trends

Strategic Alliances

The government recently unveiled its proposed amendments to Chapter 75 of the Code of Federal Regulations dealing with record maintenance and labeling requirements for depictions of sexually explicit materials. While a full discussion of the proposed changes to the Code is beyond the purview of this article, one modification will cause significant headaches for adult Internet companies and might finally bring mainstream retailers into the fold, given its potentially devastating impact on retail sales of adult films.

By way of refresher, Title 18 U.S.C. § 2257 imposes two distinct requirements: record keeping and labeling. Most adult webmasters are intimately familiar with both requirements, but only the labeling obligations apply to distributors such as retail DVD outlets. Few retailers pay much attention to this requirement because there is rarely any issue: Professionally produced erotica in the U.S. (and elsewhere) almost always contains a proper 2257 label. That may not be the case if the Justice Department gets its way with the currently pending 2257 regulations.

Presently, the ubiquitous 2257 label generally contains the following pieces of information: 1) the legal name of the records custodian; 2) the physical address where the records will be made available to inspectors; 3) the title of the work and 4) the "date."

The last requirement has resulted in much confusion and some disagreement regarding proper compliance obligations, because the regulations allow the producer to choose from one of several different (and potentially applicable) dates to insert in the disclosure, i.e., the date of "production, manufacture, publication, duplication, reproduction, or re-issuance of the matter."

The industry practice has been to select a date that best fits the particular matter at issue, and use that date in the disclosure statement. Since a website often consists of depictions created on a multitude of different dates, many webmasters take the position that the content on their site is "reproduced" or "reissued" every day it appears on the web, and would therefore insert a rolling date code in their disclosure statement.

That option would not comply in the event the proposed regulations pass as presented by the Justice Department, and webmasters suddenly will be faced with identifying the original dates of production for each image or video clip on their website(s). The reason for this is the proposed revision to §75.6(b)(2), calling for every web page to contain a disclosure statement identifying the "date of original production of the matter." As a result, each image on each web page will need to be tied to its own specific date of production in the disclosure statement. The financial and practical burden of retrofitting hundreds of thousands of web pages will be staggering for the adult Internet industry.

However, retailers and distributors dealing in any sort of explicit material will now also need to pay attention to the accuracy of the label affixed to adult material, since selling any such product without a label, or without a complete label, can result in a five-year federal felony, with up to 10 years incarceration for repeat offenders.

While adult webmasters will have their own difficulties with the new labeling requirements, the new 'original date of production' requirement transcends the Internet industry. DVD producers will now suddenly need to go back and try to identify the original date of production for all material, if they used any other date previously available for compliance with the labeling requirement. The same difficulty facing adult webmasters in identifying multiple dates of production for web content also impacts the producers of so-called "compilation" films, which generally include clips or small portions of many other adult film titles in one product. Attempting to retrofit the dates of production onto 2257 disclosures that once displayed the date of reproduction, for example, will be challenging to be sure. Moreover, the new proposed regulatory requirements purport to relate back to any content produced after the effective date of the Adam Walsh Child Protection Act. Given the independent obligation imposed on distributors and retailers to ensure that a proper disclosure statement appears on every product sold, this has now become everybody's problem.

All this has the potential for new strategic alliances to be formed between the various segments of the adult industry and mainstream retailers as well. Suddenly, distributors and retail outlets have a significant stake in the outcome of the proposed regulations. Some large DVD outlets that sell films involving explicit nudity, to which 2257 obligations now purportedly apply; may consider joining the fight against these burdensome and censorial laws. When the Justice Department realizes just how widespread the impact of these new regulatory obligations will be, it may be influenced to temper them with some reason and logic. One can always hope, anyway.

It should be noted that distributors and retailers will not be immediately liable for sale of a product with a faulty 2257 label. Initially, in order to prove a violation, the government must establish that the seller acted "knowingly." Also, the statute makes clear that sellers of explicit materials have "no duty to determine the accuracy of the contents of the statement." But, what if the statement is incomplete or contains information that is obviously not in compliance with the law? The courts have not decided those issues yet, and neither the regulations nor the statute specifically addresses those concerns. What is known, however, is that the Justice Department has finally latched on to the notion that including the date of production is required for the entire statutory scheme to make any sense. Otherwise how will the government (or the producer for that matter) ever know how old the performers were when the work was created? This glaring omission has been quietly addressed by including the new requirement in the proposed regulations, without any comment or discussion whatsoever. Now the industry must gather its allies and mobilize.

This next battle may be fought more by the lobbyists than by the lawyers, as many of the legal arguments against 2257 were rejected in the Free Speech Coalition vs. Gonzales case. While that action was dismissed before a final ruling on the merits was issued — thus allowing another crack at some of the legal and constitutional challenges — an effort must be made to band together with those other parties now affected by the proposed regulations directed at the adult industry. If done properly, the Justice Department may realize that they have gone too far with these overly broad proposals.

Lawrence G. Walters is a partner with the law firm of Weston, Garrou, DeWitt & Walters, with offices in Orlando, Los Angeles and San Diego. All statements made in the above article are matters of opinion only, and should not be considered legal advice. Please consult your own attorney on specific legal matters. You can reach Lawrence Walters at Larry@LawrenceWalters.com, www.FirstAmendment.com or AOL Screen Name: Webattorney.

Related:  

Copyright © 2025 Adnet Media. All Rights Reserved. XBIZ is a trademark of Adnet Media.
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission is prohibited.

More Articles

opinion

WIA Profile: Lainie Speiser

With her fiery red hair, thick-framed glasses and a laugh that practically hugs you, Lainie Speiser is impossible to miss. Having repped some of adult’s biggest stars during her 30-plus years in the business, the veteran publicist is also a treasure trove of tales dating back to the days when print was king and social media not even a glimmer in the industry’s eye.

Women in Adult ·
opinion

Fighting Back Against AI-Fueled Fake Takedown Notices

The digital landscape is increasingly being shaped by artificial intelligence, and while AI offers immense potential, it’s also being weaponized. One disturbing trend that directly impacts adult businesses is AI-powered “DMCA takedown services” generating a flood of fraudulent Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) notices.

Corey D. Silverstein ·
opinion

Building Seamless Checkout Flows for High-Risk Merchants

For high-risk merchants such as adult businesses, crypto payments are no longer just a backup plan — they’re fast becoming a first choice. More and more businesses are embracing Bitcoin and other digital currencies for consumer transactions.

Jonathan Corona ·
opinion

What the New SCOTUS Ruling Means for AV Laws and Free Speech

On June 27, 2025, the United States Supreme Court handed down its landmark decision in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, upholding Texas’ age verification law in the face of a constitutional challenge and setting a new precedent that bolsters similar laws around the country.

Lawrence G. Walters ·
opinion

What You Need to Know Before Relocating Your Adult Business Abroad

Over the last several months, a noticeable trend has emerged: several of our U.S.-based merchants have decided to “pick up shop” and relocate to European countries. On the surface, this sounds idyllic. I imagine some of my favorite clients sipping coffee or wine at sidewalk cafés, embracing a slower pace of life.

Cathy Beardsley ·
profile

Andi Avalon Talks Wifey Life and the Joys of Suburban Chaos

Fans crave authenticity. For most adult content creators, this has become gospel. Everybody is looking for “the real deal” — and as it happens, you can’t get much more real than MILF creator-performer Andi Avalon.

Jackie Backman ·
profile

WIA Profile: Salima

When Salima first entered the adult space in her mid-20s, becoming a power player wasn’t even on her radar. She was simply looking to learn. Over the years, however, her instinct for strategy, trust in her teams and commitment to creator-first innovation led her from the trade show floor to the executive suite.

Women in Adult ·
opinion

How the Interstate Obscenity Definition Act Could Impact Adult Businesses

Congress is considering a bill that would change the well-settled definition of obscenity and create extensive new risks for the adult industry. The Interstate Obscenity Definition Act, introduced by Sen. Mike Lee, makes a mockery of the First Amendment and should be roundly rejected.

Lawrence G. Walters ·
opinion

What US Sites Need to Know About UK's Online Safety Act

In a high-risk space like the adult industry, overlooking or ignoring ever-changing rules and regulations can cost you dearly. In the United Kingdom, significant change has now arrived in the form of the Online Safety Act — and failure to comply with its requirements could cost merchants millions of dollars in fines.

Cathy Beardsley ·
opinion

Understanding the MATCH List and How to Avoid Getting Blacklisted

Business is booming, sales are steady and your customer base is growing. Everything seems to be running smoothly — until suddenly, Stripe pulls the plug. With one cold, automated email, your payment processing is shut down. No warning, no explanation.

Jonathan Corona ·
Show More