Captioners Have Pulled Their Work Or Stopped Posting?

What happened last week to cause such a stir and scare people into removing their home made captions? These pics are available via the internet, many free, not copyrighted, and are posted in a private member forum, for no financial gain. The sites who posted these pics have the burden of ensuring all models are 18+.

So how did the law enpowerment enter into this forum and scare people? For that matter, do not even think this forum or the server is based in the USA, so what is the problem related to posting cuckold captions, in a free forum? When members enroll, they can use an anonymous email, so what is the issue?

It is a shame that someone has intimidated a large group of smart people with a small amount of words.

Incidentally, if you are not a US citizen, the laws of USA do not apply, copyright, etc. when you reside or post from another country. Who is posting copyrighted photos or material on this forum anyway? Pornography and fetishes are protected in the USA by 1st Amendment rights, free speech and all, just not young pornography.

So what is the deal, give me some insight?

they seem to be missing the point and running scared. its amazing.
pictures already in the public domain which are then contextually altered by written words cannot be deemed illegal,but would obviate the right to free speech, which cannot happen.
they are already out there on the internet, so making a legal challenge only against the words.and cant happen!!!!

agree?

oops,

meant to say, and that cant happen!!!!

could someone explain to me what this thread is in response to?

Was there some sort of article or news about infringment or something....

I've stopped because I kinda got worn out....not because of any legal threat....but IS THERE a legal threat????

You might be right, but I am still re-thinking the matter. Some have suggested that by citing the source you can get away with copying. It is a common misconception, citation protects the permister from plagiarism, but is no defence against copyright infringement. My problem is that I have hundreds of pictures in my collection that I have long since forgotten their source.

i really wish we could get a definitive answer on this matter one way or the other. i really miss capping and posting pics, as i'm sure a lot of other talented people do. with all due respect, tweaker, your arguments make a lot of sense, but we're talking about the US Government here, and 'sense' doesn't belong in the same sentence. i'd hate to be that 1 in a million that is chosen to be made an example of. hopefully, someone can shed some light on this subject.

I agree with studmaster.

It's amazing to me how easily some people get paranoid over nothing. Just amazing. As if they have no common sense at all.

There hasn't been one single case of the government going after someone for posting captioned pics of women who are obviously over 18 to demand to see their 2257 compliance. Not one single case.

Oh well.

What may seem like nothing to one individual may be somthing quite different to someone else. When one tries to balance the scale between posting caps - any many of mine featured fresh young ladies - and the slim odds of having the fascist knocking at the door, its really not even a contest.
Yes, paroniod, certainly ridiculous and far fetched, but who needs it. Our moderator indicated what he wanted, so I thought I would comply. After being gone a few days I want to catch up with the latest developments - I know I want to post again - but under what condition?
This sucks!

oh come on guys....this law enpowerment has got to be bollocks

While many people have different permisteral views on the matter, there are facts. Studmaster has properly stated them. Another important thing, is that if a picture is within a copyright infringement there is no basis for legal action. The most that can happen is that the "proper" owner can contact you and tell you to take the photo down. By doing so they must tell you what there source is and then one must be sure to not use that same source to many more times. Only if one refuses to remove the picture could there POSSIBLY be grounds for a legal action, and still it's unlikely.

It's unfortunate that the current social and political climate make us think twice about a perceived legal threat...the basic truth is that this is still a free country, as long as we want it to be. If our communication, in whatever form, is not harmful or injurious to others, or does not impede on accepted commerce, then it is "FREE SPEECH"! I, for one, refuse to allow a sense of general paranoia to inhibit my desire to share my thoughts and opinions with others. This is an open forum with others who have chosen to take part...we are not powering our points of view on the *** or the ignorant. Let's not forget that we still live in a country that is based on the freedom of individual expression, no matter how distasteful or extreme that may be to others.

in the admin thread,

I was under the assumption that the Mr Big, our moderator had basically asked anyone who'd posted to ensure they have 2257 or else take the pics down? it is HIS site afterall....

Short and sweet -
forgive my ignorance, and perhaps I've missed something, but If our moderator feels that members of this site are posting illegal pictures - be it infringment issues or subject matter - then any member doing so should be banned, which seems to have always been done in the past. Now I had read a posting by him asking that any pictures without proper documentation be removed and I complied - especially since I wouldnt know where to begin to find out about any information pertaining to my hundreds of pictures. Now I see everything is "carry on as usual". Was this statement just a off handed remark?, was it a "Cover your ass" thing? Either you want us to comply or you dont.
Again, perhaps I missed somthing or have misinterpeted.
PLease respond.

I'll make an attempt..