The federal statute 18 U.S.C. §2257 of the United States of America
It is among the most controversial regulations in the United States of America. Producers in the erotic industry are particularly affected by this. But photographers and artists are also frequently tangential to this law. In the near future, the Supreme Court is likely to address whether 18 U.S.C. §2257 is constitutional at all. But what exactly is this all about?
In a few words…
… and expressed without legal gobbledygook: 18 U.S.C. §2257 states that any producer of erotic or pornographic materials shall require two government-issued photo identification cards from each performer or model. It is not enough just to have these IDs shown. Rather, they must be copied and kept on file. The manufacturer must therefore keep the copies permanently in his records and must also be able to produce them in the event of an inspection.
It goes without saying that this involves a certain amount of bureaucracy. In addition, the anonymity on which many erotic performers place great value can no longer be guaranteed. The background of the law was once to make sure that only women and men of age are used as performers. For this, however, the documentation and retention requirement would not have been necessary.
18 U.S.C. §2257 – Powerfully controversial, and not just in the porn industry.
Federal law 18 U.S.C. §2257 is powerfully controversial, and not just in the porn industry. Just as affected are freelance photographers and artists who pursue more artistic ambitions with their erotic depictions. No wonder, then, that opposition to the law has been stirring for a long time. According to the influential Free Speech Coalition (FSC), 18 U.S.C. §2257 violates the First Amendment because it could lead to government censorship and result in a restriction on free speech.
In 2018, a federal court in New Jersey followed this reasoning and ruled that the application of the law in its district was unlawful. A producer would only have to verify that performers are of legal age. The FSC assumes that there will be a legal clarification before the Supreme Court in Washington in the foreseeable future. The decision of the latter would then apply to the entire USA.
Möchtest du unseren Newsletter bekommen?
Einmal wöchentlich versenden wir unser "Bergfest" mit den neuesten Beiträgen, News, Interviews und mehr, damit du nichts mehr verpasst – kostenlos!
Die Buch-Empfehlung unseres Chefredakteurs Mario Meyer:
"Künstliche Intelligenz – Werden wir alle vernichtet?"