FilmLA at Today's Condom Hearing: 'Webcammers Need Permits'
After the three-minute meeting, audience members make good points and deliver a surprise or two
FilmLA at Today's Condom Hearing: 'Webcammers Need Permits'
Posted May 11th, 2012 03:01 PM by Mark Kernes
LOS ANGELES?Today saw the third meeting of the Working Group on the Safer Sex in the Adult Film Industry Ordinance, which once again was held in a conference room in the City Administrative Officer's office?and which once again was not posted on the list of the Los Angeles City Meetings & Agendas website.
Of course, considering the content of the meeting?or lack thereof?the failure to post the meeting, though a violation of the city's rules, was of little consequence.
In attendance at the meeting were Miguel Santana, the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO), as well as two staffers from his office; A.P. Diaz, representing the LA City Attorney; Robert Ragland, the Principal Deputy County Counsel for LA County; Mario Perez of the LA County Department of Public Health; Dru Ross of the LA Personnel Office; and three members of FilmLA, the agency which issues filming permits for those wishing to shoot movies in the city, including both FilmLA president Paul Audley and VP of Communications & Public Affairs Todd Lindgren.
In fact, once those referenced above had introduced themselves, the official business was quickly over. The Working Group voted to approve the minutes of the previous meeting; CAO staffer Eva Bitar announced that work still needed to be completed on the Group's final report to the LA City Council, which was supposed to be presented to the Council on May 16; and Santana stated that the Working Group would have yet another meeting sometime next week, on a date to be determined, to consider the final report, and there was discussion that that report might be presented to the Council on May 23?unless the fact that the Council was slated to discuss the city's budget during that week forced yet another rescheduling.
All of that took a total of three minutes, after which Santana opened the floor to comments from the audience.
The first speaker was Immoral Productions owner Dan "Porno Dan" Leal, who informed the Group that one of his independent contractors had been given a citation by one of the eight members of LAPD's Vice Division who arrived at the location, for shooting a live webcam show without a permit. Leal explained that since the citation has been issued because the show, which was not yet under way when the police arrived, was being done for commercial profit or gain, he surmised that every webcam performer in the city would not be required to get a permit from FilmLA, and asked the FilmLA representatives if that was correct?
"It has been consistent that any commercial production, including webcasts, needs a permit," responded FilmLA's Lindgren.
"So any webcam show shot by anyone in the city of Los Angeles will now need a permit, is that correct?" Leal asked.
"Has always needed a permit, right," Lindgren corrected him.
"Ergo, any married couple shooting in their house, who's shooting a webcam show for profit or gain, which by definition would be every single person that shoots webcam, would now need a permit, is that correct?" Leal pressed.
"Under the city ordinance, if it's for commercial purpose, it needs a permit," Lindgren stated.
"And therefore, they would need condoms under the new regulation, is that correct, that logic?" Leal continued.
"We're in the process of developing that specific?and I can't answer that question," Lindgren responded.
At that point, Santana cut Leal off, stating that the comment period wasn't supposed to include a question-and-answer dialog with Group members, leaving Leal to finish by stating, "We will be happy to comply with whatever the city decides to do."
Michael Fattorosi, who thought he'd donated his three minutes to Leal, was allowed to speak as well, and directed the Group's attention to the comments he's made at the previous meeting.
"You have an overwhelming difficult task in front of you," Fattorosi told the Group. "There is a large amount of commercial shooting that is going on, that is of a hardcore nature, that would be almost impossible to regulate. The law is broadly written [and] anyone involved in the production of an adult film could be cited under this law, whether that includes makeup artists or a hired performer; you have issues as far as being able to identify who the producers are; you have overseas producers that are now looking to Los Angeles as a place to hire directors and performers. There is an insurmountable task in front of LAPD to identify the parties that may not even be the actual producers.
"This is not 1995 anymore in the adult industry," he continued. "It is a worldwide business. This is a business that has foreign interests in Los Angeles, it has local interests in Los Angeles, and again I ask that when this council and this commission puts forth recommendations to the City Council as to implementing this particular law, that they see the broader issues of being able to regulate and being able to implement this, and that you consider the First Amendment issues that were raised last time... We're in tough economic times, and there may be married couples, there may be single women who do this in order to make extra money, or to be able to pay their rent, and if you're expecting them to pay $750 or more per month to maintain a filming permit, to be able to earn that, they won't, and they probably can't afford to."
After the three-minute meeting, audience members make good points and deliver a surprise or two
FilmLA at Today's Condom Hearing: 'Webcammers Need Permits'
Posted May 11th, 2012 03:01 PM by Mark Kernes
LOS ANGELES?Today saw the third meeting of the Working Group on the Safer Sex in the Adult Film Industry Ordinance, which once again was held in a conference room in the City Administrative Officer's office?and which once again was not posted on the list of the Los Angeles City Meetings & Agendas website.
Of course, considering the content of the meeting?or lack thereof?the failure to post the meeting, though a violation of the city's rules, was of little consequence.
In attendance at the meeting were Miguel Santana, the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO), as well as two staffers from his office; A.P. Diaz, representing the LA City Attorney; Robert Ragland, the Principal Deputy County Counsel for LA County; Mario Perez of the LA County Department of Public Health; Dru Ross of the LA Personnel Office; and three members of FilmLA, the agency which issues filming permits for those wishing to shoot movies in the city, including both FilmLA president Paul Audley and VP of Communications & Public Affairs Todd Lindgren.
In fact, once those referenced above had introduced themselves, the official business was quickly over. The Working Group voted to approve the minutes of the previous meeting; CAO staffer Eva Bitar announced that work still needed to be completed on the Group's final report to the LA City Council, which was supposed to be presented to the Council on May 16; and Santana stated that the Working Group would have yet another meeting sometime next week, on a date to be determined, to consider the final report, and there was discussion that that report might be presented to the Council on May 23?unless the fact that the Council was slated to discuss the city's budget during that week forced yet another rescheduling.
All of that took a total of three minutes, after which Santana opened the floor to comments from the audience.
The first speaker was Immoral Productions owner Dan "Porno Dan" Leal, who informed the Group that one of his independent contractors had been given a citation by one of the eight members of LAPD's Vice Division who arrived at the location, for shooting a live webcam show without a permit. Leal explained that since the citation has been issued because the show, which was not yet under way when the police arrived, was being done for commercial profit or gain, he surmised that every webcam performer in the city would not be required to get a permit from FilmLA, and asked the FilmLA representatives if that was correct?
"It has been consistent that any commercial production, including webcasts, needs a permit," responded FilmLA's Lindgren.
"So any webcam show shot by anyone in the city of Los Angeles will now need a permit, is that correct?" Leal asked.
"Has always needed a permit, right," Lindgren corrected him.
"Ergo, any married couple shooting in their house, who's shooting a webcam show for profit or gain, which by definition would be every single person that shoots webcam, would now need a permit, is that correct?" Leal pressed.
"Under the city ordinance, if it's for commercial purpose, it needs a permit," Lindgren stated.
"And therefore, they would need condoms under the new regulation, is that correct, that logic?" Leal continued.
"We're in the process of developing that specific?and I can't answer that question," Lindgren responded.
At that point, Santana cut Leal off, stating that the comment period wasn't supposed to include a question-and-answer dialog with Group members, leaving Leal to finish by stating, "We will be happy to comply with whatever the city decides to do."
Michael Fattorosi, who thought he'd donated his three minutes to Leal, was allowed to speak as well, and directed the Group's attention to the comments he's made at the previous meeting.
"You have an overwhelming difficult task in front of you," Fattorosi told the Group. "There is a large amount of commercial shooting that is going on, that is of a hardcore nature, that would be almost impossible to regulate. The law is broadly written [and] anyone involved in the production of an adult film could be cited under this law, whether that includes makeup artists or a hired performer; you have issues as far as being able to identify who the producers are; you have overseas producers that are now looking to Los Angeles as a place to hire directors and performers. There is an insurmountable task in front of LAPD to identify the parties that may not even be the actual producers.
"This is not 1995 anymore in the adult industry," he continued. "It is a worldwide business. This is a business that has foreign interests in Los Angeles, it has local interests in Los Angeles, and again I ask that when this council and this commission puts forth recommendations to the City Council as to implementing this particular law, that they see the broader issues of being able to regulate and being able to implement this, and that you consider the First Amendment issues that were raised last time... We're in tough economic times, and there may be married couples, there may be single women who do this in order to make extra money, or to be able to pay their rent, and if you're expecting them to pay $750 or more per month to maintain a filming permit, to be able to earn that, they won't, and they probably can't afford to."
Please stop with the fear mongering. It's ridiculous. 
Comment