This doesn't concern you. You didn't wake up this morning and find your favorite porndog site shuttered. But those magnetized by such places of enlightenment as ratemyboner.com and gapingmaw.com had to be disappointed by a new law aimed at ensuring children are not used in the pornographic industry. U.S. Code: Title 18: Section 2257 took effect at midnight. From now on, such Web sites must keep records documenting that every performer depicted in explicit conduct is over 18. The Those who can't comply are taking down their material, like the Rotten.com folks, who maintain the above two sites, so I'm told.
But this does concern you. Karl Martino, over at Philly Future.org, runs an aggregator - what that does is assemble fresh posts from selected blogs in one place. It's a vivid snapshot of the talk-of-the-moment on a wealth of subjects. And it's in peril, Karl writes:
If I understand correctly, sites that feature RSS aggregators like Philly Future could be at risk. Publishers of other sites post pictures in their feeds. We feature feeds direct from Flickr as well.
If Philly Future is required to keep track of the ages of every picture we display from feed publishers we are going to have to disallow pictures - we just don't have the resources for keeping records on every picture shown.
Read more about it at the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy's blog, in the article titled, "Cracking Down on Porn: Protecting Children or Naked Censorship?"
The industry contends the new regs will do little to stop child pornography, which is already illegal, but the paperwork could put as many as half of all online pornography companies out of business. The adult-film industry's trade group tried blocking the law.
Ron Coleman, at Likelihood of Confusion, is not shedding any tears. "I thought we were all for bureaucratization of "victimless crimes" such as prostitution and recreational drug use?,' the Jersey lawyer/blogger wrote.
Glenn Reynolds, at Instapundit, is less enthused. Writes the law prof, "I think that it's a first amendment violation, as well as a waste of government resources."
Among the benefits? This might mean fewer U.S. companies have problem porndogs. Survey says: Half the companies in the past year have had to deal with employees using the Internet for prurient personal reasons. Only half?