HCBabes

IMHO The whole 3rd party custodian was a very progressive move by Big Brother. The beauty is that it makes it easier for freesite owners to comply with 2257... Even if it does take a little work on the part of us smalltime webmasters, it is a good thing because it actually makes it possible for freesite owners to specify their sponsors' custodians as their 3rd party custodians. Hell... It should even make sponsors breath a sigh of relief due to not having to release to model ids to 1000's of webmasters... Some who may not actually be real webmasters. ;)
This system would work, as long as the sponsors have an actual custodian and are not trying to use the regs to their own advantage and passing the buck onto their content providers or the primary producers as their own 3rd party custodians... and I've noticed that alot of them are doing this.
This is where I get pissed off. Why would a sponsor not have his own custodian of records? I can understand having a 3rd party custodian who knows your sites, content used on each site, your affiliate ids and websites, but passing the buck to content providers or primary producers is rediculous. The content provider has already given up the the required docs when the content was purchased. If he didn't then you shouldn't use the content.
This practice leaves affiliates bare assed when it comes to compliance and any sponsors who have compliance pages that pass the buck to primary producers and content providers need their asses kicked. What happens when a content provider or primary producer refuses to provide inspectors document for images on a site owned by someone he never sold content to and has no idea who owns? Simple answer... A small-time webmaster gets a knock on the door from pissed off inspectors and ends up going to prison.

I don't know how many sponsors I have dropped recently due to this idiotic policy and anyone who doesn't do the same is gonna get caught with their drawers down when an inspector visits their sites.

__________________
Trade With The HCBabes Network Sites... They're Grrreat!
Asians - Latinas - Ebony - Teens - Cameltoes - BigTits - Asses

UkRoy

You ain't as dumb as your avatar leads me to believe, actually you're one of the brighter ones I've met mate.

HCBabes

Don't tell anyone... I'm trying to keep up appearances here.

__________________
Trade With The HCBabes Network Sites... They're Grrreat!
Asians - Latinas - Ebony - Teens - Cameltoes - BigTits - Asses

BJ

Whats our responsibility as an affiliate if the sponsor doesn't have the records at a custodian, can they come after us?

PornPuPpY

How much is this 2257 costing sponsors and affiliates?

wildjohnny

Personally I am working on narrowing down my adult domains. I will end up with just a few and they will all follow garcia's advice and just show boobs. Anything harder than that will be hosted by the site I represent.

I will let them worry about the 2257.

__________________
-->-->--> Lewd Toons <--<--<-->Hentay Blog<--<--

Jim_R

I just started out so only have 2 domains , mine are gay sites with no hard core images at all,just playing it safe for now.

HCBabes

Yes they can come after you... and I would drop any sponsor who doesn't have their own custodian.

__________________
Trade With The HCBabes Network Sites... They're Grrreat!
Asians - Latinas - Ebony - Teens - Cameltoes - BigTits - Asses

britishsexlinks

I do the same

bobby

My clients use 3rd party custodians with no problems man

KatieAnn

An *actual* 3rd party custodian should be no problem. But for a primary publisher to direct the authorities to 100 different primary producers to hunt down documentation would be considered an undue burden (and rightly so). Not to mention that the publisher would have to have a tracking system to figure out which producer a particular model's documentation resides with . . . a bigger hassle than simply maintaining the documentation themself.

A primary publisher doing this is either hiding something or just stupid. Personally I'd steer away from that stuff (why take unnecessary risk when there are plenty of legit programs to support?), though as an affiliate you're still unlikely to get pinned with the primary publisher's missing paper trail.

__________________
Katie

bobby

What's the big deal about maintaining model release and age verification documents as a primary producer, if you're not breaking the law it's no big deal. If you are breaking the law well you deserve what you get.

KatieAnn

"Undue burden" is one of those gray areas of law which applies to most legal situations - basically in this case if you make it difficult for the authorities to track down your paperwork then you are in fact breaking the law.

It's no big deal if you use one or two producers, and they maintain your paperwork . . . but what happens if you have 100 producers, and inevitably some of them have moved or gone out of business, etc? And how do you determine when to draw the line going from "no big deal" to "undue burden"? It's totally subjective, so best not to push your luck with it.

__________________
Katie

seeandsee

interesting!