already confirmed they are of adult status, I wonder if a warning at the beginning of the album or video as Goldman did would be sufficient?
My only experience with laws are speeding and running red lights on occasion and I took one course on Business law over 30 years ago. Most of it is arguing over what a word means. Such is "it depends on what the word "is" is." I'm not looking for loopholes that might get us clear yet we would have to keep looking over our shoulder. But a clear clean way for us to share whatever kinds of photos or videos of us and our dolls in any way to other members in a safe legal way.
I remember a similar issue a couple years ago when members pictures started showing up on other websites without the owners permission and members started to copyright thier pictures.
We can argue and discuss the "politics" of our lives all day and there are plenty of "blogs" that do just that.
My interest here is in getting a clear definitive answer/solution to this issue for the Forum. Perhaps there is an attorney member of TDF that is familiar with the purpose of TDF and will volunteer to look into this and offer guidance. There are probably lawyers who specifically work on internet laws exclusively that could help answer this question.
I agree to the "better safe than sorry" approach Bill chose at the beginning of this thread/announcement initially. My reason for resurrecting the issue is to clearly determine if and how we can return to posting the materials we were and do it in compliance with the law/s.
I found the photos and videos entertaining, informative and instructional back when I was trying to decide if I should get a doll. I know others did too. And the subject was the doll with its owner. And all amature, however well done. That is what I would like to see again.



_____________________________
"You never close your eyes anymore when I kiss your lips..." "The Righteous Brothers"
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 2:02 pm 
Doll Guru
Doll Guru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 1:00 am
Posts: 5820
Location: Pine Street Inn
Okay, this is what we might be able to do:
<i>After</i> we get server farm and toy store changed, then I can ask Bill about this, and admin/moderators can discuss potential content.

If approved, I can post Acceptable Use and maybe have a single album or Category with restricted access to those who request access.

BTW, someone can click a link saying they are an adult, but that does not prevent someone under age from participating in TDForum, then consequently TDAlbum. Sometimes the way I post, Inkling could be 15 years of age. :D I mean, how do you know? I play with dolls, for crying out loud...
So I cannot promise anything. Let's wait and see. We have to take care of first things first.

All that said, movies cannot be uploaded. Folks run the movies from the server while online, intead of downloading them and running them on their own computer. This can really slow things down, so movies have been disabled.



_____________________________
<div>So long, and thanks for all the fish!<br>- Douglas Adams</div>
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 2:37 pm 
Doll Guru
Doll Guru
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 12:00 am
Posts: 5413
Location: right here
Inkling,
I totally agree with you that there is a certain need to control things, like you say, child porn or brutal stuff should be controlled or banned or whatever. Like with the rules this forum has. I just don't believe in those laws they do, because the don't reach the aim they are said to have. To control illegal content seems to result in killing the freedom normal people should have. If I want to post pictures showing me nude ( by the way I won't ever do that ), why not, as long as I am an adult myself. But these laws go futher, they ban far more than necessary or reasonable. If politicans have problems with a nude doll, sorry, but there is NO person at all to be seen, so how could an inanimate object be nude ??
And yes, you're right, kids can easily pass such a control by just saying "yep, I am over 18". No one can control. With my site there will be an "enter" and "leave", and underneath the "enter" button there will the the text "by entering I read and fully understood the disclaimer", with the disclamer below giving all the juridical bullshit. This is a nice prove that those laws suck, by the way. See, this doesn't control anything, but juridically, you did it the correct way. So all this is not about controlling contents, it is JUST about having someone to be sued and held responsible. And if I create a link to another website, how could I ever be responsible for the content of another site ? That's like being sued because someone driving a Honda was speeding, and you're driving a Honda as well.

About point 2
I guess you understood what I tried to paraphrase. To put it the direct way : If we need to ban pics showing someone having sex with a doll, it should be logical the pics showing a doll covered with sperm are to be banned as well. But those laws don't tell that, because they are just stupid, because they are made by politicians, and those cranks possibly don't even know how internet works. Otherwise they would be able to do laws that fit to the situation and the real problems.

point 3
see above, those disclamers and "controls" don't do their job. It's just a juridical thing. If you combine "enter" with a disclamer, like described above, and people enter nevertheless although they should not, now it's not your fault anymore. Now it's the other person deliberately entering by a lie about his/her age and own rights. Like that the webmaster is no more responsable, because he now gets tricked by the kids. Yes, you're right, this is ridiculous. But so is the law. So again it's not about protection of minors, it's about having someone responsible, or about how to not be responsible... All nonsense, but so is human species...
See, the juridical statement I suggested above, maybe it sounds strange because this is for German laws. Some time ago I've shown that to a lawyer I personally know as a friend. He just wondered and said "wow, that passage is good, how come, with you studying something different ?". I answered why that is good, because it doesn't control a damn shit, and he said "So what, juridically it's all you need to do, so it IS good".



_____________________________
Vanessa
proud to be a fully transitioned trans-girl after sex reassignment surgery :D
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 8:40 pm 
Doll Guru
Doll Guru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 1:00 am
Posts: 5820
Location: Pine Street Inn
There is no prohibition on nude dolls - only humans.

We will have to see how the law is applied when court cases based on the law come up.

I imagine (on another web site) you could post your own nude photos because you would probably have proof of how old you are. :wink:



_____________________________
<div>So long, and thanks for all the fish!<br>- Douglas Adams</div>
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 09, 2006 10:50 pm 
Doll Advisor
Doll Advisor
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2002 1:00 am
Posts: 539
Location: Kansas
From what I have read so far, TDF is under the radar of this law, and there is a way to cover our a** to post user "with" doll. I remember now that we were never able to upload movie clips due to the obvious limitations. I understand that no problem.
There are cases pending decisions and even what I have read so far about them, they still don't affect us but it is worth exploring, which I will do if not for my own curiosity.
As for another website letting me post me with Leyna, I have e-mailed watchersweb.com about this and they told me, "send away!" I explored how to upload to them and they have a lengthy statement to submitters that has to be read and then click on, "I agree" or "I disagree" to proceed. And they reserve the right to permit or not any submissions or parts of submissions. I could see this used for our forum.
It didn't look like "rocket science" or legal babble. It made perfect sense. Common sense.
Inkling I think this will be do-able. I won't bother you or the forum with this any more as you and the admin members work on resolving the immediate issues facing this community/family. Thank you for your work on that and the others for thier work/help too.
I'll quietly look into this and learn all I can about it and if I find anything of help... who should I contact? If I could PM someone or if there is someone who I should exchange e-mail with they can PM me, maybe this is an area I can help the forum with.?
I'm a little frustrated that I can't help in many ways, but maybe this is something I can help with.
If there is a way to help with a direct donation to the forum to help in the interim as someone figures out how to redirect the current donations channels, let me know how please.



_____________________________
"You never close your eyes anymore when I kiss your lips..." "The Righteous Brothers"
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 10, 2006 4:37 am 
Doll Guru
Doll Guru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 1:00 am
Posts: 5820
Location: Pine Street Inn
I appreciate your offer to help, etc., but that is off-topic for this thread.

I don't like system you described. TDForum is not under any radar. I'm not certain system you described totally escapes potential liability, but I'm not an attourney and I'm guessing many attournies might also be waiting to see how certain aspects of the law are tested in the courts.

On a more personal note, if it were totally up to me - which it isn't - I wouldn't have any explicit sex. I'm weird that way. I like nude photos that have good photography and are more tastefully done than just close-ups of genitals and seeing just how much she can be stretched wide open. I have no problem with nudity in of itself.

Also, I have a little bit of some sort of "thing" about photographing sex and nudity if it has to do with someone/something I have sex with myself. I'm not pretending it makes all the sense in the world, but it's some-what analogous to those who don't mind if <i>she</i> does that, but wouldn't want his mother, sister, girlfriend, or wife doing that. Whatever...



_____________________________
<div>So long, and thanks for all the fish!<br>- Douglas Adams</div>
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:33 pm 
Newbie
Newbie
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 12:00 am
Posts: 1
Location: Canada
I've read the law and personally I think they have really gone overboard, but then again I can't make out a lot of the legal ****. Is this law only for the US? Or is it international? If it is only for web pages published/stored in the US why not have a Canadian or someone from another country build/host an ablum(s) on a Canadian(or other non US) server with the standerd disclamers?

*A point of note* This post was redone multiple times on a word doc. due to my reaction and rather creative comments when I first read this post. It was originally four times longer.... What can I say... I get...creative when I'm ticked. Nobody needs to hear what I want to do to them with a spear, a bull, and a ten semi truck. :oops:


 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 1:05 am 
Doll Guru
Doll Guru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 1:00 am
Posts: 5820
Location: Pine Street Inn
18 U.S.C. section 2257 compliance: This pertains to the United States. Other countries are not under the jurisdiction of this law, but sometimes governments have agreements with eachother.

The only change in the last couple of years is that Old Doll Album sometimes had explicit sex. The (new) Doll Album does not. Due to bandwidth Mytime as to pay for, we cannot have every good looking female uploaded/accessed. So this change would have occured anyway.

We also have to comply with the server farm Acceptable Use Policy, so we have to be careful of dolls that look under 18 years of age.

This law seems to have had little effect on internet porn sites. They just add a 18 USC 2257 compliant tag at the bottom of the screen. This seems to be the only difference that end-users notice.


 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 12:22 am 
Doll Mentor
Doll Mentor
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:00 am
Posts: 1381
Oh this is why I coudn't find any


 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 18 U.S.C. section 2257 compliance.
PostPosted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 9:57 pm 
Doll Oracle
Doll Oracle
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 1:00 am
Posts: 7346
By law this means you cannot show your doll naked unless you can provide, and the forum can keep, certifiable proof that it is at least 18 years of age... :mrgreen:



_____________________________
“If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”
~ George Washington

Please do not send me any Private Messages as I cannot respond; the moderators of this group have prohibited me from using PM since Nov. 2014.
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 18 U.S.C. section 2257 compliance.
PostPosted: Sat Mar 19, 2011 1:53 pm 
Basic Poster
Basic Poster

Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 5:39 am
Posts: 5
After reading a few posts here, I just wanted to say that you guys are fukkin awesome!!
Its like reading posts i would make myself in a drunken stupor and forget about them.....hmm, maybe that IS where a lot them came from :)


 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: 18 U.S.C. section 2257 compliance.
PostPosted: Sat Mar 19, 2011 2:59 pm 
Doll Patriarch
Doll Patriarch
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 11:56 pm
Posts: 4669
Location: S.F.D.D. Headquarters, Vegas
Another GOP small government idea....


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

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who Is Online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

Chatting users: TJ_Foxx, Tasha Foxx, CinnamonLover, Nutmeg, Cinnamon, grimreefer24601, MaryJaneReefer, Jilly Bean Reefer

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