which justifies making it a requirement for the primary producer ONLY. you are trying to argue that the law in its entireity is valid, including the secondary producer requirements

please explain exactly how it is harder to enforce, take this specific example
ron jeremy has acted in 1000 movies, he is well over the age of majority. Each of those movies have been licienced to 100s of web sites (1000 if you include gallery submitters)
which means under the current law that 1000*100 records to be checked for 1 person.

under the super id example those 100,000 records to check would become 1 record check.

This is from the point of view of the goverment operative not the webmaster.

How exactly is the first solution easier to enforce then the second one.


while i agree with this statement, you still haven't explained how "super id" solution would be more difficult to enforce than 100,000 fold duplication of id solution. which means you are basically doing the same thing from the opposite side.

Sure you do... and so does the government.

The old 2257 law (as poor as it was) would in fact be the way to go if they really cared about kids.

The new law is utterly and completely incomprehensible and it is, therefore, impossible to comply with.

It's that simple.

This isn't about kids, it's about harassment.

If they cared about kids they'd give us a law that normal human beings could read and comply with.

You are assuming that the feds would check the ID of the same performer over and over again. That's not reality.
If there is a model of questionable age, they'll check his/her ID once and then move on.

You have this fantasy where hundreds of FBI agents are dispatched to check the same performer's ID 1000 times. That's not how it's going to happen.

The "super id" solution is kind of what's going to happen now since the feds are going to allow 3rd party record keepers. So the primary can pay a 3rd party to keep records, and the secondary can list that same 3rd party as custodian of records for that particular scene.

The thing with that though, is that as a secondary producer, I would still insist on inspecting the records myself.....because what if the girl was actually underage?
If you buy content from an overseas producer and then just "take their word" that the girl was of legal age, and then come to find out she's not, then you are guilty of publishing CP, whether you intended to or not, and can go to jail for doing so.

Even though there is a 3rd party keeping the records and keeping them organized, it's kind of like having a CPA do your taxes. They do all the heavy lifting but at the end of the day, if a mistake was made, you're responsible for it, not the CPA.
In the same vein, a secondary is responsible for the content they choose to publish, even though the actual records inspection will happen elsewhere. :2 cents:

ok explain how they will magically know.

you previously said the looks young test would not work, yet now you are using it as a justification to say what i say would happen would not happen. You can't have it both ways. IF the "looks young" test would not be adequate then they would have to check the id page by page.

My binder has kimberly franklins id, on 7 different pages.
someone else may have bought 20 scenes with kimberly franklin (my 7 plus 13 more) how would they magically know not to check those pages. How do those pages magically disappear from the second persons binder so that agent doesn't even have to look at them.

They don't
that is where the duplication of effort happens

under the superid system, i would have one super id for kimberly franklin, and a list of the set she is in.

the second person would have the same for his 20 sets. It would not matter who the shooter of the content was, which company i bought it from, or what country it was shot in.


a model specific super id system, is far superior to current system, specifically because the government would be responsible for issuing the super id.

and the same would be true if they gave you a photo copy of a fake id.

except that when tracy lords was shot with under age porn the shooter got off because the id she used successfully passed government screening (she used it to fly out of the country). The current solution makes you liable for fake id, the super id which the government issues would not.
The simple fact is the government can run down a lot of id information that i can not. They have a much better chance of catching fake id then i would ever have. Granted if manditory it could be abused, that why you would make in optional. But even if you were to choose not to take advantage of the "super id" then it would be no worse than it currently is.

Secondary producers/primary producers would have an insentive to hire models who have a super id, becuase it would prevent them from being unfairly harrassed, or liable for mistakes that could happen.