A 2257 Solution .... 2257Safe.com

[pornlaw]

http://www.xbiz.com/news/105248

Y-Tracker was developed in 2005 and has been offered as a stand alone desk-top application until now. Dan has reworked and reprogrammed his software to be web enabled for www.2257Safe.com. His software is intuitive and easy to use. And best of all, its already been through one DOJ record keeping inspection.

If you want to take his software for a test drive -- go his site www.ytracker.com for a free demo. The 2257Safe.com interface is almost the same. He also has a screen capture from 2257Safe.com to illustrate what the interface looks like.

As for pricing, we believe the market for this software is the small to mid-sized webmaster/primary/secondary producers and we are trying to keep the monthly pricing affordable for everyone with a graduated payment scale based upon the amount of records a client will have.

With 2257Safe.com, you still maintain your own records however, you will use our address and our name for your compliance notices, so your personal information remains confidential. All of your records are stored on our servers.

And if you ever end up on the receiving end of a DOJ inspection, they will be conducting it at my law firm in Los Angeles, not your home or office. We would handle all aspects of the inspection for you.

We are currently looking for beta-tester for the new service. We will start the beta testing, hopefully, within the next 2 weeks and continue until we launch, hopefully at the Phoenix Forum in April. You guys know how programming goes.

2257Safe.com will be hosted on PCI-DSS compliant servers. Which means its that it will have the same level of security that banks and credit card processors use on their servers and we are securing over $2,000,000.00 of insurance to further protect everyone's records.

Once we do launch, we are going to maintain slow managed growth. We want to insure that the system is stable and that we do not have issues in regards to the servers or the software as we add users.

With that in mind, we will be adding clients on a first come first serve basis.

If you are interested in being a beta-tester for us, or would like to be one of the first 100 clients we add, please go to our site and sign-up.

www.2257Safe.com

We will be contacting you shortly to give you additional information as to the beta-testing stage.

If you just want to be kept informed of developments with the site, please also sign-up, or you can join my Newsletter on AdultBizLaw.com.

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com

[gonzo]

Interesting solution.
I have my records at my lawyers office now. Reside in a security box and he has the key.

[TheEnforcer]

Sounds like a very good idea....

[HeavyB]

I just signed up. This is an AWESOME idea for those of us in the two-person husband/wife production company category. Can't wait to see how it works out! Also a good excuse to fill in the gaps of my 2257s and get them reorganized.

[EmporerEJ]

Wait for it.......
Wait for it.....
A new revenue stream for people like piccionelli: 2257 custodian.
Watch how fast the opposition to 2257 dissolves, as the lawyers find a lucrative revenue stream.

[tony404]

Originally Posted by EmporerEJ

Wait for it.......
Wait for it.....
A new revenue stream for people like piccionelli: 2257 custodian.
Watch how fast the opposition to 2257 dissolves, as the lawyers find a lucrative revenue stream.

you make a interesting point

[EmporerEJ]

Originally Posted by tony404

you make a interesting point

Sadly, I have more first hand knowledge of this, than I would like.

[tony404]

Well considering they actually havent been too effective.Im not surprised at all.

[pornlaw]

Well, I have never been one of the attorneys on the front line of the fight against 2257 so I never had a dog in that hunt. I suspect the "other" attorneys would still rather fight the law for their clients and the FSC than admit defeat and try to come up with an idea to comply with it.

Sadly, I suspect that I wont be invited to the join the First Amendment Lawyers Association anytime soon.

I have been in other industries with far more difficult compliance laws and they seem to be able to work it out. I see 2257Safe.com as being an affordable option....

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com

[pornlaw]

We have also now worked out the pricing for 2257Safe.com..
It is based upon storage needs... and remember that your content will be compressed since the copy of your content on our media servers will not need to be broadcast quality.

Up to:
5 gigs - $29.99 monthly
10 gigs - $49.99 monthly
15 gigs - $99.99 monthly
20 gigs - $149.99 monthly

Again, if you are interested, please go to our site www.2257Safe.com and enter your info. We will be contacting you in regards to our official launch as well updates to the site.

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com

[Jim_Gunn]

Originally Posted by pornlaw

We have also now worked out the pricing for 2257Safe.com..
It is based upon storage needs... and remember that your content will be compressed since the copy of your content on our media servers will not need to be broadcast quality.

Up to:
5 gigs - $29.99 monthly
10 gigs - $49.99 monthly
15 gigs - $99.99 monthly
20 gigs - $149.99 monthly

Again, if you are interested, please go to our site www.2257Safe.com and enter your info. We will be contacting you in regards to our official launch as well updates to the site.

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com

I am very interested in this. Do you have any ballpark idea how many records 5 gigs of data might take up in your system? Like if I have ten movies with a total of approx. 60 scenes with maybe 100 models or so, what kind of space would those records take up?

[tony404]

So you are keeping full versions of the sites on your server? We have two sites that are about 200 gig. So we would be paying on 200 gig or it that compressed or am I misunderstanding?

[pornlaw]

We are hoping on a 2-1 or 3-2 compression with over upload script. So if your site is 7 gigs of content, we should be able to get that into 5 gigs - no problems.

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com
www.2257Safe.com

[tony404]

Originally Posted by pornlaw

We are hoping on a 2-1 or 3-2 compression with over upload script. So if your site is 7 gigs of content, we should be able to get that into 5 gigs - no problems.

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com
www.2257Safe.com

Are there any 7 gig paysites with all the video thats necessary?

[pornlaw]

Just an example.... But we have been contacted by really small content producers that also must maintain records... so yes there are...

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com
www.2257Safe.com

[tony404]

I wish you the all the best. Not in my price range I figure I would be starting at $750 and growing by the month.

[Jim_Gunn]

Originally Posted by pornlaw

We are hoping on a 2-1 or 3-2 compression with over upload script. So if your site is 7 gigs of content, we should be able to get that into 5 gigs - no problems.

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com
www.2257Safe.com

Hold on a second. Don't you guys just need to keep the i.d. document records like scans of driver licenses and passports as well as paperwork like model releases and 2257 data sheets? Why would the third party 2257 company need to mirror someone's entire site content or DVD movie content with gigabytes and gigabytes of hardcore photo and video content? I think Tony404 completely misunderstood, right? The data requirements should be minimal if you are just hosting the data and not the content itself!

[pornlaw]

So you are keeping full versions of the sites on your server? We have two sites that are about 200 gig. So we would be paying on 200 gig or it that compressed or am I misunderstanding?

Hold on a second. Don't you guys just need to keep the i.d. document records like scans of driver licenses and passports as well as paperwork like model releases and 2257 data sheets?

We have to mirror your site, pics and vids. If DOJ shows up and wants to compare the screen caps they have against the actual video you have, that video will need to be linked to the actual 2257 docs and IDs stored on our servers.

We can work something out for 200 gigs, but that would hopefully compress down to about 100 gigs. For bigger sites we will have to do a custom quote. Not sure you would be at $750. I can see if we can add more storage to over server array. We are going to start with 8 terabytes.

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com
www.2257Safe.com

[DannyCox]

Wow, just Carol's site is close to a Terabyte in size with all the video we have. All our sites together are taking up about 2 TB across a number of servers. Good thing I'm in Canada!

[Hell Puppy]

Originally Posted by DannyCox

Wow, just Carol's site is close to a Terabyte in size with all the video we have. All our sites together are taking up about 2 TB across a number of servers. Good thing I'm in Canada!

I've never actually tallied it all up by byte count, but I've got similar amounts and getting larger all the time as resolution increases with users bandwidth and monitor size grows. So I was thinking same thing.

That's just not a viable pricing model for anyone who actually tries to provide something more than a cookie cutter site to their users.

Hell, how do you even begin to figure out what to price? Are you pricing the final rendered version online or the raw stuff straight out of the camera? Wow, just for stills alone I snap RAW at 10 meg and usually 300 shots per set on average before post production. Video? Uhm, I can do 20 gigs in an afternoon.

Now if you're just talking online, what if I store in several formats mpeg, h.264, wmv, mov, etc. Do I have to pay for all of those?

Bad pricing model.

Maybe by hours of footage and/or number of shots. And some of us actually have more than 10 hours of footage and 10,000 pics.

[pornlaw]

Are you pricing the final rendered version online or the raw stuff straight out of the camera?

Final rendered version online... if the content isnt published it cant be inspected.

Now if you're just talking online, what if I store in several formats mpeg, h.264, wmv, mov, etc. Do I have to pay for all of those?

No, just one version is necessary for the records on 2257Safe.com.

Bad pricing model.

Nothing is perfect, but overall we are basing pricing on storage needs which is basically the same as number of pictures and hours of video shot.

With this structure we are not saying that we will not service larger accounts, but honestly, if you are a large program or a huge site, you have probably been in business for years and already have a solution for 2257. More than likely you have an office address and have your name on your compliance notice.

2257Safe.com's pricing is geared towards the little guy -- the beginners, the affiliate sites, the solo girl sites. We will do custom quotes for larger sites.

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com
www.2257Safe.com

[tony404]

Originally Posted by pornlaw

Final rendered version online... if the content isnt published it cant be inspected.



No, just one version is necessary for the records on 2257Safe.com.



Nothing is perfect, but overall we are basing pricing on storage needs which is basically the same as number of pictures and hours of video shot.

With this structure we are not saying that we will not service larger accounts, but honestly, if you are a large program or a huge site, you have probably been in business for years and already have a solution for 2257. More than likely you have an office address and have your name on your compliance notice.

2257Safe.com's pricing is geared towards the little guy -- the beginners, the affiliate sites, the solo girl sites. We will do custom quotes for larger sites.

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com
www.2257Safe.com

I got to tell you, I know a ton of mom pop sites. We are a mom pop and your pricing model is expensive. We live in a video world it doesnt take much to get over 20 gigs. I know a bunch of sites that make a basic living and are well over 20 gig. also based on storage hosting is cheap, so are hard drives.
The company that makes this affordable will own this market to get the mom pops, solo girls 50-75 a month is going to get that market.

[pornlaw]

also based on storage hosting is cheap, so are hard drives.

Not PCI-DSS compliant servers. Find one hosting company in adult that is PCI compliant -- there isnt. MoJo isnt, Webair isnt, National Net isnt. Media servers are cheap. We have three dedicated servers. In order to meet PCI standards, you must have 1 server 1 function and you cannot keep anything else on the PCI server other than the records you want to protect. If you do not mind going with a company that hosts your records on a server that can be hacked, you will be able to pay less, no questions.

PCI compliance in necessary for storage of sensitive personal information. For example, in California, there is statutory law that states that a site/ISP is liable for $750 minimum for every record that is breached in regards to a hack. 10,000 IDs x $750 = $7,500,000.00. If you want to take the chance with a third party custodian that will not be PCI compliance, that is of course your choice. Also you arent looking at the cost of $2,000,000 in cyber and E&O insurance. That isnt cheap either.

I am sure that others will compete and probably under-price us, but they wont be PCI compliant and they wont carry the necessary insurance.

And of course there's the inherent benefit of not having your name and adress on the internet for everyone to see. As well as the fact that there's a lawyer that will oversee any inspection by the DOJ/FBI. 2257Safe.com is still far more affordable than renting an office to use on your notice and house your records.

If you just want a cheap third party custodian that will just warehouse your records I am sure they arent far behind.

Michael

www.2257Safe.com
www.AdultBizLaw.com

[pornlaw]

Just one question Tony -- what do you pay a month for hosting and bandwith on a sites that are 200 gigs each ?

Just curious ?

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com
www.2257Safe.com

[RawAlex]

I am trying to figure out a couple of things here.

1) Is the new 2257 requirements specific that you must have the ENTIRE work where the 2257 records are? Model IDs, cross indexing, and so on isn't enough? Could the same thing not be acheived with remote access to the client's server in case of an inspection? After all, unless the hosting is in your office, it would be remote anyway, right?

2) Does this storage have to be online? Obviously you won't be serving the content to anyone except the feds if they come inspecting. So the only online requirement would be to upload new documents / images / videos and nothing else. Once uploaded, it could be taken offline immediately, because it will never change. So the content could be written out to duplicated backups, example, and stored once in the offices and once in a secure, fireproof location.

I am trying to figure out why you want the content to be online.

Explanations, please!

[pornlaw]

Is the new 2257 requirements specific that you must have the ENTIRE work where the 2257 records are?

Yes, 28 CFR 75.2 (a)(1)(i) - requires of a copy of the depiction.

Could the same thing not be acheived with remote access to the client's server in case of an inspection?

No, each record in our database will be cross referenced and indexed to the content. Each is given a unique numerical identifier so when the record is retrieved so will the content.

Our business model is online - it isnt necessary. Your lawyer or your cousin for that matter can keep a copy of your records in their office under a lock and key.

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com
www.2257Safe.com

[tony404]

Originally Posted by pornlaw

Just one question Tony -- what do you pay a month for hosting and bandwith on a sites that are 200 gigs each ?

Just curious ?

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com
www.2257Safe.com

its 200 gig all together. I pay $225 a month, I wish you the best but I think alot of people in this business get use to hanging out with the big fish. They lose perspective of the needs of the mom pop webmaster. You have to remember most mom pops are doing nothing for 2257 and its hard to convince most because no one has gone to jail for 2257. When I tell people I have a office they look at me like im nuts lol.You have always seemed like a very nice guy on here, I hope this does very well for you.

[tony404]

Originally Posted by pornlaw

Yes, 28 CFR 75.2 (a)(1)(i) - requires of a copy of the depiction.



No, each record in our database will be cross referenced and indexed to the content. Each is given a unique numerical identifier so when the record is retrieved so will the content.

Our business model is online - it isnt necessary. Your lawyer or your cousin for that matter can keep a copy of your records in their office under a lock and key.

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com
www.2257Safe.com

you sound very though, thats a good thing.

[pornlaw]

Originally Posted by tony404

its 200 gig all together. I pay $225 a month, I wish you the best but I think alot of people in this business get use to hanging out with the big fish. They lose perspective of the needs of the mom pop webmaster. You have to remember most mom pops are doing nothing for 2257 and its hard to convince most because no one has gone to jail for 2257. When I tell people I have a office they look at me like im nuts lol.You have always seemed like a very nice guy on here, I hope this does very well for you.

Mom and pops need a solution and we are trying to meet those needs. Of course we do not want to ignore the bigger fish, but the bigger fish usually have solutions in place for 2257 already -- as you say, you have an office.

If you are a little fish and have your home address on your notice, you may be willing to pay our prices to be anonymous. Some may be willing to jettison their office in exchange for 2257Safe.com. I am not sure what you are paying a month for your office, but if we priced your site at $500 per month, that may be less than the monthly rent/utilities/insurance/phone ect for your office. That is assuming you have the office primarily because of 2257.

We are really trying to make this one, not the only, solution to a difficult problem. 2257 has been a bane to all those in adult. Maybe 2257Safe.com can make it a little easier to be compliant. If we can, maybe more people will do something about being compliant.

We arent trying to rip people.

And based upon the feedback I have received in this thread, we will look at our pricing again. If we can lower our prices, we certainly will. I hope once we get this going, we can come back and tell everyone that we will lower our prices 25-50%.

And thanks for the compliment. I really do try to help people in the industry and thats one of the reasons why I contribute to Oprano and the other boards I post on.

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com
www.2257Safe.com

[Jim_Gunn]

Michael, thanks for keeping an open mind and looking at the pricing on your solution again. Over the years I have used a very small office space I leased for about $100/month specifically to keep my 2257 records. So any third party solution I use needs to be in that price range or less. Hopefully, there will be multiple third party record keeping solutions eventually at a competitive price.

[pornlaw]

Hopefully, there will be multiple third party record keeping solutions eventually at a competitive price.

Am I sure there will be. I found another one this morning on the web. But the more important questions, at least in my mind, will not be price, it will be security and peace of mind.

We want 2257Safe.com to be the "gold standard" in regards to online security and insurance. I am sure other companies will offer third party record keeping, but will they be PCI-DSS compliant and will they have insurance for their services. Will they provide an adult industry attorney who understands 2257 for inspection purposes or are you going to have an admin asst dealing with the FBI/DOJ on your behalf ? Is their software brand new and not field tested for the past 5 yrs like Y-Tracker ? What bugs will their service have that will need to be addressed to make it seemless and smooth for the clients ?

This will definitely be a situation that you get what you pay for.... As stated earlier, we will try to be as competitive as possible, but we will not compete on price with inferior services. That doesnt make sound business sense.

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com
www.2257Safe.com

[tony404]

Originally Posted by Jim_Gunn

Michael, thanks for keeping an open mind and looking at the pricing on your solution again. Over the years I have used a very small office space I leased for about $100/month specifically to keep my 2257 records. So any third party solution I use needs to be in that price range or less. Hopefully, there will be multiple third party record keeping solutions eventually at a competitive price.

Im like you $135 a month for my office.

[gonzo]

My hat is off to all of you for keeping this a professional and beneficial business thread on the board.

Thank you all for not getting into a pissing match but instead being informative from all aspects of the issue.

Remember these legal firm has a true interest in the busisness and has answered many questions on this forum when other lawyers would ask for a retainer fee.

I encourage you to look at his website if you are in need of someone reasonable and knowledgeable about this business.

[tony404]

Originally Posted by gonzo

My hat is off to all of you for keeping this a professional and beneficial business thread on the board.

Thank you all for not getting into a pissing match but instead being informative from all aspects of the issue.

Remember these legal firm has a true interest in the busisness and has answered many questions on this forum when other lawyers would ask for a retainer fee.

I encourage you to look at his website if you are in need of someone reasonable and knowledgeable about this business.

There is no need to its not the jungle. lol Michael has always seemed very cool. I think he now has some info he can think about and maybe offer options or he goes to the PF and gets more orders than he knows what to do with. Then it will be screw cheapo Tony and Jim. lol

[kmdguy]

Hi folks,

My name is Dan and I'm the lead programmer/partner in 2257Safe.com and I wanted to address the concern about storage space for content.

Let me say that although 2257Safe will need to legally mirror your site's contents (as any other legitimate 3rd-party record keeper will need to do), it doesn't need to be mirrored at the same quality and resolution as required for general consumption.

We are implementing heavy compression into the process which will take photos and video and massage them down into an acceptable low resolution size and format. You will not be needing space to mirror your site's contents on a 1-to-1 ratio, it's simply not necessary. I'm working on compression for video which will be similar to YouTube in that the footprint will be reduced and the files compressed in a medium to low quality .swf files. I own a computer animation company so I know a thing or two about video and compression. If you were to upload all your videos onto YouTube theoretically, they would comprise a fraction of the size that is required for general consumption, and really that is all that is required to my understanding.

We probably need to make that fact very clear in our pricing structure, but keep in mind, things are really going to be squashed.

[EmporerEJ]

This certainly is a healthy and educational thread. (For a change.)
I look forward to more discussion on the topic.
Solutions aside, I still hope there is a legal victory in our future that renders this discussion moot.

[Jim_Gunn]

Originally Posted by kmdguy

Hi folks,

My name is Dan and I'm the lead programmer/partner in 2257Safe.com and I wanted to address the concern about storage space for content.

Let me say that although 2257Safe will need to legally mirror your site's contents (as any other legitimate 3rd-party record keeper will need to do),

Can you explain exactly why you say that "any other legitimate 3rd-party record keeper will need to [mirror the site's content]? Is there somewhere in the law that specifies this, or is this an inference that you guys have drawn from the reading of the law or is it a conclusion that you have made based on the practicality of keeping records as a 3rd party record keeper and that you have incorporated it into your standard operating procedure?

[kmdguy]

Originally Posted by Jim_Gunn

Can you explain exactly why you say that "any other legitimate 3rd-party record keeper will need to [mirror the site's content]? Is there somewhere in the law that specifies this, or is this an inference that you guys have drawn from the reading of the law or is it a conclusion that you have made based on the practicality of keeping records as a 3rd party record keeper and that you have incorporated it into your standard operating procedure?

Hi Jim,

I'll let Michael take this since he's the legal expert on the matter. But in my layman's understanding 2257 documentation include not only model IDs and Releases as well as a thorough cross referencing of a variety of data, but also source content. In the event of an inspection, all of your source content needs to be available alongside the records so it can be viewed if necessary and compared against what the DOJ or FBI may have. Again I'm not an attorney so I'll let Michael chime in on a better explanation.

[pornlaw]

Originally Posted by Jim_Gunn

Can you explain exactly why you say that "any other legitimate 3rd-party record keeper will need to [mirror the site's content]? Is there somewhere in the law that specifies this

Yes, this is the text from 28 CFR 75.2 Maintenance of Records..

I have highlighted, italicized and underlined the portion referring to keeping a copy of the content...

(1) The legal name and date of birth of each performer, obtained by the producer's examination of a picture identification card prior to production of the depiction. For any performer portrayed in a depiction of an actual human being engaged in actual sexually explicit conduct (except lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person) made after July 3, 1995, or of an actual human being engaged in simulated sexually explicit conduct or in actual sexually explicit conduct limited to lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person made after March 18, 2009, the records shall also include a legible hard copy or legible digitally scanned or other electronic copy of a hard copy of the identification document examined and, if that document does not contain a recent and recognizable picture of the performer, a legible hard copy of a picture identification card. For any performer portrayed in a depiction of an actual human being engaged in actual sexually explicit conduct (except lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person) made after June 23, 2005, or of an actual human being engaged in simulated sexually explicit conduct or in actual sexually explicit conduct limited to lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person made after March 18, 2009, the records shall include a copy of the depiction, and, where the depiction is published on an Internet computer site or service, a copy of any URL associated with the depiction. If no URL is associated with the depiction, the records shall include another uniquely identifying reference associated with the location of the depiction on the Internet. For any performer in a depiction performed live on the Internet, the records shall include a copy of the depiction with running-time sufficient to identify the performer in the depiction and to associate the performer with the records needed to confirm his or her age.

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com
www.2257Safe.com

[pornlaw]

I wanted to share some good news...

Here are our compression test results from Dan...

Here are some very initial results taking a couple .mpg videos and turning them into Flash Video files.


ORIGINAL FILE #1
Pixel Size: 352x288
File Size: 49.2 MB
Run time: 6:00 (6 minutes)


COMPRESSION SCHEME#1 RESULTS ON FILE #1
Description: No pixel size reduction
Pixel Size: 352x288
File Size: 8.5 MB
Compression Quality: MEDIUM
File size reduced by: 82.73%
Approximate amount of minutes 5GB will store at this rate: 60 HOURS

It looks like we can achieve a compression ratio of about 80%...

Which means if you have a 100 gig site it should fit into a 20 gig 2257Safe.com account.

Hope that answers some more questions as to pricing...

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com
www.2257Safe.com

[Jim_Gunn]

Originally Posted by pornlaw

Yes, this is the text from 28 CFR 75.2 Maintenance of Records..

I have highlighted, italicized and underlined the portion referring to keeping a copy of the content...

(1) The legal name and date of birth of each performer, obtained by the producer's examination of a picture identification card prior to production of the depiction. For any performer portrayed in a depiction of an actual human being engaged in actual sexually explicit conduct (except lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person) made after July 3, 1995, or of an actual human being engaged in simulated sexually explicit conduct or in actual sexually explicit conduct limited to lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person made after March 18, 2009, the records shall also include a legible hard copy or legible digitally scanned or other electronic copy of a hard copy of the identification document examined and, if that document does not contain a recent and recognizable picture of the performer, a legible hard copy of a picture identification card. For any performer portrayed in a depiction of an actual human being engaged in actual sexually explicit conduct (except lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person) made after June 23, 2005, or of an actual human being engaged in simulated sexually explicit conduct or in actual sexually explicit conduct limited to lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person made after March 18, 2009, the records shall include a copy of the depiction, and, where the depiction is published on an Internet computer site or service, a copy of any URL associated with the depiction. If no URL is associated with the depiction, the records shall include another uniquely identifying reference associated with the location of the depiction on the Internet. For any performer in a depiction performed live on the Internet, the records shall include a copy of the depiction with running-time sufficient to identify the performer in the depiction and to associate the performer with the records needed to confirm his or her age.

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com
www.2257Safe.com

Thanks for the clarification. I am considering all my options for 3rd party record keeping, hopefully I will be able to come to a decision after the Phoenix Forum, where I suspect that there will be more 3rd party record keeping solutions.

[pornlaw]

Originally Posted by Jim_Gunn

Thanks for the clarification. I am considering all my options for 3rd party record keeping, hopefully I will be able to come to a decision after the Phoenix Forum, where I suspect that there will be more 3rd party record keeping solutions.

I suspect there will be. I know of 1 other than will be our direct online competition and 1 that might be, but is not online. However, I have not seen anything from any of the other potential competitors.

If you know of others I would be interested in even talking to them about licensing our software to them...

I really do think we are ahead of most of them since the we are using software that has been in use since 2005. I would think Summer XBiz is where most will come into play.

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com
www.2257Safe.com

[Hell Puppy]

Originally Posted by pornlaw

I wanted to share some good news...

Here are our compression test results from Dan...

Here are some very initial results taking a couple .mpg videos and turning them into Flash Video files.


ORIGINAL FILE #1
Pixel Size: 352x288
File Size: 49.2 MB
Run time: 6:00 (6 minutes)


COMPRESSION SCHEME#1 RESULTS ON FILE #1
Description: No pixel size reduction
Pixel Size: 352x288
File Size: 8.5 MB
Compression Quality: MEDIUM
File size reduced by: 82.73%
Approximate amount of minutes 5GB will store at this rate: 60 HOURS

It looks like we can achieve a compression ratio of about 80%...

Which means if you have a 100 gig site it should fit into a 20 gig 2257Safe.com account.

Hope that answers some more questions as to pricing...

Michael

www.AdultBizLaw.com
www.2257Safe.com

doesn't that contradict the "as depicted" statement?

i also still think you're underestimating the amount of a content some of these girls have. many turn out 2-3 updates a week including high-res video plus webcam shows. and you can bet what's stored on the webserver is already compressed.

100 gigs isn't raw out of the camera, that's more like terabytes...

[MikeSouth]

LOL

for what it would cost me for all my sites I could pay alan begner to sit at my house

hats off to tony404 for that one liner

[kmdguy]

Hi there,

Just wanted to try to clear up a misconception that I think people may have about storage space relating to 2257Safe. Many people I believe are thinking, "I have a 100GB, 200GB or 500GB site... how can I possibly afford to mirror that?"

The reality is that the content size and quality required for record keeping purposes is totally different than what is required for paying consumers. An HD video for paying consumers which might have a footprint of 640x480 or 720x360 at 25 or 30 fps is overkill for record keeping purposes. When you push that file up for your records, it will be converted down to approximately 320x240 or even 240x180 at 15 fps with a low to medium compression scheme which will reduce the overall storage size of that piece of content dramatically, making a 100MB file turn into a 10MB file for record keeping purposes. High quality photos will behave in the same manner. Also, 2257Safe's interface will guide you through the process of uploading so that you are only uploading and storing what is necessary, not other non-related fluff and redundant files, etc.

I think once we can educate the public of this concept then the concern over storage space required to handle your records will be allayed.

[MikeSouth]

i dont think it is a misconception If I used this for all my sites id be at the top teir even with your compression. and I cant afford that pricing...no way

[MikeSouth]

I do have a suggestion though.

Instead of storing all that data why not just do a symbolic link back to the original scenes on the customers site. That way you still have the required media and all you store is a database of ids, performer names etc

and for that you could charge a much more reasonable price

[kmdguy]

Originally Posted by MikeSouth

I do have a suggestion though.

Instead of storing all that data why not just do a symbolic link back to the original scenes on the customers site. That way you still have the required media and all you store is a database of ids, performer names etc

and for that you could charge a much more reasonable price

Hi Mike, thanks for your comment.

What do you think might happen in this scenario: A legal entity comes to our office for a inspection of your records. We open up your records for them, but since your hosting company is flaky (we don't know), they are offline because of problems. Now all of a sudden, none of your content is available to compared with what they have. Now your records are incomplete and you fail any inspection because the content needs to be present as part of the comprehensive 2257 documentation. Now, who would be liable for the failure of an inspection?

We have $2 million of E&O insurance to help each and every one of our clients if something goes awry that WE control. Letting each user put a key aspect of their record keeping in the form hotlinks to a plethora of unknown services beyond our control becomes an obvious weak link in the chain.

Unfortunately, the fact remains that complete 2257 documentation requires all text based information AND depictions of the performance be kept together, and really this just makes sense. This is why we are able to offer $2 million in insurance, PCI-DSS security both of which are prohibitively expensive for those that think they can offer the same service to others out of their closets at home.

If you want you can contact me offline and tell me about how much you have. There is no doubt that we will offer a custom plan for those that have very large amounts of data.

[MikeSouth]

Originally Posted by kmdguy

Hi Mike, thanks for your comment.

What do you think might happen in this scenario: A legal entity comes to our office for a inspection of your records. We open up your records for them, but since your hosting company is flaky (we don't know), they are offline because of problems. Now all of a sudden, none of your content is available to compared with what they have. Now your records are incomplete and you fail any inspection because the content needs to be present as part of the comprehensive 2257 documentation. Now, who would be liable for the failure of an inspection?

We have $2 million of E&O insurance to help each and every one of our clients if something goes awry that WE control. Letting each user put a key aspect of their record keeping in the form hotlinks to a plethora of unknown services beyond our control becomes an obvious weak link in the chain.

Unfortunately, the fact remains that complete 2257 documentation requires all text based information AND depictions of the performance be kept together, and really this just makes sense. This is why we are able to offer $2 million in insurance, PCI-DSS security both of which are prohibitively expensive for those that think they can offer the same service to others out of their closets at home.

If you want you can contact me offline and tell me about how much you have. There is no doubt that we will offer a custom plan for those that have very large amounts of data.

Id bet my hosting company is less likely to fail than your servers but thats beside the point you could experience the same outage. keeping a duplicate of a site online is retarded guys...deal with it.

Theres way better ways

[kmdguy]

Our servers are unreal their quality, integrity and security (PCI-DSS compliant), but the point is, if OUR servers fail, you are insured for it, if your servers fail, neither of us is insured for it and since we are charged with the responsibility of your 2257 records, we'd rather have our clients in a position where they are insured and covered.