Fingers public nudity photos

[Fingersp]

Here's the first of a set from the 2015 Folsom Street Fair

[Fingersp]

Here's a second set of my photos from 2015

[RubberGears]

Fingers,

Good to see you're still around. I was also a frequent poster on Cocco's and lost you when that place went belly up.

[flanker7]

Originally Posted by Fingersp

I do, but unfortunately they all have my website watermarks, so i can't post them here. Since my sites are now closed to the public and I'm only posting there to honor the existing members until their subscription expires December 1st I've started editing without the website url so that I can post here. That will be the next 15 weeks of updates.

Eventually the Mardi shots from that era will appear on my flickr page, and then can be listed in the Free Sites open directory thread. Club Utopia was great, it's replacement does not actively encourage flashing.

Fingers, FWIW you CAN post photos here with your own watermark. We just can't upload watermarked photos that belong to other people.

Also, just to echo what others said, I'm thrilled to see you contributing here. I subscribed to Flash4Us off and on for decades, and of course always loved your contributions on Cocco.

[r3in3er]

Originally Posted by Fingersp

Here's the first of a set from the 2015 Folsom Street Fair

hi finger, never came across your posts. very nice work. do you know if the woman on the right in that first picture is the current director of FSF?

Cheers.

By the way. What do you mean by Visa regulations?

[Fingersp]

I don't know if she is.

For my pay sites VISA credit card processing is now requiring all people posted on adult sites to have model releases. It's not required by law, anything on a public street is fine without a release, but since VISA is requiring in my credit card processor, who I'd used for 25 years, dropped me. I didn't find any good alternatives, though they may exist, so I decided to close. I've kept the sites open this year for existing members to honor their paid subscriptions, but closed to new members and will close permanently on December 1st.

While I can't post pictures with the website url here (I checked), I did decide for my final photos to drop the url watermark, thus the final photos I'm editing can be posted here.

[Basiln]

Originally Posted by Fingersp

For my pay sites VISA credit card processing is now requiring all people posted on adult sites to have model releases. It's not required by law, anything on a public street is fine without a release, but since VISA is requiring in my credit card processor, who I'd used for 25 years, dropped me. I didn't find any good alternatives, though they may exist, so I decided to close. I've kept the sites open this year for existing members to honor their paid subscriptions, but closed to new members and will close permanently on December 1st.

Interesting enough, I just got suspended on bsky.app for posting my Folsom Street Fair photos for "non-consensual" shots. Even though it's a public event. It looks like the first amendment is not an argument anymore, so taking pictures of any bystander will require model release soon. Internet is getting less free every day.

[Basiln]

Originally Posted by Fingersp

I don't know if she is.

For my pay sites VISA credit card processing is now requiring all people posted on adult sites to have model releases. It's not required by law, anything on a public street is fine without a release, but since VISA is requiring in my credit card processor, who I'd used for 25 years, dropped me.

It seems to be a TAKE IT DOWN Act to blame. While the intent was to prosecute revenge porn, it actually changes the policies for the non-consensual intimate photos of web-platforms across the board.

The main problem with this law is that anybody can make a claim against the platform and the platform has no ways to reply other than removing the photos, even taken in public places where they still covered by the first amendment.

The law includes no counter-notice mechanism. Unlike the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which lets someone whose content was removed contest the takedown and potentially get the material restored, the TAKE IT DOWN Act gives the uploader no formal way to challenge a removal through the platform.

Critics say this creates an obvious vector for abuse. Someone with a grudge could file a false request against lawfully posted content, and the platform has strong incentives to remove it rather than risk FTC action for missing the 48-hour deadline. The law contains no penalties for filing a fraudulent removal request.

[Basiln]

Just of curiosity I created a new reddit account and posted the photo below, stating that hopefully this photo can be treated as consensual. The post was removed by reddit immediately.