> If your media is live streamed, it doesn't seem to me likely that you could meet the requirements with an offline system.

You store all the PII offline and assign each performer a unique identifier. Then tag each stream with the unique identifier.

Why would that not work?

> Why would that not work?

It would work if the law is applied on such a way that the list of media retrieved by querying using the performer ID on the media server is acceptable as the listing of depictions that is required to be part of the age verification records. It's pretty clear in the combination of statute and regulation that either hardcopy or digital records can be used, but it's not at all obvious that a hybrid of that particular form satisfied the requirements. From an information management perspective, I can see it making sense; from what I've seen of administration of legal rules I can see where it might not be. Especially in an industry that politicians (and lead US federal prosecutors are all a brand of politicians) like to score points against, I would expect people to be extremely conservative about uncertain legal exposure; you don't want a setup where you have a decent but uncertain argument of it goes to court, you want one that would never give anyone a reason to think it was a viable pretext for legal action against you in the first place.

Would printing out screenshots of the video constitute copies of portions?

If so, there's a simple solution, albeit one that involves hiring a decent-sized staff of file clerks: whenever a model uploads a video, have a printer start spewing screenshots and have an file clerk grab a selection of photos that both identify the video and clearly show the model's face and put them in that model's file in the cabinet.

I did not know this!

I guess today was my day to put my foot in my mouth for assuming that I can solve complicated systems with a "why don't you just" :/

It is not that difficult to achieve with documents, actually.