Legal notes for anyone with their own content

[paul jones]

I think they will be taking a practical attitude.

The context of the discussions I had was re R18 material.

However what matters to ATVOD is editorial control - so if I shoot and sell to HomeGrown, or YourChoice, but I don't have any control after that, ATVOD doesn't come into it. OTOH if I have an account on a clip selling site, and the site isn't ATVOD'd, then I'd have to be.

In the first case, I have no editorial control, in the second I do.

IANAL, just passing on the fruits of what I found to be very straightforward discussions.

And for anyone with specific situations they want clarified, talk to ATVOD.

[one eyed jack]

Thats doesn't make any sense at all Paul

In other words, if you were shooting content for a site overseas not registered with ATVOD then what is the purpose?

If you have to conform to ATVODs regulations then you may as well consider yourself out of a job because I cant see any overseas website wanting to work to regulations outside of its jurisdiction

Furthermore, how are they supposed to regulate you or the website if you have no control over how that website works beyond editing the scene that went on it

This means that every single mainstream producer of motion pictures and television has to become a member of ATVOD because they have their own website they may promote what they have worked on.

This is not what Pete Johnson said at all on the podcast so it seems to me they are switching side to side all the time on this.

Pete Johnson is the Chief Executive of ATVOD and was very specific in the podcast as to what the 5 points "caught" rules were and he didnt specifiy what you wrote and nor do ATVOD mention it on the site.

This is why I do podcasts. So people can hear for themselves without any interpretation of the rules by me .

Are you absolutely clear on this particular aspect and could you get some kind of confirmation of this?

I wouldn't expect anyone here to take my words as gospel unless it could be confirmed somewhere and podcast recordings are the best way.

You are free to use our recording on your site if you like

[paul jones]

I've added the podcast link to the article.

Perhaps we have been told different things.

To me it seems simple :-

If you are in the business of selling your material to the public (i.e. not just working on a commissioned basis) then you need to be in ATVOD or the platform you sell though needs to be in ATVOD.

If you are in ATVOD and the platform isn't, it is your responsibilty to choose platforms that are compliant re age protection (your hard material behind a credit card paywall, even if other people on the site have it out front or tke other payment types).

If you simply operate as "producer for hire" then ATVOD doesn't apply, it's an issue for whoever commissioned you, (or not, if they are not in the UK).

As to confirmation of things in writing, I haven't asked for generalities to be confirmed as I haven't needed to.

Happy to work with you to draft a list of good clarifying questions though. Drop me a line off list?

[rgb]

After talking to ATVOD, I think its simplest interpretation is: if you have "editorial responsibility for the output of a "television-like" website and you are based in the UK then you are liable.

Having said that ATVOD say that it's not simple and every case is investigated on its own merits.

[one eyed jack]

Paul wrote: "I haven't asked for generalities to be confirmed as I haven't needed to"

Thats ok for you but not for everyone else

If you are informing the adult industry by way of your website then you should. Otherwise anyone can come up on here and say that ATVOD dont want to be associated with a bunch of filthy porn producing perverts !happy!

If this was a court of law then your claims are unsubstantiated. This is not a court of law but we have a difference in opinion on the basis of what we have heard. This way lies confusion. Not good for people looking in wanting to know.

I would say, ask the questions that you've asked so far and if you can, record it to inform the industry.

[one eyed jack]

Its not good if ATVOD are telling us different things because it makes it look like they are making it up as they go along and I would seriously question the legality of their organisation if that were so.

They claim to be an independent run company and not sanctioned by the government.

Maybe we should set up our own company and charge ATVOD for charging companies and make it legal that they have to sign up with us as well !happy!

Cool! Get our money back!

[BillysBabes]

The guy I spoke to said that their main concern is that adult material is protected by a credit card wall to protect minors.

This applies whether you own the site or you upload your material to sites like AW etc.
If the site isnt ATVOD then you have to be. No excuses, if you sell content on the web you have to pay and if you dont they will eventually track you down. It's very easy for them to do it these days.

I get the impression that we will all get a "knock on the door" eventually.

They will be actively persuing ANYONE who uploads any kind of material to the internet, not just adult material.

The fee you pay depends upon the turnover of your company - up to GBP50K you pay GBP150 per year and the levels go up depending on turnover.
I asked if that was GBP150 for every site/sales channel you use and he wouldnt be drawn on it and said he would get back to me.

Dunno if this helps.

[one eyed jack]

BillysBabes wrote:

The guy I spoke to said that their main concern is that adult material is protected by a credit card wall to protect minors.


Which is why I don't understand when they say that ATVOD is there to protect children when children dont go to sites like this to pay for porn.

They go to the torrent sites which are exempt

To think the whole scheme is just to protect children but this scheme will not stop that one bit. In fact it wont even be noticed by anyone other than those who register so already its a waste of time and money to us and unneccessary money going into a new quango for them. All in good time with the recession too

[paul jones]

OEJ

Given that ISPs already use Cleanfeed to prevent access to child porn, and the recent Newzbin case, my personal view is that soon ATVOD will be able to add sites to Cleanfeed, and that the tube sites will be first on the list.

[katiek]

If it's to "protect" children then why would they need to also target companies such as 4OD, BBC iPlayer, Milkshake (a childrens on demand service- it's not like they're going to have put R18 material on their site by mistake!), etc etc. It just seems they are targeting EVERY website that has a VOD service... Why would a child go on the internet by themselves anyway? Any fit parent would not leave their child alone to roam the internet freely! Children easily have access to social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter where it has been proven that "child groomers" set up profiles and target children and I feel those are the REAL threats! It is easy for Internet sevice providers to block porn but how are they making Facebook and Twitter safer? They're not! I can easily upload any picture I want onto twitter without it getting blocked... yes it's great promotion for me but people don't even have to follow me to be able to access my photos and updates!

The other thing is it's called the "world wide web". British websites only make up a small percentage of this so censoring UK websites isn't really going to make much difference. What about the American tube sites? They can't do anything about those... what about all the international adult sites... they can't do anything about those... it's just a waste of time if they're trying to "protect" children