Ok, primo messaggio, sperando di non sbagliare...(ci vorrà  mica O.T. onde evitare il rischio ban?) .
Comunque, ciao a tutti i pornofili e le belle signore del forum, sono Blackmore, "vecchio" cultore del porno e seguace prima di V.I., e da tempo di questo forum, davvero stimolante, con orizzonte a 360 gradi ( era meglio 90?)
Avrei voluto scegliere un nick piu' consono alle mie passioni femminili, ma tettonemaniaco era già  occupato, così ho scelto un nick legato alle mie passioni musicali.....per chi vuole sapere cosa significa l' aggettivo "vecchio" più in alto, si faccia 2 conti riguardo al rock anni '70...
Non saró un assiduo scrittore causa impegni lavorativi pesanti ( e pigrizia), ma un lettore abituale senz' altro sì....ma spero comunque di contribuire alle discussioni. Intanto vi segnalo questo bell' articolo sul nostro forum, trovato su Softblog...chissà  se il capo vorrà  rispondere all' interrogativo...

Spero di postare correttamente il link:

http://softblog.it/post/videoimpulse-e-superzeta

Ciao a tutti!
javascript:emoticon(':)')
javascript:emoticon(':)')

Benvenuto!

A proposito dell' OT: c'è un link ad un post riguardante V.I.... Credo tu ti sia salvato!

blackmore ha scritto:Ok, primo messaggio, sperando di non sbagliare...(ci vorrà  mica O.T. onde evitare il rischio ban?) .
Comunque, ciao a tutti i pornofili e le belle signore del forum, sono Blackmore, "vecchio" cultore del porno e seguace prima di V.I., e da tempo di questo forum, davvero stimolante, con orizzonte a 360 gradi ( era meglio 90?)
Avrei voluto scegliere un nick piu' consono alle mie passioni femminili, ma tettonemaniaco era già  occupato, così ho scelto un nick legato alle mie passioni musicali.....per chi vuole sapere cosa significa l' aggettivo "vecchio" più in alto, si faccia 2 conti riguardo al rock anni '70...
Non saró un assiduo scrittore causa impegni lavorativi pesanti ( e pigrizia), ma un lettore abituale senz' altro sì....ma spero comunque di contribuire alle discussioni. Intanto vi segnalo questo bell' articolo sul nostro forum, trovato su Softblog...chissà  se il capo vorrà  rispondere all' interrogativo...

Spero di postare correttamente il link:

http://softblog.it/post/videoimpulse-e-superzeta

Ciao a tutti!

Benvenuto.
Nel link ho trovato questo articolo
venerdì 17 giugno 2005
Paura e delirio a pornolandia
pubblicato in: Hardcore Attualità 
Casino nel mondo del porno americano. Ne sentivo parlare da un pó, oggi la storia è su Wired News. Una vecchia legge, U.S.C. 2257, richiede che i produttori provino la maggior età  dei performer. Ora questa legge è stata estesa anche a chi non produce, ma si limita a mostrare o vendere il materiale, anche sul web.

La situazione è paradossale: qualsiasi webmaster rischia pene gravi se non riesce a fornire i dati, che nella maggior parte dei casi non esistono oppure appartengono ad anelli molto precedenti nella catena della distribuzione.

L'industria sta rispondendo a colpi di avvocati, mentre gli esperti si sperticano in previsioni epocali: nuovi contenuti, fine del free e ritorno del vintage pre 1995, che non ricade nella previsione di legge.



Questo problema della revisione del codice 2257 (che era stato creato per evitare che minorenni come Traci Lords siano ingaggiate per foto/film espliciti) dovrebbe entrare in vigore tra qualche giorno. Gia gli effetti si cominciano a costatare. Il grande database IAFD.com, ha annunciato che togliano tutte le copertine dei film che figuravano nelle scehede filmografiche.
14 Jun 05
Sucks to be US Happy Flag Day. Seems the US Dept of Justice is looking to end pornography on the internet not through obscenity prosecutions, but by forcing the 2257 record keeping requirements on not just the producer of the image/movie but anyone who displays (or causes to display) a web image of same. So, the only dicey stuff we got here are the boxcovers; and since we don't have 2257 documentation, we can spend three years in jail for the privilege of showing it off. So, guess what. We're not showing boxcovers anymore. At least not until the rules are overturned. (Join the fight!)

This course of action pains us greatly, but we don't have the resources to maintain as extensive a collection of records as we'd have to to stay out of jail (not to mention the other nonsense that would be required of us), so we're cutting bait and taking them down. They've been the only not-safe-for-work part of the site, and so we go back to being the cleanest porn site around. We thank you for your understanding and support. Boxcovers can still be viewed via the vendor links, and we hope you will still take advantage of that. Any comments or questions, we'd love to hear 'em.

For more information on your tax dollars at work, I point you to this thread over at Adult DVD Talk, where there's been a good deal of discussion on the subject.



http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,128 ... page_prev2
By Randy Dotinga | Also by this reporter

02:00 AM Jun. 16, 2005 PT
SAN DIEGO -- An adult industry trade association plans to head to court this week to fight new federal enforcement efforts that could catch thousands of online porn sites with their pants down.

Under penalty of federal prison terms, new interpretations of existing regulations would require sites that feature photographs or videos of sexual activity to keep records confirming that performers are of legal age.

In an industry that's faced little oversight, the change in policy will spawn mountains of paperwork. But that's not all: Sites may be forced to remove some or all of their racy content because the original records belong to someone else or never existed. Those who can't comply -- including many free sites that rely on stolen content -- will have to shut down or risk a visit from federal investigators.

"People are pretty freaked out," said porn webmaster Jim McAnally, who estimates that more than half of hard-core websites, including some of his, will have to dump significant numbers of photos and videos. "This will affect people from top to bottom."

The new regulations are scheduled to go into effect June 23. The Free Speech Coalition, which represents the adult industry, announced Tuesday that it will file a request for an injunction later this week to prevent the regulation's enforcement. But the details are hush-hush.

"Exactly what day it is we're not at liberty to say, nor what district we will file in or who the plaintiffs are," said spokesman Tom Hymes on Tuesday at the Cybernet Expo, an annual meeting of porn webmasters in San Diego.

Age records in the porn industry are nothing new: Since federal law 18 U.S.C. 2257 went into effect 15 years ago, everyone who produces porn has been required to prove that performers are over 18. (According to adult industry attorney J.D. Obenberger, the regulations were inspired by congressional outrage at a hard-core video performance by 15-year-old Traci Lords.)

Now, the law is getting stricter. The new enforcement regulations would require webmasters that don't produce material to keep age records for every image that shows or implies sexual activity on their sites. (Sites that simply feature straightforward nudity are exempt.)

"If the original content producer can't be found or went out of business or is unwilling to release information, that causes this content to become criminal overnight," said adult industry attorney Lawrence Walters. "These webmasters are facing felony charges if they continue distributing images they've been distributing for the last five to 10 years."

The maximum penalty is 10 years in prison per violation.

According to the Department of Justice, it's time to update the federal law with the internet in mind. The new regulations "merely" improve record-keeping rules, federal lawyers wrote in a defense (.pdf) of their proposal.

The adult industry isn't so sanguine. The government "is passing these burdensome regulations to try to cause people to shut down or move out of the United States," Walters said.

Another adult industry attorney, Eric Bernstein, said he's advising his clients to get their records in order and prepare for the worst. "Everybody needs to assume that they're going to get a knock on the door," he said. "They can't say, 'Well, there are a million adult sites and only 20 investigators, what are the chances I'll get visited?' If they do that, they do so at a very significant risk."

The countless porn sites that steal content from others will be in jeopardy as well, potentially to a much greater extent than they face on the copyright-violation front, Bernstein said. He predicts that the number of free porn sites, which often rely on swiped photos and videos, will drop.

What else will happen if the new enforcement guidelines survive legal challenges? Attorneys and industry insiders expect a major shakeout. "There are going to be a lot of people who go out of business, and a lot of people who fill the gap and go into business," Bernstein said. "You'll see fewer and fewer people buying content from others unless they literally get the records. You'll see new production and new content coming out of this."

In addition, he said, "vintage" porn -- produced before July 3, 1995 -- may become more popular because the new enforcement regulations don't require age records for older content.

The new regulations raise other issues, too. Some adult performers are afraid their personal information -- including their real names and addresses -- will land in the hands of countless webmasters who now need to keep age records for every image on their sites. On the other hand, performers should expect this sort of thing, said William Margold, an industry activist and former porn actor. "When your privates become public, you lose all your privacy," he said.

For now, porn site owners are hoping for a legal victory. That may seem to be a long shot considering the U.S. government's hard-right turn in recent years, but the industry is crossing its fingers.

In the end, said Margold, American citizens will be the ultimate arbiters of their rights to access porn: "Until the public admits it watches this and allows itself to be counted, it deserves to have the stuff taken away."