My B'Day is NOYB!

[Unregistered]

Hi, Gwen! Just want you to know that I will NOT register with the
new website. Why? Because the FIRST page of the registration form
requests date of birth. That is no one's business but my own & the
government. Anyway, I am sure that is a major block to others as
well. And yes, I would lie & put in a ficticious date, but that is
not the point. Sooooooo, once the information requested is changed
to not be so personal, I will register. Thought you'd like to know!!!

[webmaster]

Dear Steppin Out Friend:

Thanks very much for your feedback and suggestion. Ms Gwen forwarded your comments to me and asked if I would respond to you personally. I said I would be happy to do that.

Please realize we are NOT being nosey about your birthday. We honestly don't care about that detail at all and wish we did not have to ask for it. Believe it or not, it is the U.S. Government who requires us to collect that information!

The sole reason we request such information is that in the current so-called 'family friendly' federal regulatory environment involving the Internet, we are required under the terms of the Children's Online Privacy Protection (COPPA) act -- which was passed by Congress in 1998 -- to block most access to children under the age of 13 unless we have received written consent from their parents to permit them to post on our site. We didn't make those rules; but we are required by law to enforce them. The rules had not been enforced at all since '98 until our new Attorney General decided this past year that big brother should be watching us. So, you can thank our president and his Attorney General for being oh-so-wise and deciding the net needs yet another form of federal regulation, I'm afraid.


You are welcome to check out the federal rules governing sites like ours at this location: http://www.ftc.gov/ogc/coppa1.htm As I said, we didn't make the rules. Nevertheless, we are required by federal statute to live with them. Sigh... :(

So, we quietly and politely request your birth date so that we can abide by the terms of that law and block what COPPA defines as "children" from seeing or accessing certain parts of our site and from POSTING in most areas of the site (e.g. the personals section or our galleries) as well. Of course, we do not explain the reason we ask for your birthday on the page where we collect the information because in doing so, we would clearly be telling children they should "lie" to us about their birthday.

Perhaps I should also explain that later in the enrollment process, we do allow (and in fact invite) you to remove the year from your birthday so that no one but YOU knows your age! :-) As I said, we're not being nosey. We're just trying to follow the rules our oh-so-wise Congress and President decided should apply to ALL websites that allow visitors to post messages on them.

You may be interested to know that at the moment, we use the birthday information we collect in three specific ways...

1. To enforce the COPPA regulations and block children's access to certain areas of the site.

2. To allow us to send you a birthday email once a year on Your birthday. I pointed out to Gwen when we discussed this feature that I have created other sites where this feature is welcomed by those members who might otherwise receive NO birthday cards or best wishes on their special day whatsoever. In fact, I receive several personal notes each week from members for whom that is true and quite often they tell us we were the only ones who remembered their birthday! :(

3. To maintain a separate site calendar of member birthdays (with the year excluded of course).

Frankly, Gwen and I are still discussing whether that calendar mentioned in item number 3 should be made available on the Steppin Out site at all. Both Gwen and I would welcome your thoughts about that. There is, incidentally a small block associated with that calendar that can appear on one or more of our pages (but does not presently do so), that is updated each day to list the screen names of members born on that date. We would welcome your thoughts on that particular use as well.

By the way, we do go far out of our way on this site to protect your personal information. We clearly state it is our policy to never share your personal information with anyone... including law enforcement agencies. We also give you the option later in the registration process to tell us whether you are willing to receive emails from other members of the site and even from the site administrators. If you DO happen to agree to allow us to forward email from other members to you, we still go out of our way to protect your privacy by hiding your email address from any registered member who wants to send you email (assuming, of course, that you granted us permission to allow them to do that to begin with). So even then those who send you email through the site will NOT know your email address unless you opt to reply to them directly. You still get to decide whether to answer their emails or not!

Thanks very much for your feedback, Lori. I sincerely hope this explains precisely why we find it necessary to request such information and I hope our request for your birthday will NOT remain a reason for you to refuse to enroll as a member of the SteppinOutNewMexico site!

Best Professional Regards,
Greg Platt
Webmaster, SteppinOutNewMexico.com
Owner, Web Witchcraft Publishing

[albuquerquereporter]

Hi, Gwen...

Just to show you guys are right on this subject, here's an article I read in the LA Times yesterday. I also provided a link to the original Times article for anyone who cares to read it on their site.

Keep up the good work. The new site looks GREAT! ;)

Warmest Best Wishes,
Jan

Studios: Child Porn Bill Is Too Sweeping
By Jube Shiver Jr.
Times Staff Writer
(http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-obscenity13oct13,1,530147.story?ctrack=1&cset=true) (http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-obscenity13oct13,1,530147.story?ctrack=1&cset=true) to)

October 13, 2005
WASHINGTON - Hollywood lobbyists are warning federal lawmakers that
proposed anti-child pornography legislation could prove so onerous for
studios that they may be forced to keep detailed records about actors
appearing in virtually any lovemaking scene, even for movies rated PG-
13.

A little-noticed rider from Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) to the Children's
Safety Act of 2005 passed by the House would require producers of
material containing actual or simulated sexual conduct to keep records
of the names, ages and proof of identification of the actors shown in
the productions. They also would have to make the information available
to law enforcement officials upon request.

Lobbyists argue that the measure's sweeping language goes beyond the
intended target - pornography - and encompasses more tame fare.
"We are extremely concerned that this measure is overly broad and
violates the constitutional protections of free speech," said Erik V.
Huey, a Washington lawyer for the American Federation of Television and
Radio Artists. "Mainstream film and television productions are being
lumped in the same category as hard-core pornography."
The act is awaiting action in the Senate, where John Feehery, executive
vice president for external affairs at the Motion Picture Assn. of
America, said the studio trade group hoped to derail the record-keeping
measure.

But a Senate aide, who requested anonymity because the final bill
hasn't been drafted, said that although lawmakers were willing to work
with Hollywood, a bill Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) planned to
introduce would probably mirror the House version. Backers of the
measure contend that the broad language is needed to close loopholes
that could be exploited by child pornographers, arguing that Hollywood
is overreacting because the measure merely tightens a law on the books.
Currently, the makers of any book, magazine, periodical, film,
videotape, or other material that "contains one or more visual
depictions . of actual sexually explicit conduct" are required to keep
each performer's birth certificates and driver's licenses on file, and
include on the packaging disclaimers stating that no actors
participating in sexual acts were minors.

Pence's rider would extend the record-keeping requirement to
productions that depict even "simulated sex," and make that information
available to law enforcement. First-time violators would be subject to
a fine and as many as two years in jail.

"My amendment . is designed to give law enforcement the tools to stop
child pornography at the source," Pence said in a statement. "It will
fix a glaring loophole in the current law by requiring pornographers to
keep records of the names and ages of their subjects and proof of
identification."

Although Pence's staff has indicated that the lawmaker is open to "a
technical correction" that would limit the scope of the bill, Hollywood
lobbyists fear the Justice Department will be unyielding in its push
for tougher record keeping. Justice officials argue that changes are
needed to protect children from sexual exploitation by pornographers.
"While it is true that these changes will mean that more mainstream
producers whose materials depict only simulated sex and/or nudity,
rather than overt sexual acts, will have to keep records . eliminating
them from the record-keeping requirement, as is now the case, raises
serious child exploitation potential," the Justice Department said in
an analysis.

Underscoring the weakness of current law, the Justice Department added
that "a pornographer can film 16-year-old girls engaged in 'soft-core'
sex and not be subject to the record-keeping requirement" because the
filmmaker "can claim . he was not aware of the ages of the girls" and
escape punishment. Justice Department officials declined to further
comment.