Condoms in porn: Moving industry out of state could be difficult

[The Straight Story]

Threats by porn firms to leave California after the L.A. City Council voted to mandate condom use in porn films could be difficult because such filming is legal in just two states -- California and New Hampshire.

A ruling by the California Supreme Court effectively legalized the making of adult films in a landmark 1988 case, which came just as VCRs allowed people to watch explicit movies at home.

New Hampshire’s highest court made a similar ruling only recently, in 2008.

The California ruling is a key reason why L.A. became the capital of the multibillion-dollar porn business. The justices defended the right of film producers to recruit people to act in sexually explicit movies, making it impossible for police and district attorneys to prosecute producers of pornography on charges of soliciting people to engage in prostitution.
The California case stemmed from the conviction in 1985 of Harold Freeman, who had faced a possible prison term for hiring actresses for up to $800 a day to perform explicit sex acts in a movie called “Caught from Behind II,” according to Times coverage at the time.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/01/condoms-in-porn-moving-industry-out-of-state-could-be-difficult.html

[Denninmi]

1. I guess I'm missing something here.

Isn't there a whole lot of real estate in California that is NOT part of the City of L.A.? Can't they find studio space elsewhere.

I don't watch porn, I think it's pretty disgusting, but I think that people who choose to involve themselves in it have a right to do so. From what I do know about porn, its production values are pretty low for the most part, so I can't see how it would be hard to find someplace to film outside of L.A. city limits.

Or are they just afraid that this would set a precedent and this law would be adopted by other cities or even the State of California?

[joeybee12]

2. The actual city of LA is small compared to the county of LA...

I can't imagine this ordinance would really affect them...and I can't imagine how the city can enforce it.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

13. Unenforceable feel good nonsense

You are quite right about the City of Los Angeles being a small part of LA county and the area in general

[The Straight Story]

4. Not sure, but I thought it odd you can only film in 2 states

Not sure how someone enforces that either.

[RandySF]

5. Most porn stars live in and around LA.

There is also a steady supply of people who provide their houses (for a fee) to shoot in.

[Blue_Tires]

3. I thought all the trends were going more toward the

"amateur, let-me-videotape-myself-and/-or-my-lover(s)" stuff anyway??

[VWolf]

6. Welcome to New Hampshire, the new porn capital of the world!

Doesn't quite sound right, does it?

[provis99]

8. heh. what would New Hampshire's new motto be?

Instead of "Live free or die", maybe "Live free and screw"?

[VWolf]

10. More like "Live condom-free and screw" n/t

[dembotoz]

7. new hampshire--with the mandatory outside sex scenes done in a snow bank

all sorts of lines i could write after that but we should not be offensive or so we are told.....

[VWolf]

11. Mixed blessing

On the one hand, you got your erect nipples.

On the other hand ..... SHRINKAGE!!!

[booley]

9. What Whiners

Seriously, condoms in porn are no different then hard hats at a construction site or gloves in a hospital.

It's a basic safety precaution. And if you are making millions off of these films, I think you can afford some condoms.

Gay porn already does this and is happily chugging along (no pun intended). It's to the point that conventions that showcase porn like IML won't even let producers that make bare back films get vender booths.

Though I had no idea that only two states allow porn filming. Lots of small cottage producers exist in other states (even the bible belt ones) and as far as I know none have had any problems.

[HopeHoops]

12. 1998? Shit, I remember seeing them in 1980 - think "Debbie Does Dallas"

And hes, it was on VHS.