New law in effect for Nude work
Money is not the problem. The problem is, I don't have any.
Looks like they want to set up an IMDb for porn movies and actors :-)
Originally Posted by djklmnop
So, who you're gonna vote for next time round?
"I could make a good case for the idea that these regulations are designed to harass people in the adult industry. We already have tough anti-child-porn laws," said DeWitt. "I see no good reason for many of these conditions, other than imposing an unnecessary harassment for people in a business which is a stated enemy of the Bush administration."
I guess if this were REALLY true... there wouldn't be any 'kiddie porn'... just a thought. It's funny when people think it's a bad thing to have higher moral values...
Jeanette, there are fairly strong laws on the books against murder, but it still happens. I also am not sure being against pornography is actaully a case of higher values. My values are not concerned with what consenting adults do for income or pleasure as long as it doesn't harm others.
Originally Posted by BWGirl
I wonder what this will do to sites that post artistic nudes, like this one. To some, and I supsect people like Ashroft given he had a nude statue covered, these are pornography. Are we going to need to submit froms to Sean if a nude is posted? If one sneaks by I would hate to see Sean become a wanted man.
Also, where did it say this went into effect today?
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
This legislation is aimed at the American market place. I doubt that the world market will give a damn about American legislation. Wonder how this will work out in actuality for Nigeria, Bahamas and other places?
This is proposed legislation. Wait and see what congress does with it. It should take years to argue, water down and then act on, if things go according to plan. tim
I read the proposed legislation and did not see how it effect non-sexually explicit photographers. It appears this is directed at the porn industry, not fine art nudes. Then again I'm not a lawyer.
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 110 > § 2257
(3) the term “produces” means to produce, manufacture, or publish any book, magazine, periodical, film, video tape or other similar matter and includes the duplication, reproduction, or reissuing of any such matter, but does not include mere distribution or any other activity which does not involve hiring, contracting for managing, or otherwise arranging for the participation of the performers depicted;
Sean would be okay if they are talking about the type of photos that get placed here.
I am a bit confused, has this legislation gone into effect, the date on the article is in August 2004 and the article claims it would go into effect right before the 2004 presidential election, so has it in fact gone into effect?
Originally Posted by Rlibersky
Now you need to define "non-sexually explicit"
"(E) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person;"
One word: 'unworkable'
Might be aimed to protect people, but will just make the soup thicher IMO.