Great. A backup at home. Is that where you want an FBI team to visit? Have your lawyer keep it in his files.

I haven’t spent the time to go back and read this, but impressions at the time:

I saw something at a glance that they were prohibiting some types of commingling of records: 2257 records could not contain other data. They don’t want to have to get a search warrant because you have 2257 records with other protected data. 2257 had to be kept segregated.

Something about physical records?

They seemed to want a record for every URL, not just every image. For instance, I think Meatcash has a different URL for each area but one common behind-the-scenes area. And, some images in the BTS are in the download section too. This might mean that you have to document every URL that might get to an image, possibly quite a few.

The big deal at a glance is that it seems to thoroughly ignore Sundance vs. Reno. That’s important to XXXPT and is why ADT is so wound up. Technically Sundance isn’t binding in California and there is a chance, however unlikely, that the 9th circuit might disagree with Sundance. An XXXPT without pictures wouldn’t be much fun. More investigation is needed here to see if the underlying 2257 statute changed or if Asscroft is just blowing off the 10th circuit on Sundance.