Naked Censorship? (from Forbes.com)

[mongo]

Naked Censorship?
Seth Lubove, 06.23.05, 10:00 AM ET

NEW YORK - Is your Internet browser a little less polluted with porn today? Are you seeing fewer banner ads promoting hard-core sex? If so, thank U.S. Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales. Largely unnoticed in the mainstream world, his new porn record-keeping regulations went into effect today, causing fits of apoplexy among much of the porn world.

"The adult industry prepares for a legal battle that may determine whether it can survive against the onslaughts of the Bush Administration's anti-adult agenda," intones a recent story in AVN, the preeminent industry trade publication, amid ads for something called Naughty America and Hotmovies.com.

"This is an attack, we are back to the dark ages of witch hunts and instead of burning innocent people at the stake they are putting them in jail and ripping apart their businesses and families," wails the Web site of Lisa S. Lawless, whose company specializes in videos featuring female orgasms. Casualties so far, if anyone will miss them, include the aptly named Bound & Gagged, which describes itself as "The world's greatest male bondage magazine." At least it was: Its Web site shut down on Wednesday.

The new rules, which are updates to regulations that date back to 1992, require porn promoters and distributors to maintain records proving their models and actors are over the age of 18, instead of signed forms and other loose documentation. In an announcement last month, Gonzales said the new rules "are crucial to preventing children from being exploited by the production of pornography." Although seemingly innocuous and for a good cause, the rules have suddenly forced the freewheeling trade to either find and organize legal documents for every performer engaging in sex, remove the pictures, or face jail time of up to five years for the first offense and up to ten years for additional offenses.
----------------------------------------
Read on (it gets a little less anti-adult and explains SOME of the problems the adult world is having with the new interpretation of the regs http://www.forbes.com/business/services/2005/06/23/porn-entertainment-movies-cz_sl_0623porn.html

Funny thing is, these have been around since 92 and never enforced by the feds. All the real legit companies keep these records - but they up and changed the rules and demand backward compliance.

And in the last twenty years or so, there have been exactly FOUR underage performers that have weasled their way into the industry.

[medeak]

1. I could give a rat's ass about the porn industry

sorry.. but it was full time job monitoring two teenage boys on the internet.

If an adult wants porn there are plenty of legitimate ways to find it.

[mongo]

5. These regs have far more reach than just the internet.

For example, in my brick and mortar store, where access to minors is totally controlled, a lot of the movies in my store are illegal under these regs because the 2257 notice is at the beginning of the movie instead of the end, or it lists D. Smith as the custodian of record instead of Dan Smith.

This went into effect in 92, and there were many challenges, and a deal reached in 95. Every legit company has been following the same set of rules since then.

Now the feds change the rules and any movie produced after 95 has to confrom to THIS NEW INTERPRETATION of the regulations.

[medeak]

11. I live where legal brothels are in the middle of downtown

everything is legal in my state.. have nothing against them (have visited and it was a hoot) but regulation isn't a bad thing.

Girls have weekly medical checkups and are not allowed on the street without a non prostitute chaperone.

Keep the damn porn spam away from my kids tho!

[siliconefreak]

38. You're missing the point

It's not about keeping porn from your kids. It's about draconian laws that assume that EVERYONE (including companies like Comcast and Time Warner) is guilty of producing child pornography. The government should have to prove that someone is guilty; the accused shouldn't have to prove that they're innocent.

But the Bush/Gonzalez regime thinks it's perfectly fine to turn "innocent until proven guilty" completely upside-down.

Welcome to America, Version 2005.

[6000eliot]

14. Oh, then

since it's all about you and your kids, forget about freedom of speech.

[medeak]

15. typical man.. do you have kids?

by the way mine are grown now and incredible humans.. one is in grad school in London .. the youngest is working for physics prof this summer.

All great dems.. whoa.. one is green party. Yep.. it's all about me an my kids.

I have empathy for parents who are confronted with this problem daily.

I can't see how your rights are being violated. x rated movie rentals in hotels are one huge industry. btw.. just put friend's daughter on bus two weeks ago. She's heroin addict and refusing rehab and thumbing nose at judge. She plans on being porn star...she researched on the internet where to go in CA. 20 years old and we plan to find her dead somewhere.

It's a lovely industry. edited to say.. if you feel so strongly.. hey! There's openings here locally for whores in legal brothels.. pray tell do you have a sister you would like to apply for job?

[MindPilot]

16. Any issue involving the porn industry always bring out the man-bashers

Explain to me again exactly how your friend's daughter's drug problem was caused by porn.

As a "typical man" I expect I will now be treated to the lecture on how porn exploits women and makes men rape and kill.

I guess it's ok to lose rights as long as you aren't affected.

[medeak]

18. I have two sons.. pray tell how I could be a man basher.

This entire thread is creeping me out. Took girlfriend to whorehouse a month ago for her birthday. Called ahead and told come on by. Always was curious as my company does work there routinely and they always pay cash.

It was an experience I will never forget. Was a slow night and the girls gave us the tour. Wish I had a camera as would have made incredibly documentary. Each girl told us her story (compelling) and showed us their private rooms. And the toys.. harnesses.. lord I learned way too much. Some pretty sick shit. One prominant local shows up in chicken costume and whoever doesn't laugh gets the biggest tip.

It was evident that most of the girls were mentally ill. A hoot..but sad at the same time. Some were incredibly smart but very ill. We were there for 4 hours as the girls were so happy to see us...like a slumber party they said. Then the doorbell rang at 2am and we were ushered out through the kitchen into alley.

Yep.. I guess it's a good thing.. since Reagon deregulated mental hospitals there's no place for some people to go.

[6000eliot]

27. "Sick shit" is usually anything I'm not into.

I'm not an apologist for porn, although it should be pointed out that there is gay pron too (how does that exploit women?), just for free speech. If it includes only what I find to be in good taste, then it isn't free speech. We let this government go further and further in eroding our civil liberties, and soon we no longer have any.

[mongo]

19. If she's a functional addict

It is one of the few legal industries where she will be able to keep a job. Or would you prefer she was a corner prostitute?

At least in the industry she will get tested regularly for STD's.

She will never be a porn star with her problems. She will never work for the bigger companies either.

And you put her on a bus against a judges orders? Did you drive her to the bus station? That would make you an accessory to a crime.

[medeak]

22. no

I put her on bus back to town where Judge ordered her to be.

We haven't heard from her since but we think she traveled out of state as she was talking about porn industry.

Her boyfriend who was in rehab and doing very well disappeared as well. It's better to think she's dead than seeing what her mother has been through for last 4 years. (she's been through rehab twice)

Her MO is panhandling. Also have a 52 year old friend who husband and I have paid for rehab several times. He has a corner staked out in Reno. Lives behind Barnes and Noble. My husband can't sleep at night worrying about him. Off topic re porn.. but heroin is close to our lives.

[mongo]

26. Glad you clarified that

I'm sensitive to the drug issue too. My store is in a depressed area famous for drugs and prostitution, but here it's meth and crack.

Which is not to say that all adult performers are addicts. The ones that make it - like Mary Carey aren't (even though I think she's a twit for her dumb publicity stunt).

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

37. Those first two words tell me EVERYTHING I have to know about you.

Mouse cursor, meet sleeping guy icon.

[siliconefreak]

39. You don't get it, you don't get it, you don't get it (n/t)

You're so blinded by your hatred for adult entertainment that you can't even see the real issue here.

[youspeakmylanguage]

44. Porn does not just automatically appear on people's computers...

As mentioned in another post on this thread, I use Google, IE, and the World Wide Web 3-4 hours out of every workday (and have for the past three years) completely unfiltered and have had porn pop-up ads appear on my screen exactly once, and that was when I was visiting a shady (but not adult oriented) website.

If your kids or anyone's kids found porn on the Internet they were seeking it out.

Of course, everyone seems to get porn spam, but all you have to do is hit the delete button...

[MindPilot]

50. Agreed 110%!! I'm in the IT department and I spend a LOT of time

on all the Internets. I almost never see porn unless I go to a warez site and of all the spam I get, it is almost never porn. What I do get are loads and loads of drug offers, refi applications and phishing expeditions. Curiously that poor man in Nigeria STILL hasn't found anyone to help him with that $50 mil.

[youspeakmylanguage]

51. LOL

The one time I had porn pop up, I quickly emailed our IT guys and told them what happened. They laughed and told me not to worry about it. One of them told me later that most of the porn they find is on the laptops of executives and upper managers. I'll bet most of them are Republican fundie types.

[mom cat]

2. More restriction = higher profits: Good for Bush porn friends!

[mongo]

3. The industry is fighting this tooth and nail

and the adult industry as a whole is made up of some pretty progressive folks.

The Mary Carey stunt was just that. A publicity stunt by a company (Kick Ass Pictures) who wants the Adult Video Award for best marketing campaign of 2005

[XemaSab]

4. Do you think this has anything

to do with the release of the Abu Ghraib photos?

[mongo]

7. No but it certainly has shut down a lot of internet dating sites.

[mongo]

10. On second thought...

I would make it illegal to publish any photo that show simulated sexual activity, if there is nudity involved.

[XemaSab]

30. You would?

Or is there a typo here?

[mongo]

31. Typo

It would probably make some of these photos illegal to post.

[XemaSab]

32. That's what I thought

I would have been surprised if you'd suddenly come out against nudie photos on the 'net.

Very surprised.

[matt819]

6. This administration does nothing without personal gain to its allies

So. . . follow the money and the political ties. I'll bet that you'll find that those porn companies and sites that survive are politically connected to republican politicians and lawyers. Investigative journalism, anyone?

[mongo]

12. Go ahead and do some

and you will find that the adult industry overwhelmingly supports dems and democratic causes.

This is more about throwing a bone to the xtian right than protecting minors, or providing gain to some imaginary republican base in the adult industry.

[mongo]

13. Here's a good place to start

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3267797

[Skip Intro]

8. Wow - this, gay.com pics banned, Yahoo chat rooms shut down

fucking freedom, yeah!

[barbaraann]

9. What does Mary Carey think about this?

n/t

[MindPilot]

17. I want to hear from the KING of free speech

Larry Flint

[mongo]

21. Larry's not the king anymore

In fact, when the indictment came down against Extreme Assocates, he said he didn't support the kind of movies that Rob Black was making and that he deserved to be prosecuted.

The judge threw out the case and basically declared the federal obscenity laws unconstitutional. We are waiting for the appeal.

Too bad this decision only affects Western Pa.

Not that I support the movies being made by Rob Black - because I do NOT. But I don't think they should be illegal either.

[MindPilot]

25. Thanks i didn't know that. eom

[6000eliot]

28. She thinks it would be hot to do the Bush twins!

[renaissanceguy]

20. I think it's high time we go out there

and burn our undies.

I'm serious.

[mongo]

23. There have been lots of naked protests in Europe

Maybe we need to put a naked contingent for september...

I'm in. The sight of my naked body would cause right wingers to seek treatment for PTSD.

[MindPilot]

24. If I were naked, there were be nothing Post about their TSD

Traumatic Stress Disorder would be fuckin' immediate! :silly:

[renaissanceguy]

33. Imagine THEM naked...

ughhhhhh!!!



http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues/472476

[Mountainman]

29. I understand a parents desire to keep kids away from porn on the internet

I also understand the rights of someone having porn for their own personal enjoyment.

I think that in this day and age we could have something like a .prn for porn sites and parents could have software that would block .prn sites. That way both sides win.

If someone types .prn they cannot say they had porn thrust on them. Maybe a better idea would be to have to buy some software that allows .prn and computers would already block it. That way if you want porn you would go get software that enables your computer to go to porn web sites.



My only problem with that is who determines what is porn and what isn't.

For example I am a nudist and I don't think nudism is porn but I can understand if a parent doesn't want their kids to go to a nudist site.

Oh what to do, what to do !

[Sgent]

34. .xxx was just approved

But where do you put someone like Playboy? At least their magazine is more of a strong R than a XXX, and some people actually do (dodging thrown implements) read the articles. They are a big suporter of GLBT rights and of pro-legalization of marijuana.

Regardless of you views on the above, they have historically been a powerful voice, independent of the pictorials.

[siliconefreak]

41. .xxx is not a good idea

It is wrong to take legitimate entertainment and force it into a cyber-ghetto. It's not only wrong, it won't work.

The internet is a worldwide medium. It would be impossible to force every country in the world to require that all adult entertainment sites based in their respective countries register their domains under .xxx.

[youspeakmylanguage]

45. See this post...

here.

[Sean Reynolds]

78. Why charge 'em?

I think that is unfair to make someone go out and buy a program that will allow them to look at porn sites. Would you support doing so for political sites or sites that aren't porn, but are adult oriented?

[tanyev]

35. Oh, Albert...

Why didn't you raid the White House when Mary Carey and her boss were there for a fund-raiser?

[Greyhound]

36. @ least the porn industry has the financial clout to fight this.n/t

[siliconefreak]

40. sort of

Against the U.S. Government, you better believe it's an uphill battle.

And although individual adult companies may generate a lot of money, an organization such as the Free Speech Coalition does not. They need all of the help they can get.

http://www.FreeSpeechCoalition.com

[mongo]

46. Proud supporter of the free speech coalition

Jennifer Kinsley, who had written some of the briefs in this initial action - is also my lawyer. Big time Kudo's to her and all the good folks who are hard at work on this.

[Vladimir]

42. I have precisely zero sympathy here

even though its a shitty bit of legislation from the torturer-in-chief. There are some things not worth crying over, and the porn industry is one of them. Freedom of speech? More like freedom to objectify and dehumanise.

[mongo]

47. Remember Anthony Comstock?

The first person he went after with the first anti-pornography laws in this country was MARGRET SANGER and her pamphlets on birth control.

So, go ahead and jump down the slippery slope. See how far it takes you.

[MindPilot]

52. The average female porn performer will get about $3000

for a scene. That's a day's work or less.

Now tell me how that's more objectifying and dehumanizing that a man spending his life in a coal mine or on an auto assembly line for a fraction of that kind of money.

That objectifying/exploiting/dehumanizing/argument is old, tired and inaccurate. Give it up.

[Vladimir]

54. Care to back your numbers up? n/t

[MindPilot]

57. Absolutely

Here’s two links and although they are a bit lower than my numbers, keep in mind they are both close to ten years old. Even if the rate Hans’t gone up, a grand a day is still damn good compensation.


http://www.gettingit.com/article/21

Article by Nina Hartley, says $1000 per day, but that article is six years old.

http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=1055
The male lead earned $750 per day, the female lead $1,500 per day (top money for the industry) -- a pittance in the whole financial deal. But those sums represent big money in comparison to the average woman worker’s earnings, and the money often looks good to women with few financial options. (This is excerpted from an article almost 10 years old.)

[Vladimir]

60. Well, they both seem to refer

to the top pay bracket, as opposed to the average salary you quoted in your OP. But nevermind, onto this matter of objectification. You are quite correct that the coalminer is exploited, as indeed all wage-labourers are, under capitalism. The particular problem with pornography is that it does not exist in a vacuum, but against a profoundly sexist social backdrop - and it amplifies the objectification of women already prevalent throughout society. You will be horrified to learn, I am sure, that its not just porn that bothers me but also magazines like FHM, Maxim, Loaded and the like...

[youspeakmylanguage]

61. What bothers you has no bearing on my 1st amendment rights...

...or anyone else's. If you don't like it and the culture surrounding it, then stay away from it. No one is forcing it on you.

[mongo]

64. So, you would rather control what a woman does of her own free will

and NOT let her make as much money in 4 hours work as an entire week at Wal-mart - so she isn't "objectified"?

We are all sexual beings. It is part of humanity. If a woman choses to make money off of that aspect of herself, is that wrong?

How is telling a woman or man what they should be doing with their life because you find it distasteful, not itself sexist?

[MindPilot]

66. So then do you exclude gay porn?

Women aren't making it or buying it.

And if it's women being objectified in magazines, how about the women in "women's magazines"?

There is also porn produced by and for women. Are they objectifying women?

When a local news station hires a woman to be a reporter, is that objectification?

Isn't a football player objectified?

The claim of objectification and sexism just doesn't fly unless you narrowly apply it to hetero porn. In other words we are all objectified to some degree; the problem is most of us don't have the luxury of being paid for it.

[youspeakmylanguage]

67. Bravo! (n/t)

[MindPilot]

73. Thank yooouuuu! I'm here all week; tell your friends.

:toast:

[siliconefreak]

75. your argument is weak

In your opinion, do adults in the U.S. not have a right to have sex in front of a camera if they choose to do so?

The fact that you label it as sexist or objectifying is a product of your own mind. It's not up to you to decide what adults can and cannot do.

Oh - and how is gay porn sexist?

[mongo]

59. From a 1997 US News and World Report article

The highest-paid performers, the actresses with exclusive contracts, earn between $80,000 and $100,000 a year for doing about 20 sex scenes and making a dozen or so personal appearances. Only a handful of actresses--perhaps 10 to 15--are signed to such contracts. Other leading stars are paid roughly $1,000 per scene. The vast majority of porn actresses are "B girls," who earn about $300 a scene.

http://www.keepmedia.com/pubs/USNewsWorldReport/1997/02/10/226774?extID=10026

I don't have a newer link for you, but I believe the going rate now is between $400 and $1200, depending on the type of scene. Contracted porn stars make much more, and anyone that gets a part in one of the better companies films, will make the high end of that range or higher.

[MindPilot]

71. My numbers are from a lecture I attended less than a year ago

The lecture was given by a producer, and that was the figure he mentioned.

He also said there is a huge glut of women of all ages and backgrounds wanting to get into porn. Evidently being objectified and exploited is kind of popular.

Edit: spelling

[mongo]

72. I stand corrected.

Not sure where I had read the $400 - $1200 figure.

[youspeakmylanguage]

62. What do you do for a living? Care to share?

Since we're talking about the financial livelihoods of many honest businesspeople, I would love to know whether or not I should feel sympathy if your industry is railroaded by fundie politicians.

[mongo]

68. Woo Hoo!

THANKS for that one!

:yourock:

[youspeakmylanguage]

69. No problem.

:thumbsup:

[siliconefreak]

74. You're so wrong

You obviously don't understand the true meaning of freedom.

And how is it objectifying and dehumanizing when the men and women who perform in sex videos have all signed up to do it on their own - you know - just like adults!

[youspeakmylanguage]

43. LOL - Bushco forces online porn industry to adopt quality control!

Now there won't be a ton of sites all advertising the same thousand or so magazine scans from 80's skin mags. All of the sites that produce quality original content will already have been following these regulations. The hacks that host the crappy JPG collections will now have to scramble for paperwork.

I hope the fundies play this up as a great moral victory. They might even leave the adult industry alone for awhile.

Who would have thought that the man who brought quality control back to the online porn world would be AG Gonzalez?

And to all of the concerned mommies and daddies ready to piss and moan about how the porn industry corrupts your kids Internet experience - grow up and get a grip on reality. I use Google, IE, and the World Wide Web 3-4 hours out of every workday for the past three years completely unfiltered and have had porn pop-up ads appear on my screen exactly once. If your kiddies are finding porn on the Internet they are seeking it out.

[mongo]

48. But It's more than that

These regs were originally created in 92, there was a big fight over how they should be interpreted, and an agreement was reached in 95. Since then, every producer has been following the same set of rules.

Now the Feds changed the interpretation of the rules, and have backdated compliance to 95. Movies in my inventory are illegal due to this because of stupid little things like this:

The 2257 compliance notice lists D. Smith as the custodian of record instead of Dan Smith.

The 2257 compliance notice is at the beginning of the film (where they all are) instead of the end.

There are some other technical issues that I don't have the expertise to go into.

The fact is that the industry has been checking ID's and keeping records since 95 - and doing their best to comply with the law, even though there has NEVER BEEN ANY ENFORCEMENT OF IT BY THE FEDS. Now the feds get to change the rules and expect the industry to be compliant back to 95.

[youspeakmylanguage]

49. I don't think the Justice Department will be going after legit producers..

...and resellers. I think this will be aimed more towards the half-assed webmasters and producers that deal in huge archives of scanned images and old footage. They're usually the ones with no records on file.

Rob Black specialized in producing the most hardcore of the hardcore. If you paint a giant bullseye on your back and dance around, someone will eventually target you. Because he was so prominent (going on the Daily Show, etc) I'm sure a lot of other producers that keep their noses to the ground didn't have a lot of sympathy.

A friend of mine runs a small chain of adult stores and he deals in bulk shipments of discount DVDS (MSRP 9.99-14.99). These are mainly 4-5 hour compilations of crappy stock footage. His profit margin on these products is a lot smaller than his margin on high-end videos, toys and clothing. He might even be happy to scrap the crap DVDs since they tend to bring a more undesirable element to his stores, as opposed to the dancers and couples that purchase his other products.

If your store specializes in these lower-end videos then you might have a problem. Or you could look at it as a good time to upgrade your inventory.

The fundies and the fundie politicians know that Americans love their porn, even if they want to pretend otherwise in public. The neocons already have the fundie base in their pockets, so pissing off the libertarian types by taking away their stroke videos and websites won't win them any new votes.

[mongo]

53. Or perhaps I should just go out of business

Since I am in an economically depressed area, and my bread and butter is the $14.95 or 3 for $29.95 DVD's.

I can't hardly sell any new release/catalog video I get in unless it has the Hustler name on it.

And I have to take issue with the profit margin on the higher end stuff. I make less of a margin on a new release/higher priced catalog movie than I do on a cheap 4hr comp.

I got into the business to sell toys. I love selling toys to couples and I sell shoes and outfits to dancers all the time. But I would be out of business if it weren't for the cheap porn.

[youspeakmylanguage]

55. I've never worked in the business professionally...

<If my future in-laws Googled me and are reading this - please make a note of that!>

...so I just assumed the profit margin had to be larger on the high-end stuff.

Can you pass the buck back up to your distributor or wholesaler? Who is going to take responsibility for these mountains of cheap (and now apparently illegal) DVDs and video tapes?

[mongo]

56. Presumably, anyone in the distribution chain is somewhat

responsible. Including me. My lawyer told me to start a log of movies that I have seen and verified their compliance or taken them off my shelf - to show that I am making a "good faith effort" to comply with the law.

I don't really think the feds are going to come after me with this. They will start with two-bit internet operations that can't afford to defend themselves.

And no, the DVD's are not returnable. I have to eat the loss for any defectives.

[youspeakmylanguage]

58. Yeah, I wouldn't worry too much...

...like I said originally, I think this is mostly aimed at shady webmasters with huge gallerys of scanned images. Hopefully it will encourage more of them to produce orignal content.

EDIT: If you have any interest in directing or producing, now might be a good opportunity to break away from retail. Find out if you have any customers or professional dancers that would be interested in performing.

[NashVegas]

77. I'd Think This Would Hit Amateurs More Than Anyone

Which is kind of a shame. Porn belongs in the hands of the people!

[Seabiscuit]

63. My hand is up. I have a question.

You wrote: "And in the last twenty years or so, there have been exactly FOUR underage performers that have weasled their way into the industry."

OK, Traci Lords is one. Who are the other three? Did I miss something? :)~

[youspeakmylanguage]

65. Traci Lords was the only one to make a "career" out of her dishonesty...

...the others probably slipped back into obscurity where they belong.

[mongo]

70. Source

Despite the Justice Department claim, it has long been clear to adult video producers, distributors and retailers, as well as the more high-profile Webmasters, that the primary purpose of the regulation is its potential for harassment. The last time an underage performer appeared in an adult video was in early 2000. As soon as the actress' status was discovered, all copies of the tape in which she appeared were recalled and destroyed, to the point that when federal marshals raided warehouses in five cities in August of 2000, allegedly looking for copies of the tape, none were found.

In all, in the last 20 years, a total of four underage performers using deliberately falsified IDs have been uncovered, beginning with Traci Lords, and including Alexandria Quinn and gay performer Jeff Browning – an astonishingly small number considering the total number of performers who have passed through the industry during that period.

http://www.avn.com/index.php?Primary_Navigation=Articles&Action=View_Article&Content_ID=227068
(from adult video news - not work friendly)

[peacetalksforall]

76. All of this is just a THANK YOU to their 'I'll watch your morals for you'

religious base.