Rethink, yes, but there's much to learn from the history of what's gone before.

The law has different rules for different types of adult material. If you're commercially publishing the material, there's one set of standards (documentation of age and consent). If you're an amateur uploading for personal reasons (e.g. dating) there's another set of rules. And if you're hosting random user-generated content there's yet another set of rules.

Ultimately @npub1nxy4qpqnld6kmpphjykvx2lqwvxmuxluddwjamm4nc29ds3elyzsm5avr7 , as the host, bears the legal responsibility for the content. They're going to get VERY familiar with DMCA take-down requests. The proposed changes to Section 230 will be very important to them.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Sorry, for talking about you in the 3rd person. For some reason I thought I was responding to @npub1wmr34t36fy03m8hvgl96zl3znndyzyaqhwmwdtshwmtkg03fetaqhjg240

Uggh…

I can recommend some very good first amendment lawyers, if you feel you need advice…

Corey Silverstein - http://porn.law

Larry Walters - https://www.firstamendment.com

But you're really more in the position of someone like Twitter or Facebook - a host that doesn't editorially approve what goes on their server. You wouldn't meet the 1/3rd threshold that some of the recent laws have put in place at which point age verification is necessary.

For the porn content - quite a bit of it can be legal. (Provided Congress doesn't change Section 230, and the GOP doesn't redefine "obscenity"). If you're not interested in hosting it, I am. And I'm sure others in the adult industry would also be interested.