Sorry if I sound a wee bit angry or ranty in the following, but I'm feeling a wee bit angry and ranty...
So, that born-again bullshitter, Bush, and his neo-con storm-troopers are going after Pixies, now? That should keep his sugar daddies on the Religious Right happy for a bit: "Well, darn it, Bubba Senior - George Dubya sure as heck is brave in tackling all these evil pornographers and filth-merchants head on like this. If you ask me, freedom of speech and burden of proof are over rated. Let's send him a couple more million dollars and see what else he can kick up for us!"
I know the rights of folks in the hardcore porn industry are never going to be big vote winners in the American elections but if you look into how the Republicans have been adapting the laws and constitution to suit themselves in going after people working in the porn industry over the past couple of decades (first under that senile old b-movie cowboy, Ronald McReagan, then his crumbly successor GB Senior) you'll get a hint of what's on the horizon for everyday American folks throughout the remainder of this term (and its follow-up if you let it happen). Eg - look into how "Miranda Laws" (which were designed to tackle Mafia style crime organizations) have been used to snatch property from porn directors and producers without trial: guilty until proven innocent!
The new documentation required for websites to remain legal has been required by porn video producers since (I think) 1995. I don't know if it's exactly the same, but for porn videos the producer or director must have copies of two legal forms of photo-ID for each performer (passport, driver's licence etc) and a model release form, as proof that the performer was over 18 at the time of production. I guess this seems a fair enough way of preventing underagers like Traci Lords from getting into the industry, but it's interesting that the burden of proof lies with the producer rather than law enforcement. Also, the documentation requires the performer's REAL name and address, as well as stage name, which kind of throws anonymity and personal safety of the performers out the window. You'll notice that at the start of every porn movie there is a legal statement showing who holds this documentation and where it is held (real names, no PO boxes allowed).
I'm pretty sure that this is pretty much what the new legislation will require from Website Owners. Here's an example of the documentation one of the content providers I use has recently put up on all its sites in order to comply:
http://www.siccash.com/2257.html
That's fair enough for an actual porn site , exhibiting pics or vids owned or licensed by the web-owners, but how can a message board like Pixies possibly comply? How many posters here would be willing to send Pixies two forms of photo-ID and a model release form (all featuring real names and addresses) for each explicit pic posted? How else are the owners going to prove you were over 18 at the time the pic was taken?
By the way, I noticed earlier that someone was querying whether Pixies does class as a producer when there's no money involved. Well, I'm afraid it does. Pixies is the publisher of your photographs and therefore a secondary producer. You (or your hubby / wife) are the primary producer.
From what I've read elsewhere it looks like the Feds could go after the primary and secondary producer of any internet based erotic imagery which doesn't have a fully documented 18 USC Statement like the one linked to above, plus all the approriate documentation in the correct order and without any typos. I read somewhere that there's talk of possible five year prison sentences for those who don't comply.
I imagine the Bush-Whackers are going to concentrate most of their energy on going after the dodgier end of internet porn - the publicity there will be in their favour - rather than a site like Pixies. Hopefully they're thinking there'd be too much potential bad press in going after free speech forums like this, but, on the other hand, can you honestly say that this administration is known for its intelligence or subtlety?
Maybe hosting Pixies in another country is the solution, as suggested earlier. I'm not sure that the Uk would do the trick for this, though. I don't know what the UK's laws on internet sites are, but things are kind of confusing and contradictory here. Explicit sex seems to be allowed in certain magazines and has been passed in a few "arthouse" movies (like Intimacy, Romance and 9 Songs) but in general it is illegal to sell an explicit pornographic movie unless it has been classified R18 (Restricted 18) and those can only be sold in licensed sex shops (not by mail-order). I believe there are only a couple of hundred of those in the country.
Maybe a country like Canada would be a better choice, or better still - somewhere in Scandinavia or mainland Europe. Amsterdam maybe?
In the meantime it'd be great if the Pixies owners enabled the edit function on the forums so we can censor our own explicit pictures from the past incase this ends up being a problem. I'd like to be able to do this.
If you're angry about all this, then go kick up a stink - write to politicians and journalists. Don't allow the Neo-Cons to sneak all this bullshit in the backdoor without anyone even noticing. And remember to vote for Hillary at the next election, my pretties!
Whoo - I feel cleansed after all that. It's good to rant.
Linear Mode
