(December 25, 2020, 12:44 pm)LovePreggies This appears to be more impactful on individuals seeking to upload content that is not their own more so than original content.

If such a bill passed, which in my assessment is extremely unlikely, nobody would be penalized for content uploaded beforehand. It wouldn't be made retroactive for people who are uploading now. I want to emphasize that proposals like this show up in the US and UK regularly, and fail. This bill is so poorly crafted and broad that it has virtually no chance of making it into law. It would impact Google, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, Verizon, etc. It would negatively impact virtually all major platforms hosting large amounts of user-uploaded content.

In the improbable event that something did pass and we felt there was even a theoretical risk to US uploaders, we would deal with this by expunging records, not logging IPs for Americans (even though this is important for moderation), among other things. We would also relocate hosting to a different jurisdiction -- we would not be bound by, or comply with, any of these requirements. It's notable that this bill has only been covered by a handful of technology blogs. Frankly, it's not a serious legislative proposal.

(December 26, 2020, 1:47 pm)Admin

(December 25, 2020, 12:44 pm)LovePreggies This appears to be more impactful on individuals seeking to upload content that is not their own more so than original content.

If such a bill passed, which in my assessment is extremely unlikely, nobody would be penalized for content uploaded beforehand. It wouldn't be made retroactive for people who are uploading now. I want to emphasize that proposals like this show up in the US and UK regularly, and fail. This bill is so poorly crafted and broad that it has virtually no chance of making it into law. It would impact Google, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, Verizon, etc. It would negatively impact virtually all major platforms hosting large amounts of user-uploaded content.

In the improbable event that something did pass and we felt there was even a theoretical risk to US uploaders, we would deal with this by expunging records, not logging IPs for Americans (even though this is important for moderation), among other things. We would also relocate hosting to a different jurisdiction -- we would not be bound by, or comply with, any of these requirements. It's notable that this bill has only been covered by a handful of technology blogs. Frankly, it's not a serious legislative proposal.

Thanks for the update and all the work y’all do to keep this forum operating everyday!

In any case, I would expect republicans in Congress to reject this bill as governmental overreach

As a lawyer and a political science major in undergrad, I do have some knowledge in this sort of thing. I would need to actually read the bill and then try to interpret how courts would interpret it as well as any constitutional issues that would arise.
Obviously there is potentially a prime facie case for violation of the First Amendment here, but without reading the 10,000 page bill, I cannot say exactly how that would play out.

@LovePreggies the bill seems like grandstanding/posturing as opposed to a serious legislative proposal, as seen here: merkley.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Stop%20Internet%20Sexual%20Exploitation%20Act%20Text1.pdf

It contains such gems as these:

PROHIBITION ON DOWNLOADS.—On and after the date that is 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, a covered platform may not permit the download to a retrievable data file of any pornographic image from the platform.

(A) IN GENERAL.—A covered platform shall operate a 24-hour telephone hotline that an individual or an authorized representative of an individual, or a law enforcement officer, can contact to request removal of a pornographic image from the platform if the individual appears in the pornographic image and has not consented to the pornographic image being uploaded to the platform.

The text below is the definition of a covered platform. This could include Twitter, Instagram, Bing, etc.

(2) the term ‘‘covered platform’’ means an on line platform that hosts and makes available to the general public pornographic images; and (3) the term ‘‘pornographic image’’ means any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct.

Downloading "pornographic" images wouldn't be allowed, period. Also, hotlines for porn sites and any other site falling under the definition of a "covered platform". This is laughable nonsense and lacks a basic understanding of browsers, the web, the internet, etc. Nonetheless, I will monitor this -- the site will adapt if anything actually happens.

Not to mention that all browsers cache data for loading websites, or the fact that this would basically ban archiving.

I feel bad for whoever would have to man a 24 hour DMCA hotline. No way that would get abused.

(December 26, 2020, 12:44 pm)LTKNT101

(December 26, 2020, 11:49 am)TommyDe I’m not going to advocate or take any side of this problem that has come to us. Yes, I do think that we need to curb and or stop child pornography, but at the same time we are hurting other forms of pornography as well. I know that this site is solely dedicated to pregnancy but while reading some stories on how we interact with some of the models it’s hard to paint a clear future for us. I know that Winnie Cooper is one of the down to earth pregnant porn stars but that’s because at the same time she is one of us when it comes to the fetish. She understands what it’s like to worship a pregnant woman and to be worshipped herself. The overall problem we are facing aside from this starting to become a political fist fight is that we were never taught from the educational perspective of what porn does to us. Now I don’t know myself where I should stand on this but the only thing I can say is when one porn site goes down a million more takes it’s place. The real main problem when it comes to stuff like this is that no matter how many times you try to put an age restriction to a site there is always a way to get around it. I even know that when I was younger and would go on an adult site there is nothing from stopping you from faking your age or hitting the “Yes, I am 18” button. I also don't think that places like DeviantArt and OnlyFans will have any problems that porn sites will have. They are only based for sharing content and selling them. It was only Tumblr that went from both NSFW & SFW to SFW only. So, I get it from where the government is trying to come from since one of the things they stand behind is the children. Their job when standing behind children is to make themselves look good and to tell adults where they stand on certain issues that involve kids. So, with that I only see the US market getting hurt by this law than any other country.

So these are my thoughts and where I personally stand on this.

The problem of minor exploitation certainly needs to be addressed however I think the government is using it as a smoke screen to take down legal porn. If the regulations they are asking for become law they are going to affect more than just those who engage in illegal activity.

I can agree that minor exploitation needs to be addressed and this is a smoke and shadow cloak used by the government. The problem is an will be no matter what when one site goes down thousands will take its place. I also know that if said act becomes law it will effect those in illegal activity