100........
-
Custom Software Development, email: woj#at#wojfun#.#com to discuss details or skype: wojl2000 or gchat: wojfun or telegram: wojl2000
Affiliate program tools: Hosted Galleries Manager Banner Manager Video Manager
Wordpress Affiliate Plugin Pic/Movie of the Day Fansign Generator Zip Manager -
100!!!!!!!!!!!
woj, your slipping
edit: damn it!!!!Trump haters gonna hate. that's all they can doComment
-
Originally posted by aicoWhen I am on the highway, I always like to find a car that is going just a little bit faster than I am, so I can let it go in front of me and follow it.
depends on the cop boss..
DukeComment
-
Originally posted by Webby
Two minutes on Google will show you he is telling the truth.I was looking for a job, and then I found a job
And heaven knows I'm miserable nowComment
-
You are reading way too much into my post.Originally posted by chupacabra
What I'm saying is they made the decision to produce this porn for profit, not to extend the barriers or protect the rest of us. Obscenity laws are there and need to be considered when producing porn. If you cross the lines then you took the risk for profit. Yes profit you will take from the rest of the industry. Not just from me, in fact very little from me as it's a big jump from what I do to extreme.
People bought porn to jerk off to when it was just topless, I know because I was buying it.
I don't mind them producing it, unless it involves abusing a model, what I mind is the belief that we all have to pay for their defence and I do not see this government coming after the mainstream porn, they will talk about it but that's all they will do.
Remember I was one of the people stirring up the campaign against Acacia who held a patent that was invalid where I live and work. It would of worked in my favor if Acacia won. I did my utmost to defeat them, including giving money.
If the US government come after mainstream porn of US producers you will see me at the front stirring it up again. That will be worth fighting for. But I do not see it happening.Comment
-
He may be, but there is obviously a problem even referring to anything about his conviction.Originally posted by CoronaXXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.Comment
-
Of all the rubbish I've read on GFY (including 'would you hit it' and Britney Spears threads) this has to be the stupidest post I've seen...Originally posted by Paul MarkhamIt'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.Comment
-
Really?Originally posted by Paul Markham
Consider these words if you will...
"In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me -
and there was no one left to speak up for me."
- Martin Niemöller 1945My signature is almost invisible.Comment
-
Originally posted by Paul Markham
I understand where you are coming from Paul and I agree.Comment
-
Fights we should support.
http://xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=15645
http://xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=15652
I'm just against fighting the wrong ones.Comment
-
Another reason they are not going to go after vanilla porn is its a 15 billion dollar industry. Who spends that money voters lots of voters, they will go after the extreme stuff and probably put tighter regs and make big speeches but as much as the right wing zealots dont want to face it, the times have changed. Jenna is advertsing sneakers and as much as they want the clock is not going back.Also I knew a while ago piercing videos are a big no no , if you had all those big names as lawyers. I think one of them would of told you.Comment
-
It may not have been intended Tony - but that is damned funny!Originally posted by tony404
XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.Comment
-
Originally posted by Gunni
Comment
-
If we allow them to ban the so-called extreme porn, your "straight, normal porn" is next. Freedom is rarely taken in one fell swoop, its almost always done incrementally. The death of a thousand cuts. First they target extreme porn because they know potential jurors will see it as degrading to women, disgusting, etc, etc. Once they have trained juries (with the help of the ever complicit media) and legislators to throw the book at extreme porn, they'll step it up again to include all porn.
History has consistently shown that once a law is on the books, district attorneys will attempt to widen the meaning of the law through court interpretations and then later through follow-up legislation. A proof of concept is how Americans have lost most of their rights to be protected against searches without warrants. While this has been done largely through legal precedent and SCOTUS decisions, the concept remains the same. The SCOTUS has allowed police to enter without warrants more and more until we reach the present day situation where warrants are used only if convenient. IF we allow them - through our inaction - to put laws or bad legal precedent on the books that bans or criminalizes extreme porn, it is a matter of time before all porn is in danger.
This industry and the United Snakes of America share alot in common: both are filled with people who wait until the sky is falling before doing anything proactive. Posts like the one that started this thread represent selfish and destructive attitude that has plagued this industry since its inception. We are all on the same team here, regardless of what content niches we choose to deal in. We all have a substantial interest in seeing to it that the RIGHT to sell, produce, distribute and jerk off to porn is preserved. And as such, we should be willing to put personal pet peeves and opinions, business drama and disagreements and general day to day bullshit aside and work together to ensure that the most important goal is protected.Comment
-
Porn existed long before the net was ever heard of. It was also the case that what is now being described as "extreme porn", was the subject of legal action. That is not new - both in the US and most other western countries.Originally posted by minusonebit
Cross the line where a Prosecutor would consider he has a chance in front of a jury - chances are, he will prosecute that case and let the jury be the deciders.
Definitions of "obscenity" may vary from country to country and are often vague as hell - but bottom line, - we are always talking about the same thing - obscenity.
If anyone feels happy and confident enough to take the witness stand at their own trial and show the jury their website content of "cum dripping candy in a dungeon being gang-banged raped" and claiming "rights" of freedom of expression - they need to be physically restrained by their lawyers and have a shrink give an opinion.
On search without warrant - it's a serious issue and more akin to a police state than any democracy. In fact, it has no place in a democracy.Last edited by Webby; 06-24-2006, 07:56 PM.XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.Comment
-
As of 2003, ten states had laws against hetro blowjobs.Originally posted by Webby
Alabama
Florida
Idaho
Louisiana
Michigan
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Utah
Virginia
Are blowjobs extreme?Last edited by Corona; 06-24-2006, 08:24 PM.I was looking for a job, and then I found a job
And heaven knows I'm miserable nowComment
-
The problems of state variances in the US is another story and basically just a mess. Other countries have one law as regards "obscenity" and it's simple (tho may be vague as hell).Originally posted by Corona
Did anyone claim - even within any of those states, that blowjobs are "extreme"? Doubt extreme is the legal definition - if it is, it's time to change lawmakers
Only my - personally don't consider blowjobs to be obscene, - but my opinion on this does not matter. It's the concern of a jury and the wording of whatever laws which may apply in these areas.
XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.Comment
-
The problems of state variances in the US is another story and basically just a mess. Other countries have one law as regards "obscenity" and it's simple (tho may be vague as hell).Originally posted by Corona
Did anyone claim - even within any of those states, that blowjobs are "extreme"? Doubt extreme is the legal definition - if it is, it's time to change lawmakers
Only my - personally don't consider blowjobs to be "extreme", - but my opinion on this does not matter. It's the concern of a jury and the wording of whatever laws which may apply in these areas.
XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.Comment
-
That is the kind of comment which earlier I called rhetoric. Whatever its emotive appeal, there is absolutely nothing to suggest that this is the case. There are all kinds of people willing to step up and defend freedoms, even when they find the context distasteful. For that matter, the Supreme Court hasn't done a bad job over the years: ask Larry Flynt. The reality is that in many so-called "porn" prosecutions there is usually something else going on, such that the simple sale of porn element is almost incidental. And it is still so difficult to attack porn on a broader front, that such attacks are always disguised as attempts to protect minors in some way.Originally posted by minusonebit
Again, people may try to push the boundaries, but whether they succeed or not is another matter entirely.
We are NOT "on the same team here": the belief that we are is the attitude which has really "plagued this industry since its inception" because since we will not distance ourselves from extreme material, we make it is easy for our opponents to lump us all together. Few if any of us are evangelists: we are in this business simply to make money. Those who choose to do so on or over the boundaries set by the law make that choice because they believe they will make more money more easily. They couldn't care less if their activities make the rest of us easier targets.Originally posted by minusonebit
And if we were to follow your argument to its logical conclusion, why are we not out there defending the rights of those who wish to distribute or view underage content? Part of the reason may be that we are much better at posting on message boards than actually doing anything. But the main reason is surely that the vast majority of us feel strongly that it is wrong. So in fact we are willing to compromise our freedom and the sky did not fall in as a result.Comment
-
Totally agree with evey part of your post jayeffOriginally posted by jayeff
I'd add.. very true in what you say about "usually something else going on". The "usually something else going on" does absolutely nothing to represent anyone operating in the adult biz. The further they are away from the adult biz, the better.XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.Comment
-
In England there is still a law requiring people to practice archery every Sunday. I suspect it has been a while since anyone has been prosecuted under that oneOriginally posted by Webby
Seriously, prosecutors are generally not inclined to bring cases unless they are confident of winning and also of not being overturned on appeal. We are very lucky that is the case, because there are probably very few states or countries which couldn't make our lives thoroughly miserable if they chose to prosecute using every law available to them.
What saves us is the application of "community standards" and the way freedoms are so jealously defended. However much reactionaries may hate it, the application of law does move with the times and if the envelope has been pushed in recent years, changes in attitude on balance have been in our favor. Certainly that's not reflected by newspaper and TV headlines and the major pressure groups are all ones trying to push the boundaries back. But the fact remains that sex in all its aspects is a far less taboo subject than it was 50 years ago and since the law represents the community, it has no choice but to mirror that shift.Comment
-
Originally posted by jayeffIn England there is still a law requiring people to practice archery every Sunday. I suspect it has been a while since anyone has been prosecuted under that one
Seriously, prosecutors are generally not inclined to bring cases unless they are confident of winning and also of not being overturned on appeal. We are very lucky that is the case, because there are probably very few states or countries which couldn't make our lives thoroughly miserable if they chose to prosecute using every law available to them.
What saves us is the application of "community standards" and the way freedoms are so jealously defended. However much reactionaries may hate it, the application of law does move with the times and if the envelope has been pushed in recent years, changes in attitude on balance have been in our favor. Certainly that's not reflected by newspaper and TV headlines and the major pressure groups are all ones trying to push the boundaries back. But the fact remains that sex in all its aspects is a far less taboo subject than it was 50 years ago and since the law represents the community, it has no choice but to mirror that shift.
Yep... very familiar with the judgement of the Director of Public Prosecutions in the jurisdiction you mentioned.
In many ways, that is a vastly superior system where there is no pressure on individuals to have a need to make a name for themselves.
There was... a few years back, some highlighted public cases re net activity. On checking the backgrounds, generally the DPP never actually went for a case of "obscene publication" - that was just a substantive offence. The real "offences" were actually related to CP and there was the usual other minor stuff like tax evasion, theft of computers and anything else you can imagine.
You know if there has ever been a conviction under the Obscene Publications Act in the last few years? That was always a very hard case to go in front of a jury with - especially using the 1969 act definitions of obscenity.
I used to know a few of the "dirty dozen" - the "porn squad" at Scotland Yard, but.. not sure these days.. think that sqaud may have been disbanded because it was not really going to serve a purpose when it was too difficult to prosecute "obscenity".
Now.. about the archery on Sunday mornings - you ready to go?
XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.Comment
-
i dont support them either, when you do that extreme stuff you're just asking for trouble.Comment
-
Probably one of the dumbest things you have ever said, and that is saying something.Originally posted by Paul MarkhamComment
-
if extreme makes them so much more money, why does paul say they need help paying their lawyers?Got Gay and For Women Traffic?
Comment
-
only if you do them right ;)
Originally posted by CoronaGot Gay and For Women Traffic?
Comment
-
This is a great thread, one of the more interesting ones I've seen on GFY in some time. Good posts by a whole bunch, esp convicted and Jayeff.
The Extreme case seems to revolve around a community standards argument, one that has been around for quite some time and offers little in the way of traction for other prosecutors should he lose. Let us lose the pending 2257 legislation or the Unspam Registry action in Salt Lake City and you will see alot more damage to our industry than Rob Black's conviction could ever do.
In these types of discussion it is always easy to bring up the arguments of "first they came for the jews" and the "slippery slope" but you also have to balance these arguments with financial realities. We are fighting a war against the DOJ, make no mistake on that. Realistically though, we are underfunded, understaffed and have little backing for our position with the greater population of the United States. To win the war, we have to be smart about where we decide to plant the flag and make a stand.
Rob Black chose this path towards confrontation with the USA DOJ. He called out the prosecutors on the nationally broadcasted primetime Frontline show, he chose material that arguably was done to maximize his profit potential while ignoring the certain litigation it would create. All the while, peers in the industry warned him repeatedly he was going to be prosecuted and to tone it down as he was bringing unneeded levels of scrutiny to our industry. He made his bed folks, and I do not agree that we all need to lie in it with him.
Comment
-
I found it in google after 30 seconds... It's a legitimate case and mentioned in quite a bit of sources. But there is a little bit more to the story. I don't want to say anything because it's none of my business, but from what I searched around it is a "real" case and not made up...Originally posted by Corona
He's not lying when he said he is "convicted".Last edited by rants; 06-26-2006, 06:51 AM.Comment
-
Originally posted by scoreman
Checkout this thread:
http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=626011Comment
-
firstly, define "extreme" and for what area of the country?
while we're at it define obscenity.Comment
-
I cannot imagine, unless the merest hint of naked naughty bits were ever to be declared illegal, these can ever be anything but gray areas. How can they be anything else when community standards are fixed in neither time nor geography?Originally posted by A1R3K
However inconvenient, when you show so much as a naked breast for no other reason than that you hope to make a profit, you can call it erotica, softcore, whatever you like, but someone will call it pornography and in the right (for them) place, could seek a prosecution against you. That's a risk you have to assess for yourself: get it right you make the profit, get it wrong you pay the price, the same as with any other business-related decision.
About the most stupid thing anyone can do is assume he/she will never be a defendant. Close behind that would be planning to try to argue that because the limits weren't clearly defined, anything goes...Comment
-
ok, and now???Originally posted by Paul Markham
http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=626011
or is cumonherface extreme? if so, you are an extreme producer too. like me - or nearly any other here.Comment
-
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txn/PressR...an_ind_pr.htmlOriginally posted by rantsUnvaxxed, still alive.Comment
-
I'd run like hell.Originally posted by ConvictedUnvaxxed, still alive.Comment
-
Excellent.Originally posted by Jack_Daniels
Obscenity laws should be unconsitutional. It's really a matter of taste. I think that videos of beheadings are completely obscene, but it's not my place nor the gvn't, to say what we can and can't watch. We decide for ourselves.Comment
Comment