Why do the "Extreme" pornographers expect me to help pay their lawyers bill?

[Paul Markham]

It's not like I asked them to produce extreme porn.

No they decided to produce it to make more money, money they took away from me. Because they did not bring new porn buyers to the business, they converted the existing ones by going to the extreme.

Were they interested in my rights or their profit margin?

Are they protecting my rights by pushing the envelope? Not in my opinion, all they do is give the anti porn lobby an easier, take note I said EASIER, hammer to hit us all with. Take away the extreme and life would be a little quieter. Don't see anyone prosecuted for straight normal porn.

So they create very little extra business, they take business away form the rest of us and they make us an easier target to attack. All done to line their own pockets.

Now they have the added expense of keeping themselves out of jail and they want the rest of us to contribute.

I understand the lawyers asking us to give up some money to fight, the longer the case is in court the more money they make.

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Take away the extreme and life would be a little quieter. Don't see anyone prosecuted for straight normal porn.

You seem like a smart guy and I have done business with you on many occasions. However, do you honestly think that "straight normal porn" has never been under a microscope? Do you think that "straight normal porn" would go unnoticed if extreme content wasn't around?

Come on Paul. You have to be smarter than that.

[Pron Don]

agreed, damn those pissing twins!

[gooddomains]

what is extreme ? and what is normal ?

[brand0n]

come to terms with any liability you should encumber before stating your venture.

[CaptainHowdy]

You got a really strong point there... got me thinking...

[american pervert]

fuck them.. they bring heat

[V_RocKs]

I trip out on how easy it is for a kid to circumvent child protection software and then surf google for "big clits".

[V_RocKs]

And I also see your point and wonder myself.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by shermsshack

You seem like a smart guy and I have done business with you on many occasions. However, do you honestly think that "straight normal porn" has never been under a microscope? Do you think that "straight normal porn" would go unnoticed if extreme content wasn't around?

Come on Paul. You have to be smarter than that.

The supreme court is around, so no worries.

Do you think the anti porn brigade would get very far prosecuting people who do porn to say my strength?

They have to stand up in court and argue that it's extreme, perverted and will corrupt. Hard to do that when most of the jury are thinking "I was doing that last night"

Extreme makes us an EASIER target.

Keep the business coming though.

[Choppa]

Originally Posted by gooddomains

what is extreme ? and what is normal ?

thats a very good point now considering what is available to people

[martinsc]

Originally Posted by gooddomains

what is extreme ? and what is normal ?

that should be the real question...

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by gooddomains

what is extreme ? and what is normal ?

Simple.

Extreme is what some people do to make lots of money.

Normal is what will keep you out of court.

Understood?

If you don't know what is extreme and normal porn in 2006 then you really should find out or be very careful. But a rough guide is normal is what 50% or more of the population do. Extreme is what 5% or less do.

[BlackCrayon]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Simple.

Extreme is what some people do to make lots of money.

Normal is what will keep you out of court.

Understood?

If you don't know what is extreme and normal porn in 2006 then you really should find out or be very careful. But a rough guide is normal is what 50% or more of the population do. Extreme is what 5% or less do.

extreme is all subjective. the only guidlines people have to go by is whats out there. just like huslter was extreme when it came out, now its tame by comparison to a lot of porn. if 'extreme' porn didn't exist, people would just take aim at whatever is out there.

[Antonio]

you think the way the Jews were thinking in the Warsaw ghetto during the WW2 - 'hey, nothing's going to happen to us, we've done nothing wrong', next thing they were reduced from 500 000 to 3 000

[Tdog]

Paul, I dont understand why this is your problem. Let them have to deal with the courts.

[Convicted]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

It's not like I asked them to produce extreme porn.

Are they protecting my rights by pushing the envelope? Not in my opinion, all they do is give the anti porn lobby an easier....

Imagine the worst porn you possibly can that doesn't involve children. Obscenity is the violation of community standards. No matter how "extreme" the porn why should consenting adults not be allowed to view it? Bigger still is sticking your head in the sand empowers the government to control what YOU do in your bedroom or the images you watch. If you don't think you should throw in for the defense its cool, but to suggest that these guys some how deserve prison is another.

Let's just go all the way...

If a man and a woman make a rape video then piss on each other at the end,and they WANTED to make the movie, and you WANTED to sell it, and a US citizen WANTED to buy it AND its NOT VIEWED IN THE COMMUNITY but in the privacy of their bedroom. Why should the government "go after" anyone?

....Justice Black - Supreme Court 1969...

I think the First Amendment bars all kinds of censorship.

To impose a regime of censors requires, in my view, a constitutional amendment.' Obscenity' is no exception. 'Obscenity' certainly was not an established exception to free speech and free press when the Bill of Rights was adopted.

It is a relatively new arrival on the American scene, propelled by dedicated zealots to cleanse all thought. [396 U.S. 976 , 980]

Prior to the Bill of Rights, state law, when it spoke of freedom of the press, meant only freedom from prior restraint. But an author or publishers could be held accountable for publishing what the state house thought was against 'the public good.' In other words, the First Amendment did not build on existing law; it broke with tradition, set a new standard, and exalted freedom of expression. There is no trace of a suggestion that 'obscenity,' however, defined, was excepted.

We forget today that under our constitutional system neither Congress nor the States have any power to pass on the value, the propriety, the Americanism, the soundness of any idea or expression.

************************************************** ********

Lastly I started a thread last night showing a congressional resolution to go after ALL porn not just "extreme". People have been charged for topless pictures in states like Texas is that to extreme?

The knock is coming. Are you going to be ready? When it comes I want you to say "I deserved it, I sold porn, that SOMEONE thought was too extreme."

[LouFromHell]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

It's not like I asked them to produce extreme porn.

No they decided to produce it to make more money, money they took away from me. Because they did not bring new porn buyers to the business, they converted the existing ones by going to the extreme.

Were they interested in my rights or their profit margin?

Are they protecting my rights by pushing the envelope? Not in my opinion, all they do is give the anti porn lobby an easier, take note I said EASIER, hammer to hit us all with. Take away the extreme and life would be a little quieter. Don't see anyone prosecuted for straight normal porn.

So they create very little extra business, they take business away form the rest of us and they make us an easier target to attack. All done to line their own pockets.

Now they have the added expense of keeping themselves out of jail and they want the rest of us to contribute.

I understand the lawyers asking us to give up some money to fight, the longer the case is in court the more money they make.

This thread has been by far the most painful thing I have ever had to read on this forum

First off extreme porn is sold not because someone out there wanted to take food off your table. Extreme porn is the product of demand. The reason it makes money is because people want it and they buy it. Anyone in the industry turning the other cheek to these prosecutions for the intended purpose of rekindling their own business is as guilty as the prosecutors bringing them.

Second those defending these cases are in every respect protecting your rights. Your porn could just as easily be labeled as extreme (and probably some day will be) because that word isn't any more than an interpritation. Assuming your safe because they havn't hit your nitch yet is ignorant. Lets look at some indicators: Ashcr#ft covered the breasts of lady liberty ... ? Howard stern. There are people out there who want the SSI swimsuit edition gone ... and believe it or not there are prospective jurors who have a problem with girls made to look prepubescent being molested by men with grey hair like the ones on your affiliate page.

Everyone needs to get past this "well they just pushed it a little to far" bullshit and look at the big picture. Its not going to stop.

I am sorry if I come off as abrasive I just hate to see people in the industry with this take on things because its tremendously counterproductive and insulting for those of us who have dedicated so much time and effort working to protect them.

[DWB]

Someone has to make extreme porn so the stay off my/our back. Does that mean I have to give them money? No way. That is the risk they take, because they probably make a TON more money than I do for taking that risk.

High rsk = high rewards.

[WiredGuy]

At one point, showing too much skin was considered extreme and you'd go to jail for it.
WG

[Mr.Fiction]

Is BDSM extreme? What about bondage sites? Cumshots? Anal sex? Gay sex?

Free speech rights do not only apply to things that don't offend you personally.

[Convicted]

Originally Posted by DirtyWhiteBoy

Someone has to make extreme porn so the stay off my/our back.

Is this your position?

Smart Response
"I don't give shit if they go to jail as long as it is a diversion from my sites."

Dumb response
"Why is the government trying to control what people are watching in their bedrooms as long as it doesn't involve kids or non consenting adults?"

[Convicted]

Originally Posted by WiredGuy

At one point, showing too much skin was considered extreme and you'd go to jail for it.
WG

Its headed back that way.

109th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. CON. RES. 52

Expressing the sense of Congress supporting vigorous enforcement of the Federal obscenity laws.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 9, 2005

Look it up...

[LouFromHell]

Originally Posted by Convicted

Is this your position?

Smart Response
"I don't give shit if they go to jail as long as it is a diversion from my sites."

Dumb response
"Why is the government trying to control what people are watching in their bedrooms as long as it doesn't involve kids or non consenting adults?"

couldn't has said it better.

[Convicted]

Originally Posted by Mr.Fiction

Is BDSM extreme? What about bondage sites? Cumshots? Anal sex? Gay sex?

Free speech rights do not only apply to things that don't offend you personally.

Yes! Thank you! I was getting worried that a website of adult webmasters are happy about adult website government prosecutions.

[jayeff]

Originally Posted by LouFromHell

Everyone needs to get past this "well they just pushed it a little to far" bullshit and look at the big picture. Its not going to stop.

What's the difference between buying a certificate of deposit and walking into a bank with a sawn-off shotgun? Both are ways to make money via a bank...

The answer is very obvious: one is illegal.

Despite all the rhetoric which appears in threads like this, we live comfortably with thousands of laws that one way or another restrict our ability to make choices. Those laws are passed - and upheld - when the legal system perceives "community standards" are such that the citizens the system represents are overwhelmingly in favor of the law in question.

Note the stress on "upheld". There will always be true believers and opportunists, and from time to time they will succeed in introducing laws or finding a court to interpret existing law in their favor. That's part of the system and nothing can be done about it. But the same system is ultimately pretty good at evaluating and judging in favor of the bigger picture. Narrow interest laws are rarely if ever upheld, so long as someone is willing to challenge them.

We need a distinction. If the US or any other country ever becomes a true paradise of the narrow-minded, then our whole industry is screwed in that country. Community standards. Otherwise, while we cannot prevent opposition, those same community standards protect us against that opposition being effective. It doesn't matter what some people want to do: only what the system allows them to do. Which is why we are definitely not in a "first they came for..." situation. Quite the contrary.

We can probably have very little impact on community standards and they will become more liberal or more restrictive as a result of social and political changes far beyond our control. But to the extent we can influence those standards at all, it must be in the interest of most of us to distance ourselves from extremes and definitely counter-productive to support them.

It is frustrating to see diversions enter threads like this: posts about freedom of speech, questions about definitions, etc. Politico-social debates do not belong in a business discussion and we all know what crosses the line with even the more liberal members of our communities.

All that said, I do not believe we are at our most vulnerable in terms of content itself. Our smarter opponents recognize that if they want to restrict us further, age is the area of "community standards" where they are on firmer ground: age of participants and age of access. If the new 2257 laws had been crafted more carefully, they would have been far more difficult to oppose and we are wide open to the charge of doing little or nothing to prevent minors accessing our material. It can only be a matter of time before that comes back to haunt us.

[Mr.Fiction]

Originally Posted by jayeff

Politico-social debates do not belong in a business discussion and we all know what crosses the line with even the more liberal members of our communities.

We all know what crosses the line?

Free speech issues have no place in a discussion about the adult business?

[JenUncut]

The line is about what is "obscene" and that is a moving target in the US due to the "community standards" definition developed by the Supreme Court all those years ago. There have been over the years prosecutions of Hustler, the Robert Mapplethorpe Art Exhibit, and the movie "Deep Throat" based on these loose definitions.
If anything "extreme" porn pushes the boundaries of what should actually be pursued by the authorities as the extreme of today pushes what will be mainstream tomorrow. Hustler Magazine is nowhere near extreme by any normal persons standards today. There was also a time when there were very few cases of deep throat in the bedroom. I would bet that is not quite the case today. What about anal? Like I said, they keep shifting society's norms which can only benefit us "mainstream" folks.

Hugs,
Jen

[LouFromHell]

Originally Posted by jayeff

What's the difference between buying a certificate of deposit and walking into a bank with a sawn-off shotgun? Both are ways to make money via a bank...

The answer is very obvious: one is illegal.

...

We can probably have very little impact on community standards and they will become more liberal or more restrictive as a result of social and political changes far beyond our control. But to the extent we can influence those standards at all, it must be in the interest of most of us to distance ourselves from extremes and definitely counter-productive to support them.

...

It is frustrating to see diversions enter threads like this: posts about freedom of speech, questions about definitions, etc. Politico-social debates do not belong in a business discussion and we all know what crosses the line with even the more liberal members of our communities.

jay ... one is illegal. but in case of this argument there are no existing laws against either. The bank manager is just making them up as he goes. That is the problem.

...

by allowing them to awknolege and enforce standards based on personal preferance and imaginary lines isn't going to solve the problem either. Just going to slowly deteriorate one sides ability to defend itself. And before you know it you might just be that 'extreme' your talking about with nothing left behind you to prop you up.

...

And its frustrating to see people working and involved in the adult industry who cant understand the problem for what it is ... even worse buying into the black / white argument against it. Maybe when you are wondering how you got indicted for your 'non-extreme' porn and facing a 20 year prison sentence for selling videos that by definition of the law are legal to consenting adults you will get it. I just hope it doesn't take everyone that long.

[evulvmedia]

Originally Posted by jayeff

What's the difference between buying a certificate of deposit and walking into a bank with a sawn-off shotgun? Both are ways to make money via a bank...

The answer is very obvious: one is illegal.

Despite all the rhetoric which appears in threads like this, we live comfortably with thousands of laws that one way or another restrict our ability to make choices. Those laws are passed - and upheld - when the legal system perceives "community standards" are such that the citizens the system represents are overwhelmingly in favor of the law in question.

Note the stress on "upheld". There will always be true believers and opportunists, and from time to time they will succeed in introducing laws or finding a court to interpret existing law in their favor. That's part of the system and nothing can be done about it. But the same system is ultimately pretty good at evaluating and judging in favor of the bigger picture. Narrow interest laws are rarely if ever upheld, so long as someone is willing to challenge them.

We need a distinction. If the US or any other country ever becomes a true paradise of the narrow-minded, then our whole industry is screwed in that country. Community standards. Otherwise, while we cannot prevent opposition, those same community standards protect us against that opposition being effective. It doesn't matter what some people want to do: only what the system allows them to do. Which is why we are definitely not in a "first they came for..." situation. Quite the contrary.

We can probably have very little impact on community standards and they will become more liberal or more restrictive as a result of social and political changes far beyond our control. But to the extent we can influence those standards at all, it must be in the interest of most of us to distance ourselves from extremes and definitely counter-productive to support them.

It is frustrating to see diversions enter threads like this: posts about freedom of speech, questions about definitions, etc. Politico-social debates do not belong in a business discussion and we all know what crosses the line with even the more liberal members of our communities.

All that said, I do not believe we are at our most vulnerable in terms of content itself. Our smarter opponents recognize that if they want to restrict us further, age is the area of "community standards" where they are on firmer ground: age of participants and age of access. If the new 2257 laws had been crafted more carefully, they would have been far more difficult to oppose and we are wide open to the charge of doing little or nothing to prevent minors accessing our material. It can only be a matter of time before that comes back to haunt us.

What an excellent viewpoint! This is one of the most interesting items I've read on GFY!!!

[Convicted]

Originally Posted by jayeff

Despite all the rhetoric which appears in threads like this, we live comfortably with thousands of laws that one way or another restrict our ability to make choices. Those laws are passed - and upheld - when the legal system perceives "community standards" are such that the citizens the system represents are overwhelmingly in favor of the law in question.

So just accept what the moving target of this vagueness of this law, close you eyes to the people that go to jail because the "line" is not defined, shut your mouth and accept it, hope that others get prosecuted by the Feds freeing up more money for the other players, and stop the ridiculous rhetoric?

BTW... more than 1 person convicted for selling "obscene" material showed the pics/videos to former federal prosecutors and defense lawyers and were told "You have nothing to worry about". Then the knock comes.

These same lawyers then say...

- Wow I can't believe they would do this
- Well, I mean they could put a pic up of a topless woman and ask if its obscene, your just in for the ride

What about when you "win" and your still out $100,000 for your defense? Was justice done in this case? Cost of doing business? Suck it up? Don't change anything? Where's the line?

I am sorry the discussion of Freedom is rhetoric and a silly idea. I am coming to terms with the notion that the government has mind washed us so badly that we have come to accept the beat down with a smile.

[Convicted]

Originally Posted by Mr.Fiction

We all know what crosses the line?

Free speech issues have no place in a discussion about the adult business?

This is becoming typical. This is the biggest threat to the entire business but no one wants to talk about it. By the way, I never asked anyone for money. Even though...

- Bank accounts were frozen
- Forced to close my online business while awaiting trial
- Not allowed to use a computer while awaiting trial

Been in the business for 10 years. Now I can't even use a computer? I can't imagine why someone would ask for support for their legal defense. I mean heck, a court appointed lawyer takes good care of you.

[DukeSkywalker]

Originally Posted by american pervert

fuck them.. they bring heat

I will never figure you out bro.. one minute you're trying to light a passed out dudes eyebrows on fire as he is laying there helpless and wasted, and all of a sudden you have a moral conscience about extreme porn? If I recall that night, it was 4 guys who produce extreme content who said " dude, wtf are you doing" and pulled the guy off the pavement, and got him a blanket.

Duke

[jayeff]

Originally Posted by Convicted

I am sorry the discussion of Freedom is rhetoric and a silly idea.

Which is not what I wrote. More than 35 years ago I was expressing unpopular views too publicly and regularly being picked up by the police when I left my house: "you fit the description of someone we are looking for". I have been held for hours on several occasions and enjoyed indignities such as being frisked outside a busy department store. I have a little experience of defending freedom of speech.

But business is about attempting to deal practically with existing and probable future reality: there are other contexts in which to debate the merits of social or political change.

[Convicted]

Originally Posted by jayeff

there are other contexts in which to debate the merits of social or political change.

If not in an Adult webmaster forum, concerning adult websites, then where?

[Mr.Fiction]

Originally Posted by jayeff

Which is not what I wrote. More than 35 years ago I was expressing unpopular views too publicly and regularly being picked up by the police when I left my house: "you fit the description of someone we are looking for". I have been held for hours on several occasions and enjoyed indignities such as being frisked outside a busy department store. I have a little experience of defending freedom of speech.

But business is about attempting to deal practically with existing and probable future reality: there are other contexts in which to debate the merits of social or political change.

If Larry Flynt and many others before him hadn't pushed the boundries with "extreme porn" for their time, then the definition of "extreme" today might be some girl in a bikini. In Hustler's case, it was also a good business decision to fight about free speech and political issues. They made a lot of money fighting for free speech.

Do you think that bukkake is extreme and should remain off limits for responsible producers of porn?

You say that we all know what is off limits. What about bondage videos? Should videos of an entire legal lifestyle be off limits because some people consider it extreme?

[DukeSkywalker]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

It's not like I asked them to produce extreme porn.

No they decided to produce it to make more money, money they took away from me. Because they did not bring new porn buyers to the business, they converted the existing ones by going to the extreme.

Guess your're stuff aint good enough paul.. dont hate the players.. hate the game.

you're welcome.
Duke

[shiloh451]

So, Paul when you started this thread you decided what was extreme(their stuff) and what was acceptable(your stuff), and decreed that you should not have to pay to defend them. Yes the definition of extreme is a moving target, but why do you think you should get to draw todays line for all of us?

I don't have kids but I pay my school taxes like everyone else because it is for the good of all that kids get an education. Government intrusion against individual rights should be defended in these cases for the same reason.

You can bet if the politicos weren't going after these guys they WOULD be going after sombody else. It's the name of the game.

[Big Red Machine]

Theres only 2 extreme guys I can think of that the government went after, and that was after they Taunted the Government. Actually called them out. Extreme is a Niche that is in fashion right now. Alot of mid 80's - mid 90's porn had women in power. Now the opposite is in fashion. Next it will be something else, but if the next thing is your stuff Paul , I won't cry about it

[Convicted]

Originally Posted by Big Red Machine

Theres only 2 extreme guys I can think of that the government went after, and that was after they Taunted the Government. Actually called them out.

"I think I have prosecuted more obscenity cases in the history of the United States, just because I've been involved in 700 or 800 obscenity cases. I've done 100 jury trials in maybe 25 states. I've done 200-some appeals. There have been other prosecutors who did a couple hundred cases in a city, among their staff, but nobody has done like 700 or 800. ... From 1988 to 1995, we [the Justice Department] got 130 convictions, took in $25 million in fines and forfeiture, and convicted most of the kingpins of the pornography industry at least once."

Bruce Taylor
Federal Prosecutor

Look him up...

"The Supreme Court in 1973 also gave us some examples of the kind of sexual conduct that could be found to be obscene by the jury. They said it could be ultimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated, and it could include masturbation, excretory functions, and lewd exhibitions of the genitals."

Anyone in here do the "extreme" of showing "masturbation" or "exhibition of genitals?"

[chupacabra]

sorry paul, i've always had a lot of respect for you and some of the others in the business until reading this thread and these shockingingly puritanical stances... your viewpoint on what constitutes "extreme" doesn't seem all that far off of the folks who are carrying out the current inquisitions i'm sad to say.

do you really believe that so-called "extreme porn" is just some ploy to pickpocket the vanilla providers? that is the silliest analogy i've seen on GFY in a long time, and thats saying a lot. so... all those customers who were happily paying for vanilla, straight-laced, good old-fashioned amerikan porn have been purposely poisoned into the extreme side? what a crock. i'd venture that those who spend their money on the extreme porn they desire just won't be spending much at all once their choices have been made for them by those who feel they know what people should and shouldn't be allowed to purchase/view/enjoy. don't expect a witchhunt to fill your squeaky vanilla coffers.

and no, i don't think anyone should feel obligated to donate to help defend those who do decide to work near the ragged edge, but to actually side w/ the persecutors and still consider yourself a proud part of the adult community smacks of pandering to the machine that wants us all *cleansed*...

shame on you..

[tranza]

Originally Posted by gooddomains

what is extreme ? and what is normal ?

Exactly.... Who draws the line?

[chupacabra]

Originally Posted by tranza

Exactly.... Who draws the line?

well, apparently it isn't just the prosecutors who want us all hung out to dry these days... we now need to worry about our fellow pornographers, who some of have made clear that they support the war on obscenity/pornography, w/ an interest in claiming the money left in the wake of their fellows being dragged off to jail. what a proud moral position, i'm surprised that some would even be willing to reveal such in an arena like GFY..

[DWB]

Originally Posted by Convicted

Is this your position?

Smart Response
"I don't give shit if they go to jail as long as it is a diversion from my sites."

Dumb response
"Why is the government trying to control what people are watching in their bedrooms as long as it doesn't involve kids or non consenting adults?"

MY POSITION:
They have been asking for it. I don't shoot "extreme porn" or take the risks these people have taken, and with that comes less risk for me. So yes, I don't give a shit if they go to jail because they have been pushing the limits for a long time... now it's time to pay the piper. If the tables were turned, they would not stop to piss on me (or you) if we were on fire. THAT is the truth.

Fighting the government on this issue is a losing battle. No more needs to be discussed there, hence the fact that I am a proud ex-pat and have no plans in the foreseeable future to EVER live in the place so many call the land of the free.

Rob Blacks attorney is my attorney as well so I'm fully aware with what is going on here, and for his sake I hope he walks... but do I hope he sets a precedent so more people can make extreme and vulgar porn? No. He made a choice, as does anyone shooting extreme stuff and this is the reaction to what they did.

[abyss_al]

wow... i think you are very lost...




great posts Convicted

[Webby]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

Why do the "Extreme" pornographers expect me to help pay their lawyers bill?

As a favor - perhaps.

It is up to every individual who operates an adult website as to how far they wish to push a boat out.

Despite any law in whatever country - that is a personal decision and also one of business judgement.

Because something is "legal", does not mean you have to go there.

There is also an education process along the way - it's pointless making judgements on material when there is little or no knowledge of existing laws covering that subject matter and the legal history.

What may be "extreme" to one person can be tame to the other - that's also a personal view. The legal deciders of what is extreme or otherwise is a jury. Meantime - it's back to individual judgement on both content and commercial decisions.

If an issue arises where there is clear conflict with that personal view and individual judgement and where some authority attempting to "encroach", that's another matter.

Ravings about "rights" and "freedom of speech" regarding material which may be deemed by a jury to be obscene - just don't wash. The material is either obscene or not and covered by whatever laws in whatever jurisdiction. If you don't like the laws - change them or move out.

Issues as to what is obscene or otherwise, is totally open and often vague. We then hit back, least initially to personal judgement - before a jury may decide one way or the other. If there is a conflict between a balanced personal judgement and what others may claim, there can be a strong case for defending any action.

It's impossible to generalise on "extreme" or any "porn" unless the material is in front of your face and available for inspection.

[Webby]

Originally Posted by tranza

Exactly.... Who draws the line?

First place the line gets drawn is with webmasters - and their personal judgement based on the content and commerical aspects.

[Convicted]

Originally Posted by chupacabra

well, apparently it isn't just the prosecutors who want us all hung out to dry these days... we now need to worry about our fellow pornographers, who some of have made clear that they support the war on obscenity/pornography, w/ an interest in claiming the money left in the wake of their fellows being dragged off to jail. what a proud moral position, i'm surprised that some would even be willing to reveal such in an arena like GFY..

You have made 2 of the best post of the day.

I was convicted for a piercing video. No sex, No masturbation, No bondage, No Kids, No Hitting, No Scat. Chick getting her tits pierced on Video. Guess I deserved it. I will be thinking about this thread while I rot in prison. Probably see a few of you join me over the next few years. We can all have a good laugh about it with the rest of our cell mates. "Hey remember that time on GFY...."

[Convicted]

Originally Posted by DirtyWhiteBoy

MY POSITION:
They have been asking for it. I don't shoot "extreme porn" or take the risks these people have taken, and with that comes less risk for me. So yes, I don't give a shit if they go to jail because they have been pushing the limits for a long time... now it's time to pay the piper. If the tables were turned, they would not stop to piss on me (or you) if we were on fire. THAT is the truth.

Fighting the government on this issue is a losing battle. No more needs to be discussed there, hence the fact that I am a proud ex-pat and have no plans in the foreseeable future to EVER live in the place so many call the land of the free.

Rob Blacks attorney is my attorney as well so I'm fully aware with what is going on here, and for his sake I hope he walks... but do I hope he sets a precedent so more people can make extreme and vulgar porn? No. He made a choice, as does anyone shooting extreme stuff and this is the reaction to what they did.

Did you miss this post? This is from the Justice department promising religious organizations they will 'clamp down' on internet pornography.

"The Supreme Court in 1973 also gave us some examples of the kind of sexual conduct that could be found to be obscene by the jury. They said it could be ultimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated, and it could include masturbation, excretory functions, and lewd exhibitions of the genitals."

Also, are you saying Rob black DESERVES what he is going through?

-He didn't rape anyone
-He didn't molest kids
-He sold only to people who wanted his material

Besides you are saying its time to pay the piper but then you want him to walk. Which is it???

[RogerV]

I bet Paul is and thinking they do have a good point. I didnt really think this post through LOL..

Great thread