I think you're overreacting here, if you read the entire chapter, it clearly applies to child pornography, including the sections cited.
What you perhaps ought to be concerned about is section 2252b, to wit:
Quote:
(a) Whoever knowingly uses a misleading domain name on the Internet with the intent to deceive a person into viewing material constituting obscenity shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
(b) Whoever knowingly uses a misleading domain name on the Internet with the intent to deceive a minor into viewing material that is harmful to minors on the Internet shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 4 years, or both.
(c) For the purposes of this section, a domain name that includes a word or words to indicate the sexual content of the site, such as “sex” or “porn”, is not misleading.
(d) For the purposes of this section, the term “material that is harmful to minors” means any communication, consisting of nudity, sex, or excretion, that, taken as a whole and with reference to its context—
(1) predominantly appeals to a prurient interest of minors;
(2) is patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community as a whole with respect to what is suitable material for minors; and
(3) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors.
(e) For the purposes of subsection (d), the term “sex” means acts of masturbation, sexual intercourse, or physcial [1] contact with a person’s genitals, or the condition of human male or female genitals when in a state of sexual stimulation or arousal.
|
What exactly constitutes a "misleading domain name" is not really specified, paragraph c does state explicitly that the words "sex" or "porn" in the URL cannot be termed misleading - change your URL to pixiesexplace.com, or whatever, and I don;t see where you are prosecutable under this law, no matter what members post - as long as there are no legal monors, i.e., under the age of Eighteen depicted performing any of the sexual acts mentioned - which was already properly disallowed and monitored before this law took effect.
Doesn't seem to be anything really new, the porn film industry has had to keep records for years concerning proof of age, a perfectly reasonable precaution I think most would agree, and this mainly updates that law for the internet as far as I can tell.
The kicker here I think is section 2252b above, concerning misleading URL's - any site with a URL without the words "sex" or Porn" in it, is technically fair game.
I suppose it could be enforced in bad faith, i.e., if every porn site on the internet has to maintain records of every performer in every image posted on their site, it's gonna take up an awful lot of disk pace, and most of them steal these pics from each other anyway - section - I think they'll have their hands full just going after the child porn however. I get popups and redirects to sites offering what appears to me to be adolescent models on a regular basis - still, to be in full complience with the law, you'd have to maintain the records as described - a photocopy of the birth certificate, and a legitimate photo ID - a drivers liscence or state ID card probobly - I doubt too many poster will want to go to the trouble, not the proprieters of Pixies willing to keep it all on file, I dunno.
In any case, I'd consult an actual lawyer familiar with these types of laws before getting too wound up.
On the plus side, drawings of any sexual act have been ruled to be perfectly legal,
including child porn - so if this is as far reaching as you seem to believe, I'm gonna do booming business. No child porn or rape though, gotta have some standards.
. We must remediate problems with any REPORTED posts.
Linear Mode
