I'm not so sure.

I don't want to completely disrupt this hissy fit, but consider this - would the Feds have agreed to this if they thought the new regs would stand? Seems to me the other guy has already winked, at least - and maybe he's blinking.

I'm all for a conservative legal strategy, but if the hand is loaded with Aces, you're a fool not to play them - and the new regs bear a striking similiarity to the ones tossed aside.

I am a laymen, don't profess to be a lawyer, but I did spend five years trying to keep them from fucking up my databases.

There is a lot about this whole thing that puzzles me. I'm confused by the number of people that contend there was no way to obtain a "blanket" TRO enjoining the DOJ from enforcement efforts of any kind against any entity; that only named plaintiffs could have been covered by a TRO resulting from today's hearing doesn't seem quite right to me.

I don't know enough at this point to conclude that what the FSC did is good strategy, bad strategy, or stupid strategy.

That being said, Lee - if you are not a member of the FSC, they can't have sold you out.

So what you are really saying is that this organization didn't follow a legal strategy that benefited you - an organization you do not belong to, and who therefore has no reason to give a fine flying fuck about you.

Why the fuck should they do your legal work for you? How much legal work have yoiu done for other people for free?

They do already have a list.

The FSC have opnly said that anyone on the DOJ's 'list' will be checked against those on the FSC's member list.

If the DOJ jas a current list of 'violators', see my point in that thread Drav started.

It only takes one bad apple to spoil the barrel ;) [/b][/quote]
I was not aware that people are joing the FSC, because they want to continue to be "illegal", but if they do, then its a personal choice - not something the FSC is promoting. The FSC has already washed their hands in the press release regarding any bad apples.

FSC have placed themself in a situation, where they can fight.. I would think just that would be enough to contribute, if you are located in the US?

Anyone who joined the FSC in the effort to support the lawsuit against the government and expected that your information would be kept private - please contact me immediately.

I have bridges for sale in New York and San Francisco for sale real cheap.

:blink:

They havent sold 'me' out, they sold 'us' (the industry) out.

They claim to represent the industry yet, at the first chance they get, they make a non-disclosed 'dea' that benefits only their members.

They dropped a TRO that would have protected EVERYONE, not just their members, instead, they are continuing to line their profits usng the 'we represent the industry' marketing 'spin'.

I really couldnt care less myself as my company is fully compliant however, i know US based webmasters who are also compliant but do not currently belong to the FSC, they are the ones who got sold out. Even though they are compliant, because they arent a member of the FSC they can still be inspected at great expense to themselves.

I agree, it isnt something that FSC is promoting but, its also not something that they are telling people NOT to do either.

If the DOJ finds a single webmaster in non-compliance with these 2257 regs, and they ARE a member of the FSC, every other member of the FSC's information will be made available to the DOJ.

As i mentioned above, this 'private deal' does NOT protect people who ARE guilty of a crime even if they are FSC members.

If someone has commited a crime, in this instance, non-compliance, no amount of 'private deals' in the world will stop them being prosecuted.

Can you prove ownership of the said bridges?

Perhaps you could stand by them with a copy of todays newspaper to prove you have them in your possession ;)

How will the DOJ find out that they are illegal, if they can not inspect the company records until September 7, 2005? :unsure:

How will the DOJ find out that they are illegal, if they can not inspect the company records until September 7, 2005? :unsure: [/b][/quote]
They dont have to inspect the records LOL

They ALREADY have a 'hit list'.

That means that they have ALREADY done their homework.

All its going to take is for the DOJ to find a single image on a site that they already know doesnt have the required documents in circulation and voila, no need to inspect, just arrest and charge.

Then how does that give the DOJ access to all the others on the FSC list? :unsure:

I wish I caught this thread sooner so I could have shoved my 2cents at the top of the thread :( but better late then never.

Anyone who paid close attention to the FSC would have seen this coming a mile away,

Case in point:

They said for the last 30 days 2 things that TOTALY contradicted the other
(1) We Will NEVER Give out your info if you become a member
(2) Only our members will be covered by our TRO

Now one would read those two statements and do a compleate Homer "DOH" and see that these fucks are just full of shit, but for some reason the vast majority of webmasters totaly missed this????

Next up, they NEVER used proper legal terms for what they were doing from the get go:
(1) We will be filing for a TRO (Temporary Restraing Order) And it will only cover our members
(2) We will be filing an injunction.....
(3) We will not give out our member lists

Next up, They knew the end plan the entire time, a true TRO would cover EVERYONE member or not BUT a PLEA or "Begging for an extension" would only cover their members, this was their plan all along if you stop and apply commen sence to it all, again they misslead us and fuck over those who payed them money.

Finaly, They (My consperacy Theory) Are providing kickbacks to certain players who drum up huge signups, bringing us right back to the year 1999 where people made mass ammounts of cash by "less then ethical means" All one needs to do to understand this theory is to follow the board drama and who is doing what, These are not "stupid people" or "noobs" who would just believe everything they read, these are "power players" who hold a nice chunk of thier collective industries. The result is the ability to manipulate a huge flock of sheep to fork over $300.00 a pop from which they get how much in return?

The list goes on and on, but I called this 28 days ago but no one seemed to want to listen, but now a damn good portion of people see the truth, I just pray they did not put themselves and their freedoms at risk by being put on the FSC soon to be handed over to the court "Member List"

-Loki-

Then how does that give the DOJ access to all the others on the FSC list? :unsure: [/b][/quote]
Once one has been charged, its only going to take a plea to a judge on the grounds of 'discovery' to have them unseal the list.

99% of the time, if a crime has been commited by someone on a 'sealed' document, it gets 'unsealed' and entered in to public record at least thats what one of our attorneys are telling us :)

Something about having potential evidence hidden from law enforcement / prosecutors that could influence the outcome of a case was what she mentioned specifically.

In essence, it means people who are ALREADY members of the FSC need to be stopping those webmasters who have posted on places like GFY saying they only want to join to get the 'protection' from joining because its only going to take one of them to be caught for every FSC members to be up the creek without a paddle.

Im with ya there, ive been saying since the FSC first started telling people they need to signup to be 'protected' that something was amiss.

Its only now people are starting to realize the consequences of the FSCs actions, along with what i have been saying made sense all along.

$300 for an ass fucking is out of my price range <_<

Depends on who's ass

Does that price included a reacharound and kissing?

Well, I guess we get to see, if this will happen - no way all persons/companies on the FSC list have their things in order ;-)

But bottomline is that the FSC are now the industry best bet to get anything changed regarding 2257... I will not speculate, if they have a good case or not - but it will clearly benefit all if the FSC succeeds. So why not support them? (you can probably just wire them money without being a member ;-))

They could have gone for the blanket TRO, that is what was requested. The agreement was made to forego the hearing on the TRO.

My point was that the TRO was not a sure thing, that would have depended on the judge's mood.

The agreement was a sure thing, and covers only the plaintiffs.

Depends on who's ass

Does that price included a reacharound and kissing? [/b][/quote]
If I'm being payed $300 then I don't mind a reach around with a little kissing :)


However if I'm paying $300 then I don't want to be ass fucked, period!

Boy, the conspiracy theories are flying high now.

OK, here's my perspective. My house is clean, authorities can feel free to inspect my records. No cost involved to me, they come, ask to see records, I show them, they're going to say OK.

I belong to the FSC, not as some protective measure, but because I believe in what they do. This just turns out to be an added unexpected benefit to me as a paying member.

Let's just say that the "discovery" theory is true. "One bad apple" won't ruin me, because I'm compliant. The only people it'll "ruin" are the ones who AREN'T compliant, and my perspective is fuck 'em, they should've been compliant.

Why anyone would be concerned about anybody knowing they're a Free Speech Coalition member in the first place is totally beyond me. I really don't care who knows I'm a member, from the DOJ down to that red-haired kid down the block. Matters not to me.

How long will this thread continue until this point is understood?

Man, this industry is really terrifying. When the DOJ reads these boards, I bet they look upon us like a lion does when it spots a gimp old elephant.[/b][/quote]
What the fuck's the matter with you? Don't you understand? These are the "l33t" of porn. Everyone on oprano has been compliant with the new regs since 96'. I mean these are the geniuses of online porn. They created it. Hell, they created pop ups! By that fact alone they should be included in any injunction or agreement for free. Didn’t you know all the lawyers from bangbro’s and ifriends, etc., surf here to learn how to deal with the DOJ? It’s not like paul cambria or others have any “real” idea of what's going on.

Gotta give has been and faggot porn peddlers credit, they make GFY look like yale orientation at times.

I'm praying they all get indicted so I can dance around at their sentencing hearings.

What the fuck's the matter with you? Don't you understand? These are the "l33t" of porn. Everyone on oprano has been compliant with the new regs since 96'. I mean these are the geniuses of online porn. They created it. Hell, they created pop ups! By that fact alone they should be included in any injunction or agreement for free. Didn’t you know all the lawyers from bangbro’s and ifriends, etc., surf here to learn how to deal with the DOJ? It’s not like paul cambria or others have any “real” idea of what's going on.

Gotta give has been and faggot porn peddlers credit, they make GFY look like yale orientation at times.

I'm praying they all get indicted so I can dance around at their sentencing hearings. [/b][/quote]
Very nicely wrote :)

Your anger and hate barely shows, but you ignorance seems to be harder to hide! <_<


One of the people in this thread that have claimed that they comply and did before these regs came out, I truly believe! As he’s from the UK and has had to cover his ass with factor 2000 sunscreen from the start!

It’s easier to work this when the laws are tight and being loosened – harder to work it from the other way around!

So you don't believe ME, eh, Trev. <_< Just for that...


































HOMO :nyanya:

So you don't believe ME, eh, Trev. <_< Just for that...


































HOMO :nyanya: [/b][/quote]
You are another of the few that I truly believe was/is compliant. :)

Too little, too late. You've already broken my heart. :(

let me take the time to thank the lord i never got involved in content.

Too little, too late. You've already broken my heart. :( [/b][/quote]
HOMO!

HOMO! [/b][/quote]
you are gayer before 9 am than some people are all day;)

hallelujah :okthumb:

you are gayer before 9 am than some people are all day;) [/b][/quote]
HAHAHAHAHAHA

:D

HOMO! [/b][/quote]
Nah, I'm only play gay. :purpdance:

Nah, I'm only play gay. :purpdance: [/b][/quote]
TEASE!!!!

:P