Adult Filter

Not trying to start a morality thread or free speech or anything like that. My wife thinks it would be a great idea to have a "adult" filter. When signing in or saved as a cookie it may be a great idea to stop adult oriented videos to not show on the first sign-in page or with searches. For example there are some very provocative videos that show up when a bird watcher does a search for "Tit" (The tits, chickadees, and titmice comprise Paridae, a large family of small passerine birds which occur in the northern hemisphere)
.
There are many offices that monitor internet use and if a topless woman shows up it can be embarrassing or even possible grounds for termination. There could also be children searching for videos or watching parents doing so.

Yes I know the internet is full of it but P5 should be a little above the rest. Again, this is not a discussion thread on morality or control your kids, leave the videos there but allow them to be filtered if desired by individuals.

Don

I don't view it as censorship, as such a feature would be voluntary (can be turned on or off). I view it more as a "job safe" feature. :)

i think this feature is ok if voluntary ... many people can then decide "on or off" ...and it´s extra advertising tool for many curiously people online :o)))

As someone who once tried to find a photo of a "coal tit" bird at school, I think a voluntary on/off adult filter is a great idea. :)

In the us its a requirment to have age verification for sites that contain adult content. Here is an example:

http://terabyte-hosting.com/orca/topic/Warning-Disclaimer-Adult-Content.htm (no nudity on this link BTW)

There are exceptions, I suggested this to p5 a long time ago. I guess p5 was exempt somehow because Marcus is in Geneva.

2257 applies to any business or website that has any status in the US - no, they are not exempt because Marcus lives in Geneva! 2257 is serious business. It basically allows the FBI to enter your premises and do an audit without cause or court order. It requires that you have complete records and a "records person" available should this occur. Having hosted clients several years ago with such websites of the adult biz, I am very familiar with this law. The reason we got familiar with it was due to the "long arm" of the law that could have literally included our company - and we were just hosting facilitation (ISP) - Mark, no offense and I understand your intent, but please if you are going to bring up a topic of this nature - make it real, accurate and important - and no, THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS in this case! It could be very misleading and wrong information for people. The bottom line, this is a very dangerous area to play in, if proper procedures are not in place. The bare minimum requirements to meet today's version of 2257 can be found on various adult boards such as avn.com, ynot.com and others. If you are going to post any such material, whether you are on or offshore, I highly recommend that you do the minimum required tasks to have this information ready should P5 ever need it. By default, it should be included as part of the model release in any case. This includes copies of picture ID's - i.e. passport, driver's license birth certs etc.. - date of shoot - witness as per - there are even software apps specifically for this purpose:

http://zei2257.com/

and now even specialized services:

http://ytracker.com/


Listen guys, this is no joke. I have had several long conversations with attorneys specialized in this and I can only let you imagine some of the horror stories that have occurred in the past regarding this. This was Ashcroft's doing - and we all know what a piece of work he was.

In any case, if you really want to get to the bottom of this, I recommend J.D. Odenberger http://www.xxxlaw.net/ - he is basically one of the few true experts on this topic and as I have stated, discussed this with him many times at various events.

Please take note, as this could have a major impact on Pond 5's well being.

Im not 100% sure but i belive the 2257 is not effective for topless shots

Yes it is... any nudity. They don't differentiate between soft or hard core - the key is that it primarily is to protect minors. See http://www.asacp.org/page.php? as well.

There are exceptions, if someone is risque or almost nude you don't need this. IE bikinis and stuff. Besides I said I guess there are exceptions.
I brought it up before, Im assuming marcus knows something I don't.
Why didn't you bring this up before?

I don't recall it ever having been brought up.. but we really should make it a point to push for something from Pond5 regarding this, for everyone's protection. I also really didn't pay attention as to what is being submitted in regards to this topic. :) Hence, I never ever surfed for such topics, ever. :~> No, not me. (As I reach for new batteries for my halo) No, really, I haven't paid too much attention to what is being submitted from others... But then, from Europe, I suppose it is far more common than here. They are not as prudish about such topics as we are here. Bikinis and such (even nipple thingy's or pasties) are ok, because, and you'll love this, "the "pornographic or private parts" are covered. These prudish laws even change from state to state... and from network to network... for example - I saw a program on ABC that blurred out a woman's butt wearing a g-string bikini... but on VH1 for example- no blurring, no pixelization... and really pushing the boundaries. - Then after 10:00pm, ABC, NBC etc.. are getting really risque. In my opinion, the whole censorship thing is a waste of time - they can shoot and kill and show guts and gore, but a little titty is not allowed... go figure.. - As we used to say in the biz... "nobody ever died from watching porn". The only thing I really agree with in the law is that it does protect the issue about minors or child pornography being totally illegal and punishable. That is a good thing.