On eBay, this is fine.
Why is Twitter more moral than Ebay? Is it because Ebay makes more money off this material?
Here's a typical fake image on Katy Perry that an eBay seller is making money on, without stating that there's a signed form of consent. This is one of the milder images. Check the postings below for much worse on such a wide range of women, from underage actresses to the President's wife.
FEDERAL LAW:
Title 18, Sections 2257 and 2257A: all models, actors, actresses, performers and/or other persons who appear in any visual depiction or “sexually explicit conduct” (as that term is defined in 18 U.S.C. §2256).
Sellers MUST have a signed model release stating age and consent. Where, next to the Katy Perry image, is her signature on a document stating she has agreed to the sales of the photos, and that the photos are compliant with Title 18, Sections 2257 and 2257a of Federal Law?
The uploader should get a form letter stating: "You have nude photos with NO statement of age or consent. Provide this or remove the material." When it comes to obvious violations, such as Photoshopped nude celebrity or "leaked celebrity" images, they should be removed instantly, as well as the "ha ha, look at the drunk naked girl" pix or "my girlfriend naked, sleeping." In the latter two cases, people can find other things to post if they desperately need to amuse strangers.
No comments:
Post a Comment