Quote:
Originally Posted by Quentin
This is a commonly held misconception, but a misconception nonetheless.
The tubes are relying on being considered OCPs ("online content providers") as that term is defined under the Communications Decency Act, and operating on the assumption that they would have immunity to prosecution under 2257 by way of CDA Section 230 immunity.
It's a theory which, to my knowledge, has never been tested in court (I could very well be wrong about that, though).
Larry Walters wrote a good two-part piece for XBIZ about this some time ago, and he does a much better job of explaining it than I can. Here's and here's for those interested in the subject.
|
Affiliates may well need 2257 documents relating to any of 2257-triggering content they use to promote their sponsors' sites. As noted earlier, affiliates would not be in the same category as tube sites since affiliate material is not 'user generated content' in the same sense as material uploaded by independent third party users to social networking sites. But the lines are blurry here, and there may be ways to structure a promotional business model so that it fits within a 2257 exemption. Contact one of the adult industry attorneys for advice on the issue, as it can get quite complex.