The ACLU has been stretched thin by the chronic lawlessness and perpetual assault on Democrat institutions and vulnerable communities by the current administration, they need all the support they can get.
I've asked a few places and a lot of girls are stating that yes, the fosta/sesta bill sets prostitution charges higher. Now, we will be charged with promoting (ourselves) and can receive a felony.
Can I get a lawyers input, or someone who can clearly exsplain to me and others if this is true?
First of all, prostitution is NOT a Federal crime so under what circumstances it's a felony are on a state-by-state basis. In some cases it's already a felony.
Also, FOSTA/SESTA isn't aimed at individual prostitutes, even if they advertise on line. It's aimed at the service that carries the ad.
Many states have "progressive" laws regarding prostitution; multiple convictions lead to higher criminal offenses and penalties (e.g., a third conviction is a felony). I agree with another poster than ramifications of FOSTA-SESTA will result in charges/changes[shutdown] for most social media platforms.
like MSOG for us? Fines go up like rates go up? Some providers are like the states where there is no escalation of costs/penalties.
A doubles page on your website featuring more than 3 of your friends (you’re the 4th person), a newsletter featuring 5 or more ladies, an agency, and possibly a banner exchange on your website with more than 3 ladies. Remember to count yourself and anyone you’re helping to advertise.
The new laws do not make harsher punishment for promoting just yourself.
The 10 year thing applies to people who own, manage, or operate an interactive computer service, like Twitter, or American owned escort malls.
“Sec. 3) The bill amends the federal criminal code to add a new section that imposes penalties—a fine, a prison term of up to 10 years, or both—on a person who, using a facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce, owns, manages, or operates an interactive computer service (or attempts or conspires to do so) to promote or facilitate the prostitution of another person.
Additionally, it establishes enhanced penalties—a fine, a prison term of up to 25 years, or both—for a person who commits the offense in one of the following aggravating circumstances: (1) promotes or facilitates the prostitution of five or more persons, or (2) acts with reckless disregard that such conduct contributes to sex trafficking.”
FOSTA: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1865
SESTA: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1693
.
HOW FUCKING AGGRAVATING IT IS TO NOT HAVE REVIEWS, TO NOT HAVE ADS, TO NOT HAVE WAYS TO EXCHANGE HELPFUL INFORMATION TO KEEP EVERYONE SAFE AND HAPPY.
.
And how aggravating it is to have such idiotic politicians who are more interested in poll numbers and photo ops than in passing legislation that will actually achieve their stated goals.
.
If I visit a Provider and DO NOT PAY HER, there is no prostitution charge against either of us. However, now my hostess will be AGGRAVATED, beat the crap out of me, and then she can be charged with aggravated, but ever so satisfying, assault and battery of the client.
.
Ugh. So aggravating.
I really miss my reviews. I had such a good reputation here. Being in my city’s top 30 was a source of pride. Now I got fuckboys from other sites AGGRAVATING me in the middle of the night asking me if I’m available now and trying to negotiate.
I really hope they overturn this in court.
I was wondering why more people were not discussing that promoting yourself would get you a felony. I appreciate the breakdown!
need no stinkin' lawyers! Here, for $500 an hour we can get our legal questions answers AND a hot time from the same person. Lol
Or, we can just read what it says on the bills. lol
The bills focus on participation in an online service that involves underage or forcibly-refficked persons.
FOSTA also makes it a federal crime to “promote or facilitate the prostitution of another person.”
Advertising yourself certainly wouldn’t seem to violate that.
Advertising you and your friend might.
Advertising a service would certainly seem to be a problem.
Running an ad/review board or even running an internet service where providers host their own advertising could certainly be a problem.
If I leave a positive review of a provider, am I promoting the prostitution of another person? I guess we may find out...
Exactly. Even if I give a bad review, it still could be seen as promoting criminal activity...
I know of 50+ defendants in Dunwoody who became painfully aware of the creative interpretation and application of federal law resulting in dramatically disproportionate consequences. Those cases are still pending as far as I know but the damage was done.
Actually.... asI read FOSTA again, reviewing may not be a problem.
The bill language is difficult to parse grammatically, and you have to consider the commas, but I think you must be someone who “owns, manages or operates an interactive computer service” before promoting the prostitution of another person violates the law.
If the site is offshore, and you’re just posting reviews (not “operating” the site), it seems to me like everything is good.
—————————
“(a) In General.—Whoever, using a facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce or in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, owns, manages, or operates an interactive computer service (as such term is defined in defined in section 230(f) the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230(f))), or conspires or attempts to do so, with the intent to promote or facilitate the prostitution of another person shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both.
In fact, I’m not 100% sure that operating a website is operating “an interactive computer service.”
47 USC 230(f)(2) defines that term as, “any information service, system, or access software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server, including specifically a service or system that provides access to the Internet and such systems operated or services offered by libraries or educational institutions.”
So does this part of the law put liability on a web designer for designing independent provider sites?
And who may host independent provider sites through their own hosting account?
Any advice would be appreciated....Thx
I can't give you advice on it.
Web design, by itself, would not seem to fall into: "owns, manages, or operates an interactive computer service."
Hosting a provider's website might, and would certainly be high-risk. The definition of "interactive computer service" is pretty murky. The media and legislators certainly seem to think that it includes operating a website (as in BP). You would "own" and/or "operate" it, and it's for the "prostitution of another person." The only out would be argue that it's not an "interactive computer service," which is probably a tough argument to win.
Ultimately, I think the solution will be for all this stuff to be hosted on non-U.S. domains and servers. Someone hosting such sites currently in the U.S., and who is unwilling to relocate to another country, would be wise to avoid being low-hanging fruit and move the hosting off-shore. The U.S. government might argue you're still violating the law by your actions within the U.S., but you'd at least be less of a target, and harder to track down.
It's become apparent the larger websites are taking their entire operations out the U.S.
Pretty soon the government will start imposing tariffs 
Who will repeal the bill? Might as well give up and ladies get new careers.
This law will be around a long time. That's why I predict review sites will pop up off shore -- owned and operated by non-US citizens.
Read the specifications of the CLOUD Act -- those details really won't matter. US LE agencies no longer need to obtain MLATS to get info from foreign sources about electronic activity in the USA.
Along with the gutting of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (that's what FOSTA/SESTA were about), it will have far-reaching consequences beyond our little corner of the inter webs.
The CLOUD Act only applies to US companies and residents who are hosting data overseas. The United States government is not actually able to pass let alone enforce their laws upon other countries without either cooperation or military action. So a foreign company based in a foreign country is only at risk if their host country chooses to cooperate with American law enforcement. Some countries will, and some won't, based on their existing relationship with the U.S. And some countries that are otherwise friendly with the U.S. probably won't cooperate if the targeted activity is legal in their country.
That's my understanding as well.
If you're in the U.S. and trying to protect yourself by hosting overseas, the CLOUD Act strips away that protection.
Some website owners may screw themselves by not completely jumping to another country, and trying to run things from here.
Setting up a foreign corporation in a country with corporate privacy laws would provide a fairly high level of protection.
Emigrating there would provide the best.
If I were the owner of TER and I was making a good living just running this site up until a month ago, I would seriously think about emigrating to the Netherlands.
Haha....
"Alex, I'll take 2 condoms for a thousand!"
the Asian hostess clubs here in SoCal. The guest buys a bottle of $25 Champagne for $500 and then picks a girl to take upstairs for an hour. No money changes hands between the customer and the girl except a tip after they are dressed and back downstairs in the club. Its a model that has been used successfully to frustrate LE for years in other countries. The only downside is that if you're not Asian, you won't get in without an Asian friend who will vouch for you. Even Asian LE officers who get inside cannot make arrests stick, because the girl did not make a P4P offer, nor did she accept my money directly from the customer. The receipt only says he bought liquor. She gets a nod from the manager, then approaches the customer and says she really likes him and would he like to go party with her privately? They have tried to entrap some of the girls with specific money proposals, but the girl just says she doesn't want any money, she just wants to be with him because she likes him and he's very handsome. I've seen some of the guys that go to these places, and they should arrest her for fraud for calling them "handsome." Lol
So your joke about selling condoms and giving away the sex for free has some actual market history behind it.
Change the patter a little bit ...
.
Can you get me in to one of those places?
more truthful, but not condusive to getting repeat business.
If you want to go, one of us needs to be Asian. When I was shaving this morning, I noticed it wasn't me.
Just one problem though. American people look at me as an Asian while Asian people look at me as American.
That said, I could probably get myself into one of those places alone, but not with a couple of round eyed white guys with me. lol
Korean friends got me in ONCE. While there is no question the girls are hot-looking and professional, they are not AS professional, skill-wise, as a top-tier Kgirl who charges a little less in this market. Those clubs primarily cater to Asian tourists and guys here on business, so its not uncommon for there to also be a few large-breasted white girls in the mix, usually at a $1-200 premium. I didn't try one, but was told they are average as well.
From what I had to go through to get in that ONE time (On of the guys finally told the doorman that I was married to his sister, so I was okay to let in, so the doorman got the manager, they discussed it, and finally agreed since we were all "family." Lol), I agree that rather than you getting us in, we would probably succeed in keeping you out. Lol
The only ones I really cared for are the ones that operate right out in the open in Honolulu. I know us Asians are supposed to be "smart" but my experience in most hostess bars is that they are way overpriced for the quality of service received. Like you, I guess I am spoiled by the K-girls who get right to "the good stuff" without any of the hustle you get in a hostess bar, which for anyone who has never experienced one is kind of like a strip club, but where all the girls keep their clothes on unless and until you go BCD.
A word of caution to anyone considering going to such a place, just like a strip club if you aren't careful you can easily spend THOUSANDS of dollars and never even get a whiff of pussy. If you go in like a "big shot" you won't get "better service" you will get treated like the mark that you are. Sounds just like a strip club, doesn't it? lol
more truthful, but not condusive to getting repeat business.
.
“Mind like parachute - only function when open.”
I have every Charlie Chan movie ever made, but I still look like a round-eyed whit guy. A fake Charlie Chan accent, OTOH, night do the trick.
Prostitution can be a federal crime if it is committed across state lines, which has always been the case. See the Mann Act. It is the law that Jack Johnson was convicted of that ironically Trump is talking about pardening him for.
As for Sesta/Fosta it is unconstitutional on multiple fronts but will have to be challenged in federal court, likely to the Supreme Ct, to be struck down. The retroactive application violates ex post facto. Also it is overbroad as applied in that it prohibits constitutionally protected speech. Finally it holds platforms liable for speech of its users which is de facto government censorship. Someone will have to challenge the law showing harm of constitutionally protected speech i.e. standing. Most likely the ACLU would join such an action which could take months or years to wind through the courts.
Be at the conference coming up In DC.. but.. not so sure right now unless they stepped out!
It’s a 1500 conference!
The ACLU has been stretched thin by the chronic lawlessness and perpetual assault on Democrat institutions and vulnerable communities by the current administration, they need all the support they can get.
There really is nothing the ACLU or anyone else can do about this law until there is a test case.
Most likely the government is going to be VERY careful in who they charge first under this new law as it will most likely set precedent for all the cases to follow, and I hope the ACLU or who ever ends up fighting/appealing this travesty of justice is equally as selective in picking which battle to fight.
One of the biggest vulnerabilities I can see that can hopefully be exploited is the fact it creates an "ex post facto law" which can surely be challenged all the way up to the Supreme Court on constitutional grounds. I can't see how they can throw that part out without scrapping the entire bill and forcing them to start all over again from scratch, or at least that is my hope.