|
|
|||
| forums: groups: | |||
|
"Now we gotta get photo ID's:-/"
Love you, too
Hello my wamily. I recently got a heads-up from our biller that the credit card companies are preparing new rules for the identity verification of content producers. Nobody is clear yet on exactly what the final rules will be or when they will be revealed, but I want us to get in front of it as much as possible.
One thing that's almost certain is that we will need to start getting photo ID's from anyone who sells content here, and we'd also ask for it from anybody uploading nudity or explicit content. This will be required soon, so if you fit the group, please edit your profile and upload your government-issued state ID as soon as you can. Like your other sensitive info, we will not store your photo ID on any internet server.
Please remember that for every model, you are required to keep proof of age on hand (or stored at your Custodian of Records), and you need to keep model release forms from every shoot. That's for your models and crew. The new rules may require that you send US proof of your model ages--something which has never been required before, and which will surely be at odds with privacy agreements between producers and models.
Just bracing for a worst case scenario. 
Our legal landscape is being morphed by tube sites that never cared much about what kind of content they had up, and that's a shame. But at least we are tight-knit enough that I think we can weather whatever crazy laws or regulations come our way. I'll update everyone whenever the credit card companies announce anything concrete. If anyone else has more info it would be great to hear it.
Thanks for your help
Messmaster
One thing that's almost certain is that we will need to start getting photo ID's from anyone who sells content here, and we'd also ask for it from anybody uploading nudity or explicit content. This will be required soon, so if you fit the group, please edit your profile and upload your government-issued state ID as soon as you can. Like your other sensitive info, we will not store your photo ID on any internet server.
Please remember that for every model, you are required to keep proof of age on hand (or stored at your Custodian of Records), and you need to keep model release forms from every shoot. That's for your models and crew. The new rules may require that you send US proof of your model ages--something which has never been required before, and which will surely be at odds with privacy agreements between producers and models.
Just bracing for a worst case scenario. Our legal landscape is being morphed by tube sites that never cared much about what kind of content they had up, and that's a shame. But at least we are tight-knit enough that I think we can weather whatever crazy laws or regulations come our way. I'll update everyone whenever the credit card companies announce anything concrete. If anyone else has more info it would be great to hear it.
Thanks for your help
Messmaster
Stay messy, my friends
so, since govts have mostly failed at both meaningful measures but also ridiculously absurd measures, the CC companies are now stepping in?
like, i can see the theoretical behind all of this (and the theoretical can be justified) but all i can see is this going about as well as all the previous various attempts by various govts to impose unreasonable control.
also, how would half this stuff even function considering the (now truly) global nature of adult content (outside the relative relics of the "old school" big name porn companies)?
like, i can see the theoretical behind all of this (and the theoretical can be justified) but all i can see is this going about as well as all the previous various attempts by various govts to impose unreasonable control.
also, how would half this stuff even function considering the (now truly) global nature of adult content (outside the relative relics of the "old school" big name porn companies)?
I can see the pros and cons from both sides here but I'm afraid that this much cumbersome accountability control will discourage a lot of great content from being made anymore. Such a contrast to some European countries who are really all about privacy.
Couples that get messy together, stick together
Fox_Trot said: ...also, how would half this stuff even function considering the (now truly) global nature of adult content (outside the relative relics of the "old school" big name porn companies)?
Exactly. How do you administer expirations, changes of address, etc? Only proves it's nothing but a checklist exercise by lawyers. Compliance will only become an issue when an actual legal violation arises or they just want to get rid of you for whatever reason they choose. The list of "what ifs" and "why nots" could fill a Bible.
Dirty Job but I got to do it 20+ years. Thanks.
DuncanEdwards said: Exactly. How do you administer expirations, changes of address, etc? Only proves it's nothing but a checklist exercise by lawyers. Compliance will only become an issue when an actual legal violation arises or they just want to get rid of you for whatever reason they choose. The list of "what ifs" and "why nots" could fill a Bible.
To be fair, if all it's to do is prove "not underage" then it doesn't matter if a passport or driving license has expired, it's still state-issued ID that proves photo, name, and date of birth, and none of those change just because it expires, it still proves the model was over 18 at time of shoot, or (for producers) what their state-recognised ID is (or was at that time).
Does have interesting international ramifications though. Under GDRP in the UK and EU it is illegal to pass on anyone's personal information to anyone else without explicit consent. Not an issue adding that to future model releases but what about previous models who've retired, will it be necessary to get back in touch with everyone and get them to sign new releases for all previous scenes? Not that much of a problem where the producer is friends with and still in touch with a smallish pool of regular models, but much harder for those who hire fresh talent for each shoot and probably aren't still in contact with them afterwards.
From a personal POV I trust MM rather more than I trust many governments or government agencies, so having spotted the new message on the Add Scene page yesterday I sent MM a scan of my ID this morning.
Saturation Hall - Forth! The Gungemaidens!
DungeonMasterOne said:
To be fair, if all it's to do is prove "not underage" then it doesn't matter if a passport or driving license has expired, it's still state-issued ID that proves photo, name, and date of birth, and none of those change just because it expires, it still proves the model was over 18 at time of shoot, or (for producers) what their state-recognised ID is (or was at that time).
DuncanEdwards said: Exactly. How do you administer expirations, changes of address, etc? Only proves it's nothing but a checklist exercise by lawyers. Compliance will only become an issue when an actual legal violation arises or they just want to get rid of you for whatever reason they choose. The list of "what ifs" and "why nots" could fill a Bible.
To be fair, if all it's to do is prove "not underage" then it doesn't matter if a passport or driving license has expired, it's still state-issued ID that proves photo, name, and date of birth, and none of those change just because it expires, it still proves the model was over 18 at time of shoot, or (for producers) what their state-recognised ID is (or was at that time).
Yeah I understand that but it's about all the questions that come with this. In the USA we have this nasty conflict with personal freedom and privacy that keeps lawyers employed. If we can keep inaccurate information on file then why don't we just not require the information until we need it to prove that nothing wrong was done? 99.99% of this collected info will never be looked at or used to serve it's intended purpose. So why do we need it to begin with?
Dirty Job but I got to do it 20+ years. Thanks.
DuncanEdwards said:
Yeah I understand that but it's about all the questions that come with this. In the USA we have this nasty conflict with personal freedom and privacy that keeps lawyers employed. If we can keep inaccurate information on file then why don't we just not require the information until we need it to prove that nothing wrong was done? 99.99% of this collected info will never be looked at or used to serve it's intended purpose. So why do we need it to begin with?
DungeonMasterOne said:
To be fair, if all it's to do is prove "not underage" then it doesn't matter if a passport or driving license has expired, it's still state-issued ID that proves photo, name, and date of birth, and none of those change just because it expires, it still proves the model was over 18 at time of shoot, or (for producers) what their state-recognised ID is (or was at that time).
DuncanEdwards said: Exactly. How do you administer expirations, changes of address, etc? Only proves it's nothing but a checklist exercise by lawyers. Compliance will only become an issue when an actual legal violation arises or they just want to get rid of you for whatever reason they choose. The list of "what ifs" and "why nots" could fill a Bible.
To be fair, if all it's to do is prove "not underage" then it doesn't matter if a passport or driving license has expired, it's still state-issued ID that proves photo, name, and date of birth, and none of those change just because it expires, it still proves the model was over 18 at time of shoot, or (for producers) what their state-recognised ID is (or was at that time).
Yeah I understand that but it's about all the questions that come with this. In the USA we have this nasty conflict with personal freedom and privacy that keeps lawyers employed. If we can keep inaccurate information on file then why don't we just not require the information until we need it to prove that nothing wrong was done? 99.99% of this collected info will never be looked at or used to serve it's intended purpose. So why do we need it to begin with?
Oh, agree completely. And in the EU this is going to crash head-on into the GDRP with all kinds of legal ramifications I'm not qualified to comment on, including passing EU citizen data for processing outside the EU, which has all manner of complications. As you say, and as ever, it's the lawyers that get rich of this, and it's unlikely to make any difference to underlying issues of trafficking and enslavement.
As to why, an unholy coalition of moral puritans who hate the idea anyone might enjoy doing something they don't approve of, coupled with the "something must be done, this is something, so it will be done" brigade.
Saturation Hall - Forth! The Gungemaidens!
DungeonMasterOne said:
Agreed. It is a perfect storm of puritans on the right (My group) combined with SJW types who scream about freedom but really only mean the freedom they designate as freedom. It's like a circular firing squad of morally upright perfection.
As to why, an unholy coalition of moral puritans who hate the idea anyone might enjoy doing something they don't approve of, coupled with the "something must be done, this is something, so it will be done" brigade.
Agreed. It is a perfect storm of puritans on the right (My group) combined with SJW types who scream about freedom but really only mean the freedom they designate as freedom. It's like a circular firing squad of morally upright perfection.
Dirty Job but I got to do it 20+ years. Thanks.
123gunge said: I added a reply but removed it. As the MM has said: it's speculation and not gospel at this time. I'm not sure how this could be resolved. If it comes to pass.
Regards,
Andy and the team.
Regards,
Andy and the team.
That's thoughtful, intelligent, and considerate of you. Unfortunately that won't apply to the tyranny of the minority that will require bankers to show how pure they are or face chastisement as greedy supporters of kiddie porn.
Dirty Job but I got to do it 20+ years. Thanks.
DuncanEdwards said:
That's thoughtful, intelligent, and considerate of you. Unfortunately, that won't apply to the tyranny of the minority that will require bankers to show how pure they are or face chastisement as greedy supporters of kiddie porn.
123gunge said: I added a reply but removed it. As the MM has said: it's speculation and not gospel at this time. I'm not sure how this could be resolved. If it comes to pass.
Regards,
Andy and the team.
Regards,
Andy and the team.
That's thoughtful, intelligent, and considerate of you. Unfortunately, that won't apply to the tyranny of the minority that will require bankers to show how pure they are or face chastisement as greedy supporters of kiddie porn.
If MM is not clear (100%) on what may or may not happen. (I'd want him to have this in writing before suggesting anything due to the legal ramifications.) I don't see what he can do. He can't give any REAL information as he doesn't possess it. (Bar speculation which leads to flame threads.) I understand his point of view to protect the site and the people within it. The data storage is the crippler. If someone personal details leak or are stolen (hacking). Then who is responsible? A copy of someone's driving license ends up on the dark web. That's just the start.
Regards,
Andy and the team.
DungeonMasterOne said:
To be fair, if all it's to do is prove "not underage" then it doesn't matter if a passport or driving license has expired, it's still state-issued ID that proves photo, name, and date of birth, and none of those change just because it expires, it still proves the model was over 18 at time of shoot, or (for producers) what their state-recognised ID is (or was at that time).
To be fair, if all it's to do is prove "not underage" then it doesn't matter if a passport or driving license has expired, it's still state-issued ID that proves photo, name, and date of birth, and none of those change just because it expires, it still proves the model was over 18 at time of shoot, or (for producers) what their state-recognised ID is (or was at that time).
Yeah, that's not how it works in the US. Any form of ID that is not current is not valid for any purposes requiring an ID, even if that purpose is getting a beer from the local bar. Doesn't matter if you're old and wrinkled, if your ID is expired, you can only only get a drink, but they are required by law to have you removed from the premises in certain cases/states etc.
This is so fucking dumb...with everyone that's already thrown in the towel recently, here's yet another compelling excuse to do so if you haven't already.
He's more potato now than man. Twisted and evil.
Potatoman-J said: with everyone that's already thrown in the towel recently, here's yet another compelling excuse to do so if you haven't already.
No need to be so gloomy
This stuff has always happened, and it will continue to happen. It's like it's on a cycle. We deal with the politicians, we deal with the banks. Same shit, new green flies. At some point you sorta stop getting mad at it and just figure out how to deal. We have always come out the other end stronger. 
Stay messy, my friends
This has been the norm for online content/fetish/smut artists for the past few years. It seems to have ramped with FOSTA/SESTA back in 2018 (my gosh that feels like yesterday).
Unfortunately, this is the new norm so sites can stay up and running.
Unfortunately, this is the new norm so sites can stay up and running.
Nope! Not while there's a senile old man in the WH
wannapienaked said: Nope! Not while there's a senile old man in the WH
At least he is not as corrupt as the previous clown
I want to get muddy and messy
gness7 said: a lot of professional and amateur producers are making content where nobody strips down to anything less than their underwear. Content that can be posted on YouTube with a link to Patreon and nobody would bat an eye*. But selling it here means everybody has to be treated like they're producing hardcore porn.
Maybe not hardcore porn, but it is all fetishistic and made for adults. I figure such material does need to be vetted too somehow. It's definitely unfair that we are put to a different standard than other sites.... fetishists are buying that stuff too, and there are no checks in place at all.
123gunge said: The data storage is the crippler. If someone personal details leak or are stolen (hacking). Then who is responsible?
Me. That's why I don't store any of this stuff online anywhere. There's really nothing left on UMD's backend worthy of even hacking.
wannapienaked said: Nope! Not while there's a senile old man in the WH
This time it doesn't appear that politics is at play. It's credit card companies actually not wanting to bill for child porn. We don't even know what the rules are yet
MuddyOtter said: I wasn't entirely sure from the wording, but does this apply specifically to stores and selling content, or is it likely to be required for content shared for free too?
For now it's store content plus any free videos that have nudity or sex.
Stay messy, my friends
gness7 said: The Patreon site selling, say, tickling videos or furry drawings may be getting viewed by fetishists, but they're still not explicit which is why there's no need for them or their participants to jump through the legal hoops.... there's got to be an alternate site separate from the UMD with its own backend just for non-explicit WAM content that shouldn't be held to the same scrutiny as the pied blowjobs of the world
Thanks for the suggestion, but been there done that.
And nobody even used it. LOL Besides, I believe these companies won't be making so much of a distinction between this fetish stuff and actual hardcore sex. Paypal never has. If it's sexually-arousing content then it's pigeonholed into porn, I guess because it causes them the same liability issues. Makes sense because the furry fetishist can be just as sexually aroused as anybody else looking at regular porn, even if that doesn't make sense to the average person. So perhaps the furry models should be protected with the same vigor? Maybe the rollout of the rules won't be fair or smooth, but something's going to happen so we gotta be ready. Now stop worrying for now everybody, and have a bangin weekend!
Messmaster
Stay messy, my friends
Here is a summary of the major video hosting platforms and who does and does not require PhotoID from uploaders.
*Onlyfans = 100% photo IDs required for all uploaders
*Manyvids.com = 100% Photo ID requirement now.
*P***Hub.com = Since the major crackdown recently, now they require Photo IDs for all uploaders = a tactic aimed at shutting them down that has NOTHING to do with Trust and Safety issues, but was solely intended to combat their rampant piracy problems and to put them out of business.
*Clips4sale = 0% photo ID required and they base their verfication documentions on IRS Tax reporting requirements only. They know who you because you are required to provided by your SSN# for tax reporting purposes (U.S. persons only). You are NOT required to supply a photo ID when you file a tax return, so if the United State Treasury knows who you are, then that is suffiicent documention for Clips4sale.
*Ditto for Vidown and UMD at the moment. You need to be an ADULT to file a tax return and your Taxpayer ID or SS# number is good enough ID for who you are. Social Security cards do NOT have a photo of your face,...yet the IRS is happy to use that as the basis for reporting Taxes.
If Banks and CC Providers want to be an "unelected legislature" and make "laws" out of thin air, then they will have to be consistent and apply the same Photo ID requirements to YOUTUBE uploaders as well. If credit card processors want to enforce photo ID on anybody who SELLS their media, then they MUST address Youtube monetized channels as well. That is the big "elephant in the room". FYI there are currently 300 milllion Youtube Channel Creators, and at least 10% of them are monetized, so that means that Google Adsense is selling and sharing ad revenue to at least 30 million Youtube channel owners....and no photo ID is required for them for sell their media on Youtube.
Curio point: For 20+ years I had Visa and Mastercard credit cards with my PHOTO embossed in the top top right corner of my cards, and then 5 years ago they suddenly stopped printing my renewal cards with photos. So....the CC companies had my photo on their card in the past, but now they stopped putting them on my cards. Currently the CC companies do not even ask tor SIGNATURES any more. Go to any supermarket or store these days, and they no longer ask for a signature. I could send my DOG to the supermarket with my card around his collar and he could make a charge if he was smart enough to do that.
You might say....well Youtube does not host ADULT media and UMD does,so that is why Youtube uploaders do not need a photo ID...they are exempt because it is not adult media. So if that is their argument then that means that all NO NUDITY uploaders should be EXEMPT from Photo ID requirements....just as they are on Youtube.
If Messmaster want to get ahead of this issue, what could be done is that Messmaster could add a new field in each UMD Producers Profile, where they are asked to define the nature of their media according to MPAA ratings stands....i.e. a G/PG rated content channel means you are exempt from Photo ID requirements just as Youtube creators are. If you classify your UMD profile as R/X then you may be subject to additional verification documents.
As an R/X Producer myself, I want to know why credit card companies do not trust the U.S. Treasury who have all my tax returns and the U.S. Social Security. Administration......and they know who I am...and the last time I looked at my SS card....it does not have my picture on it. When you rent an apartment and they run a credit report check to identify who you are, no photo is required. You only need a name, address and social security number in order to identify who a person is.
So....what's the point. What is the goal here. It has nothing to do with underage people or trust and safety issues. OK....I can see why they went after P***hub....because the goal there was to resolve video piracy and scare aware all the amateurs and pirates from using their system and to drive that site into the ground.
If I was a cynical person I might think that the hosting companies that already require Photo ID for uploaders (Onlyfans and Manyvids) must be rubbing their hands with glee if these new cc rules take effect, because there will be a mass exodus of content creators at Clips4sale and other hosting sites that will drive them out of business, same as happened to P***hub already.
Sadly we no longer have any privacy rights these days......that is why when you are thinking to become a WAM Producer, you need to ask yourself these 3 questions....
1) Do you ever intend to run for public office or hold a job in the public sector
2) Do you ever aim to hold a senior position in a private corporation
3) Do you aim to be a public figure or celebrity
If the answer is NO to all three questions, then it is safe to become a WAM Producer, because then you are teflon and nobody can dig up dirt and ruin your life with information that you gave privately to some hosting company and then they get hacked, so you are safe to become a Wam Producer.
If you have any kind of important jobs in the public or private sectors (e.g. I have customers in the clergy, in senior military ranks, police, local gov officials etc) then DON"T upload wam media....because it is sure to get leaked...eventually.
Only upload wam media if you are a nobody.....like I am....ha ha
MK
*Onlyfans = 100% photo IDs required for all uploaders
*Manyvids.com = 100% Photo ID requirement now.
*P***Hub.com = Since the major crackdown recently, now they require Photo IDs for all uploaders = a tactic aimed at shutting them down that has NOTHING to do with Trust and Safety issues, but was solely intended to combat their rampant piracy problems and to put them out of business.
*Clips4sale = 0% photo ID required and they base their verfication documentions on IRS Tax reporting requirements only. They know who you because you are required to provided by your SSN# for tax reporting purposes (U.S. persons only). You are NOT required to supply a photo ID when you file a tax return, so if the United State Treasury knows who you are, then that is suffiicent documention for Clips4sale.
*Ditto for Vidown and UMD at the moment. You need to be an ADULT to file a tax return and your Taxpayer ID or SS# number is good enough ID for who you are. Social Security cards do NOT have a photo of your face,...yet the IRS is happy to use that as the basis for reporting Taxes.
If Banks and CC Providers want to be an "unelected legislature" and make "laws" out of thin air, then they will have to be consistent and apply the same Photo ID requirements to YOUTUBE uploaders as well. If credit card processors want to enforce photo ID on anybody who SELLS their media, then they MUST address Youtube monetized channels as well. That is the big "elephant in the room". FYI there are currently 300 milllion Youtube Channel Creators, and at least 10% of them are monetized, so that means that Google Adsense is selling and sharing ad revenue to at least 30 million Youtube channel owners....and no photo ID is required for them for sell their media on Youtube.
Curio point: For 20+ years I had Visa and Mastercard credit cards with my PHOTO embossed in the top top right corner of my cards, and then 5 years ago they suddenly stopped printing my renewal cards with photos. So....the CC companies had my photo on their card in the past, but now they stopped putting them on my cards. Currently the CC companies do not even ask tor SIGNATURES any more. Go to any supermarket or store these days, and they no longer ask for a signature. I could send my DOG to the supermarket with my card around his collar and he could make a charge if he was smart enough to do that.
You might say....well Youtube does not host ADULT media and UMD does,so that is why Youtube uploaders do not need a photo ID...they are exempt because it is not adult media. So if that is their argument then that means that all NO NUDITY uploaders should be EXEMPT from Photo ID requirements....just as they are on Youtube.
If Messmaster want to get ahead of this issue, what could be done is that Messmaster could add a new field in each UMD Producers Profile, where they are asked to define the nature of their media according to MPAA ratings stands....i.e. a G/PG rated content channel means you are exempt from Photo ID requirements just as Youtube creators are. If you classify your UMD profile as R/X then you may be subject to additional verification documents.
As an R/X Producer myself, I want to know why credit card companies do not trust the U.S. Treasury who have all my tax returns and the U.S. Social Security. Administration......and they know who I am...and the last time I looked at my SS card....it does not have my picture on it. When you rent an apartment and they run a credit report check to identify who you are, no photo is required. You only need a name, address and social security number in order to identify who a person is.
So....what's the point. What is the goal here. It has nothing to do with underage people or trust and safety issues. OK....I can see why they went after P***hub....because the goal there was to resolve video piracy and scare aware all the amateurs and pirates from using their system and to drive that site into the ground.
If I was a cynical person I might think that the hosting companies that already require Photo ID for uploaders (Onlyfans and Manyvids) must be rubbing their hands with glee if these new cc rules take effect, because there will be a mass exodus of content creators at Clips4sale and other hosting sites that will drive them out of business, same as happened to P***hub already.
Sadly we no longer have any privacy rights these days......that is why when you are thinking to become a WAM Producer, you need to ask yourself these 3 questions....
1) Do you ever intend to run for public office or hold a job in the public sector
2) Do you ever aim to hold a senior position in a private corporation
3) Do you aim to be a public figure or celebrity
If the answer is NO to all three questions, then it is safe to become a WAM Producer, because then you are teflon and nobody can dig up dirt and ruin your life with information that you gave privately to some hosting company and then they get hacked, so you are safe to become a Wam Producer.
If you have any kind of important jobs in the public or private sectors (e.g. I have customers in the clergy, in senior military ranks, police, local gov officials etc) then DON"T upload wam media....because it is sure to get leaked...eventually.
Only upload wam media if you are a nobody.....like I am....ha ha
MK
Do unto others, then run
I think Mark hit every fucking nail on the head here squarely. The problem I have with this is it's not even the government. Like why does PayPal or Verotel need a copy of my personal ID with my address on it? Just because my fat 39 year old ass rolled around in some pudding with Ariel and Jayce?
Why are CC companies (private banks/financial institutions) asking for this, and what is their legal basis for even being allowed to? If this were a federal bank regulation like Reg D, or the BSA, there would be SOME basis to stand on, and it would the fed regulating the private companies.
You don't have to look far or deep to see that big tech companies have been making strides against civil liberties. Whether it's the producer vs platform argument to regulate free speech on social media such as Twitter or Facebook or the push of new "corporate cities" like in Nevada where private businesses will own enough land to be their own township, have their own school districts, taxes, etc.
They're very open and blatant about it, and the current administration doesn't really seem to have much interest in dealing with it. They're more concerned with banning menthol cigarettes, and making sure positions are filled with the correct political diversity rather than the most competent person (regardless of identification) for the job.
I'm not trying to be "negative" or a "downer" D, I'm just calling it like I see it. And what I see is bullshit.
P.S. Let's get a drink sometime now that we're all vaccinated
Why are CC companies (private banks/financial institutions) asking for this, and what is their legal basis for even being allowed to? If this were a federal bank regulation like Reg D, or the BSA, there would be SOME basis to stand on, and it would the fed regulating the private companies.
You don't have to look far or deep to see that big tech companies have been making strides against civil liberties. Whether it's the producer vs platform argument to regulate free speech on social media such as Twitter or Facebook or the push of new "corporate cities" like in Nevada where private businesses will own enough land to be their own township, have their own school districts, taxes, etc.
They're very open and blatant about it, and the current administration doesn't really seem to have much interest in dealing with it. They're more concerned with banning menthol cigarettes, and making sure positions are filled with the correct political diversity rather than the most competent person (regardless of identification) for the job.
I'm not trying to be "negative" or a "downer" D, I'm just calling it like I see it. And what I see is bullshit.
P.S. Let's get a drink sometime now that we're all vaccinated
He's more potato now than man. Twisted and evil.
This is just nuts!!!! I understand the reasoning behind it and I can some what agree. I am not suggesting in any way shape or form that anyone here would do this. But when you have sites that do not do as good of as job as MM does with the mods help policing things, it is an all or none situation. Yes it sucks that there are sites that refuse to be responsible with their content *Looking right fucking at you YOUTUBE*. There is a TON of questionable content all over that place. I also think that the credit card companies are stupid if they don't think you can't photo shop a state ID. Give it a try it is not hard.
How do they require you to keep the ID's? Would something as simple as a zoom meeting with the producer showing the copies of the model ID's that they keep much like all employers work? Where the copies are stored in a filing cabinet or something so that if needed they can be produced? I know that there are cities that have things set up so even though you are using the city website everything goes through a financial institution on the back end so nothing is stored on their machines to avoid PCI compliance. Would something like that be possible? Where you would not be required to keep the ID on hand because you offload everything to another company?
How do they require you to keep the ID's? Would something as simple as a zoom meeting with the producer showing the copies of the model ID's that they keep much like all employers work? Where the copies are stored in a filing cabinet or something so that if needed they can be produced? I know that there are cities that have things set up so even though you are using the city website everything goes through a financial institution on the back end so nothing is stored on their machines to avoid PCI compliance. Would something like that be possible? Where you would not be required to keep the ID on hand because you offload everything to another company?
I think since the Mind4Charity issue with Tom Mills fetish mining minors for fetish content this should be something we need to practice. Every producer who makes hardcore content does it, anyone who's worked in the sex industry is used to providing IDs, it's a job like any other, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it and every model should be okay with doing it, especially if they have been creating adult content regardless how explicit. Everyone should know where their content is being shared and what it's being shared for.
As a model I can say providing photo ID is perfectly normal and totally okay to do. When I worked at a strip club in Louisiana, it was state law for everyone who worked there to get licensed as a sex worker through the state, so some states have regulations for these things already that you may not be aware of. I still have my ID for it. Professional producers all take and keep on file the performers ID. Anyone who has a problem with that has a problem with an essential part of doing this job, which is verifying proof of age. As a woman, this is vitally important to our safety. There should not be any problem with guaranteeing the age of the models we're working with. This is not going to be public knowledge, it's not going on a list anywhere, it just guarantees that you're not trafficking minors or, fetish mining unsuspecting victims.
As a model I can say providing photo ID is perfectly normal and totally okay to do. When I worked at a strip club in Louisiana, it was state law for everyone who worked there to get licensed as a sex worker through the state, so some states have regulations for these things already that you may not be aware of. I still have my ID for it. Professional producers all take and keep on file the performers ID. Anyone who has a problem with that has a problem with an essential part of doing this job, which is verifying proof of age. As a woman, this is vitally important to our safety. There should not be any problem with guaranteeing the age of the models we're working with. This is not going to be public knowledge, it's not going on a list anywhere, it just guarantees that you're not trafficking minors or, fetish mining unsuspecting victims.
Don't worry,MM. I'll contact them and deal with it personally!
Oh Janet! You look so funny!!!
I know we're still awaiting clarification from the cc companies so just curious at this point. Would this apply to photos shared on profiles? Like I said just curious and will wait for further clarification. Thanks for the heads up MM!
wammster27 said: I know we're still awaiting clarification from the cc companies so just curious at this point. Would this apply to photos shared on profiles? Like I said just curious and will wait for further clarification. Thanks for the heads up MM!
From MM's original post:
One thing that's almost certain is that we will need to start getting photo ID's from anyone who sells content here, and we'd also ask for it from anybody uploading nudity or explicit content.
So as I read that, photo-id is needed if either:
1) Selling content.
2) Uploading naked or explicit images, whether for sale or not.
Anyone uploading non-nude, non-explicit images to their own profile should for now at least still be exempt.
As to the reasons for all of this, having done some research, it all started because PH was hosting multiple copies of a video of (as I rememember the news reports) the rape of an under-18 girl - which was what led to the card associations pulling the financial plug on them the other year - but more cases and new lawsuits are now in motion, as reported here:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14041449/pornhub-lawsuit-hosting-rape-sex-trafficking-victims-videos/
TBH this is an issue that's been building for some time and I can totally see why the card associations - and for that matter anyone with a shred of decency - wants proof that everyone involved in commercial erotic activity (including free material on ad- or subscription-supported websites) is a) over 18 and b) fully consenting, which includes being aware of the fetish nature of anything that isn't obviously erotic, like pies in the face or custard down the trousers.
Edit: Been trying to find the original news reports I remember however ssearches are now buried behind all the reports that came out last year when the card associations pulled the plug, but I definitely remember reading articles about abuse survivors trying to get videos of themselves being abused taken down only for more copies to be re-uploaded. This article gives just one horrific example: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/child-abuse-victim-says-pornhub-profited-from-her-child-rape/W2MFWK6XLXP5RFYETS7J7LVBSQ/
To be honest the more I think about this the more I actually swing in favour of it. Models have had to provide ID for ages anyway, so the only people really new to this are producers, and I have no problem trusting MM or Soundguy with my ID. And a potentailly beneficial side effect of this might be to finally eradicate much of the pirated content from long-gone producers, as pirates, even verified ones, won't be able to provide model IDs or proofs of consent.
Saturation Hall - Forth! The Gungemaidens!
5/1/21, 5:51am: User has claimed post does not purposely direct users to forbidden site "pornhub"
So, what? Someone can load an adult trailer onto Fetlife or Twitter, and other platforms. But can't on here without giving ID? What do you think is going to happen? As someone else has asked. What's next? ID for explicit photos?
I'd best break my ID for my avatar?!?
Regards,
Andy and the team.
I'd best break my ID for my avatar?!?
Regards,
Andy and the team.
My opinion might be very unpopular, but this adult industry was been asking for this. There are two major organizations that fight sex trafficking and underage material, and good for them.
It's no secret that there's a big issue with underage content and a bigger issue with sex rings making money by forcing girls to do sex work online.
The adult industry's answer? Not only do nothing, but allow (like PH did) literally anyone to upload porn. You're 12 and have a smart phone? Go ahead.
These platforms claimed to have a review and flagging system to combat UA videos, but I've read the lawsuits against PH and Twitter. They don't. The organization, for example, flagged certain UA videos to no avail.
So this was all coming, and it's going to be much, much worse. We all saw that Mastercard is coming out with new streaming rules that will all but kill adult streaming: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20210415/11413646621/mastercard-lays-down-new-rules-streaming-sites-that-require-them-to-review-content-before-publication.shtml
Clips4Sale is on a rampage, shutting down countless categories and banning more and more keywords. C4S is now after spanking: https://twitter.com/SarahGregory02/status/1388270923304865796
Sleeperkid, who is an institution in this business, producing since 1998, lost his ability to process credit cards and cannot find another bank to take him. His sin? Wrestling: https://twitter.com/Sleeperkid/status/1384532142999363585
Mark my words, coming soon, any adult platform that does not have an ID system will no longer be a platform.
It's no secret that there's a big issue with underage content and a bigger issue with sex rings making money by forcing girls to do sex work online.
The adult industry's answer? Not only do nothing, but allow (like PH did) literally anyone to upload porn. You're 12 and have a smart phone? Go ahead.
These platforms claimed to have a review and flagging system to combat UA videos, but I've read the lawsuits against PH and Twitter. They don't. The organization, for example, flagged certain UA videos to no avail.
So this was all coming, and it's going to be much, much worse. We all saw that Mastercard is coming out with new streaming rules that will all but kill adult streaming: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20210415/11413646621/mastercard-lays-down-new-rules-streaming-sites-that-require-them-to-review-content-before-publication.shtml
Clips4Sale is on a rampage, shutting down countless categories and banning more and more keywords. C4S is now after spanking: https://twitter.com/SarahGregory02/status/1388270923304865796
Sleeperkid, who is an institution in this business, producing since 1998, lost his ability to process credit cards and cannot find another bank to take him. His sin? Wrestling: https://twitter.com/Sleeperkid/status/1384532142999363585
Mark my words, coming soon, any adult platform that does not have an ID system will no longer be a platform.
gness7 said:
It is unfair that you're being held to a different standard, but I would lean more in favor of "no checks" like the other sites--at least when it comes to the non-explicit stuff. The Patreon site selling, say, tickling videos or furry drawings may be getting viewed by fetishists, but they're still not explicit which is why there's no need for them or their participants to jump through the legal hoops.
.
Messmaster said:
Maybe not hardcore porn, but it is all fetishistic and made for adults. I figure such material does need to be vetted too somehow. It's definitely unfair that we are put to a different standard than other sites.... fetishists are buying that stuff too, and there are no checks in place at all.
Maybe not hardcore porn, but it is all fetishistic and made for adults. I figure such material does need to be vetted too somehow. It's definitely unfair that we are put to a different standard than other sites.... fetishists are buying that stuff too, and there are no checks in place at all.
It is unfair that you're being held to a different standard, but I would lean more in favor of "no checks" like the other sites--at least when it comes to the non-explicit stuff. The Patreon site selling, say, tickling videos or furry drawings may be getting viewed by fetishists, but they're still not explicit which is why there's no need for them or their participants to jump through the legal hoops.
.
Running two Patreons, I can tell you that their Trust and Safety team is on it. Both of my pages needed to be reviewed before launch, and both pages are constantly reviewed. Patreon is a system in place for reporting people who are in violation and they are swift to act. Other sites, however, have no such systems in place. No human is looking things over to make sure everything conforms to their rules.
