While language of the piece of legislation has not yet been released Hatch’s bill would beef up federal record-keeping rules (18 U.S.C. § 2257) by working on four specific caveats, including:
• Defining actual sexually explicit material consistently with corresponding sections in the U.S. Code. The current law incorporates only four of the five definitions outlined in other sections.
• Applying the same record-keeping requirements to those who produce depictions of simulated conduct. Current law applies only to those who produce depictions of actual conduct.
• Stating that refusal to permit inspection of age-related records is a crime. Current law only requires maintaining the records, but it provides no penalty for refusing to disclose them.
• Providing a targeted definition for what it means to produce sexually explicit material. The definition includes activities such as filming or photographing someone, duplicating or reissuing images for commercial distribution, and managing the sexually explicit content of a computer site. It specifically exempts those not involved in hiring, managing or arranging the performers’ participation, along with those involved in web-hosting services when the provider does not manage sexually explicit content.
Calls to Hatch’s Washington office early Thursday were not returned to XBiz; however, in a press release, Hatch said the introduced bill was the result of the inability for law enforcement to curtail child pornography on a meaningful level.
“Those who produce sexually explicit material are breaking the law if that material depicts children, and this bill enhances our ability to bring these pornographers to justice,” Hatch said.
“If we are serious in protecting children from being exploited by child pornographers, we need a workable, practical law that’s enforceable,” Hatch said. “This is a straight-forward, common-sense bill that will strengthen this important tool for protecting children.”
Hatch’s bill — s. 2140 — is the result of extensive discussions with the Justice Department, representatives of the motion picture industry and Internet companies, according to the release.
Adult industry attorneys so far are tight-lipped on the bill because its actual language has not yet been released. However, attorney Joe Obenberger said he is against any form of regulation on the business.
"I'm a Libertarian, and I generally am opposed to government intrusion into private matters," Obenberger told XBiz.