AMEN

And Jay leave me out of this
I don't shoot content-
don't sell content-
and have no worries over this matter whatsoever-
I worry about the webmasters who constantly get bad information- it ends up costing all of us.

Larry Flynt is also a member of the Free Speech Coalition.

You work for Mobbucks...an affiliate company. You have sites. You have affilaites that will be effected by this. If you've published one naked picture on the internet...this effects you.

You, KB, are the source of bad info my friend.

ok but Larry has Paul Cambria already in his corner, if I had big fish money I would of had my own brief presented already and hired a pr firm to get my face on every news show that would have me. I wouldnt be hoping others fight for me.

For those of you whining about the price, I'm pretty sure they have a low monthly fee. Its like $30. I spend that when I go out to eat.

You are being very naive.

I am a marketing company Jay -
No sites I currently promote are owned by me in any way
I work for sharp guys who are very intelligent and have access to great attorneys it's their job to comply not mine

It's my job to get you to send me some traffic as well as get them national press and more exposure.

KB Consults is in every press release I write-
That's me.

please post link to it didnt see it ,we are joining but I have opinions and I dont expect them to save me. I have a adult lawyer and a local criminal lawyer at my adult lawyers advice and a bail bondsman picked and Im disney compared to most of the hard stuff that is out there lol I have no problem spending money just dont want to throw it away.

Once again I am for a lobbying group in our industry
I support that they are trying to fight the good fight for pornographers-

I just feel that it's a Herculean task, and I feel they are underqualified

Is Paul Cambria fighting as part of the Free Speech Coalition?

If he is -then they have someone who is really qualified-
I simply don't know

I agree.

I don't have a link. My friend called me the other day to tell me that he just joined and the lady he spoke with was very nice and setup a payment plan for him, something like $30. Just call them and see what they can do, I highly doubt they're going to turn away your money. I tried joining online but their form doesn't work, going to call Tuesday and get everything taken care of.

Seriously, $30 a month? That's nothing. Eat in one night and there's the $30 membership fee.

Call me naive, call me selfish-
I only get worried about things that can end up costing me a lot of money or put me in jail.

My attorneys agree that my business model is the safest in the industry.

YOU CAN'T SHOOT THE MESSENGER.

$30 for a meal you eat cheap lol, I spend a $100 at fogo for lunch at least once a week lol

I'm a little guy. The $30 is actually dinner for 2. :-)

I have never had a worry in this business other than getting fucked over by webmasters who shave or simply are thieves-


I have never attached myself to CP sites or even sites that can be misconstrued as such-
I have never SPAMMED a piece of email down anyones throats.
I have never stolen any content.
I have never violated any copyright laws
I have never infringed on a patent

So how can I be regarded as naive?

Cautious, legal , and ethical are better words that befit me.

Sure, that might be true, but can the people you work for run their business from jail?

I've never done any of those things and have yet to be fucked over.

Maybe you're a bad judgment of character?

Of course not,
but they'd need to be convicted first of an offense.
I can tell you that I have spoken to all my clients about 2257 and they seem to be confident that they'll comply fully with it as it stands

So, you don't think it is better to fight it then? If for no other reason than the increased administrative costs.

Do you or your employers really want to mail out 30000 2257 docs to your affiliates?

The l"aws of averages" apply here Sly
I have done business with more people in this business than anyone

I have been doing what it is I do for almost 8yrs
My companies have run the gamut-
from sextoy companies, to affiliate programs, penis pills, to webmaster resources to selling companies for millions of dollars

U may be happy with never being fucked over- but I can tell u I have collected in every case where I was wronged
and for a lot more $$$ than people would ever imagine.

I always like a good fight-
but a good fight is an evenly matched fight.

No amount of money that can be raised for the FSC will ever match the resources of the Federal Government-
especially with this regime in office.

Sorry, but to me a good fight is one that can be won.

Man if i had to send out that many docs no one would need me!- Mobbucks and Dirty Danza don't have a zillion affiliates yet and all the content they shoot is exclusive.

They'll have every piece of identification and will show it to whomever they need to - to go about their business.

I agree it's a much bigger problem for larger affiliates than it is forthe companies I represent now

As a member I went with a group of lobbyists to help defeat a %5 tax on gross income of adult businesses in California referred to as a "porn tax".

The FSC is a good organization and worth joining for many reasons but that is one I can give you from firsthand experience.

Jay

I applaud you for having such passion on this issue- I hope you aren't taking my views too personally.

My views are exactly that, mine.
I am sure I can be proven wrong over time-

I'll tell you this much, if I am proven wrong in the future about the FSC I'll be the first to donate to them.

Let me see them win this battle first...

KB... I think everyone should take this approach.... I will be able to look forward to losing some competition and bloat of the marketplace.

:thumbsup

AsianWebDude,

You can join the FSC for $100. (or based on your sales volume) The link for this lower price wont be up on their "badly designed web site" as you call it until Monday. Or you can contact the FSC directly and ask for Michelle. You can find the # on their "badly designed website". But shit if you feel like its such a waste of money or you dont want to join then why are you worried about it. If you feel that "all it takes is good reading skills, a good copier, some manila folders and a working knowledge of Excel basics to comply with the regs" then it shouldnt matter if the much the membership is you shouldnt be joining since you have it all figured out.

You know the answer: there is no-one. But you have also sidestepped my questions about FSC and their agenda. You did mention a couple of names, but the ones I saw were people who are not primarily online porn operators.

What is "this fight"?

Many would see the best outcome as having the new regulations overturned completely. I assume (there's that word again) FSC will be attempting that, and if they succeed, terrific.

But a more likely outcome is that they will be successful in overturning or clarifying specific areas within the regulations. Which is where a clear definition of "this fight" matters. Most of us here have no direct interest in - for example - whether a DVD producer is allowed to put his 2257 declaration in his main menu. There are several other areas of interest only to offline operators and different areas of primary interest to webmasters.

In other words, there isn't one fight, but several. The point I have been trying to make is that the FSC site does not make it clear which issues they plan to try to tackle.

So the possibility exists - and I'm only saying it is a possibility because of the lack of information - that beyond sharing a common interest in overturning the regulations in toto, the aims of FSC have little to do with the interests of most here. In that case we still don't have anyone fighting our fight.

Which brings me to the reason I also wanted to know more about the rules of membership. If a few hundred webmasters have been galvanized by current events to join the FSC (rather than contribute solely to the 2257 fund), then if one member equals one vote there could reasonably be enough webmaster members to push the FSC agenda in our direction. But instinct tells me that FSC is not so democratic and that we shall simply be financing an existing agenda. And we don't know what that agenda is...

I'm only asking these questions because FSC may be everything that many are hoping for. But we don't know. And if it should turn out not to be, then we still face your question of "Who is going to take up this fight then?"

A very eloquent post-
You made my point- albeit in a more articulate way

After reading this thread... gosh darnit, its too bad ACACIA didn't get what they wanted.

and how much did the FSC have to do with that?
NOTHING.

Just a second, re-checking my posts...

Yep, I was right. I didn't say that anywhere.

We are talking about the FSC not ACACIA
stick to the topic.

FSC has been trying to get web people to participate forever. They know that is something they need.

Anyone have an answer to the question I posed about fiscal accountability to members?

They also know we are "low hanging fruit" that are non unionized and in most cases sheep-

They , like the rest of the world, have the same perception of us- A bunch of unorganized kids making a shitload of money.

We are a "mark" that's all

KB, you've been in the internet biz as long as I have, and I definitely respect you and your many accomplishments. So with that said, I feel it's okay for me to say, with all due respect, I have no respect for many of the arguments that you are presenting here on GFY.

To address this idea that a "fight" is not winnable because the federal government has more money, well, that's just absurd and it makes me wonder why you'd even say that. First, we're not fighting the "government" in its entirety, and if you think the resources of the DOJ are unlimited on things like this then you're making a mistake. They have manpower and financial limitations same as we do.

As far as examples of wins, since I know someone will ask, where do I start? How about most recently with the Extreme Associates decision. I know there are still appeals going on, but it was a win. How about the CDA. How about COPA. The virtual child porn law. Flynt's Supreme Court win. The Lawrence decision. When it comes to the censorship people in government taking on sexuality they QUITE OFTEN open themselves up to a bare-assed spanking at the hands of federal courts. We QUITE OFTEN win over the federal government. And these regs are so poorly worded that there is a VERY GOOD CHANCE that we will win. Could we lose? Sure. But to suggest that this fight is not winnable is just bizarre to say the least. What's your angle?

In terms of some FSC history. Some of you may remember that there were a few problems over there not to long ago, and Kat Sunlove was forced to take over on an interin basis for Bill Lyon as Executive Director. And I'll say that I was NEVER a fan of Lyon. He had ZERO interest in the internet community, and I tried a number of times to get him involved with us. In my opinion his leadership was a real problem for the FSC. There was also some issues with Board members. Kat led a search for a new Executive Director, and Michelle Freridge was hired. She's been in charge for a while now. Anyone who has met Michelle has come away impressed. I can't think of a SINGLE person who hasn't been impressed by her organizational skills, her enthusiasm, her intelligence, and her willingness to reach out to the internet community. She's a tremendous asset. I can tell you that from YNOT's perspective, and I'm sure it's the same for Xbiz and AVN and others, the FSC has been responsive to the adult internet community from the moment Lyon was gone, and especially since Michelle took over. And I can tell you that the FSC, with Lyon gone, has been making strong efforts to reach out to the internet community since WELL before this 2257 shit first came up last year.

The problem is that so many of us in this industry don't give a shit about what could happen sometime in the future. So when the FSC asked for support, most webmasters didn't pay attention. Now, all the sudden, when 2257 is an issue and people need an organization, the FSC is the ONLY group that can even possibly save our butts. And there wouldn't even BE an organization and this chance if it hadn't been for the few companies and individuals who donated money and donated time to keep FSC afloat while the internet community basically mocked those who warned about this administration. Someone would try to raise important issues, and 10 posters would jump on them with a "The Sky Is Falling" chant. You know who you are. So when I hear people too cheap to join, or pulling some BS reason why they don't think they should ante up (and BTW an "individual" membership is only $50, you cheap asses), it really puts a sour taste in my stomach.

What has the FSC done? First, understand that the FSC is most needed when there is a THREAT to the industry. Times have been, for the most part, good in recent years. The shit is JUST NOW hitting the fan, and the FSC is RIGHT THERE to protect this industry. No hesitation, it was ready to go. That said, here's SOME of what it has done:

1) Defeated the "virtual child porn" law at the SUPREME COURT that would have made all of your teens sites a HUGE legal liability and could have put some of you in jail on "child porn" charges to be anally raped by an HIV-infected guy named "Bubba" even though you had age records of your model in pigtails that showed she was really 30 years old. That law would have outlawed most anime too. How many organizations have won a fight at the SUPREME COURT level? Not too many. This is a huge accomplishment people. Recognize it for what it is and show some respect for the people who made it happen.

2) Holds an annual "celebrate free speech" lobbying days, which gives people from our industry a chance to meet with politicians in Sacramento, CA, every single year to put a face on the adult industry. I participated in this myself last time out. Those of you who didn't HAD your chance.

3) Has Kat Sunlove in Sacramento an a REGULAR basis, protecting the health of the California adult industry, where most content is shot.

4) Was center in keeping those proposed "mandatory condom" requirements from becoming a reality after the HIV scare. Did you think those politicians backed off because they got bored? All you fools with "facial" sites would be making a ton of cash if your stunt cocks had to wear rubbers while they were getting their dicks sucked.

5) Helps educate adult entertainers on health issues.

6) Showed character and stood against .XXX and the questionable motives of those who pushed it.

7) Hired a full-time federal lobbyist -- the first for an adult industry organization -- who is in Washington looking out for the interests of the ENTIRE adult industry.

And now they're ready to jump in for 2257 even though so many of us on the internet side haven't done ANYTHING to support them to this point. We've just hung back and enjoyed the benefits of their work and the donations of a few companies who have had the good sense to look out for their industry.

So am I SERIOUSLY seeing a debate on GFY as to whether or not people who work in this business should support the Free Speech Coalition? You've GOT to be kididng me!!!

I think Connor has raised some valid points-

However don't you all agree it should be a member of the Board of the FREE SPEECH COALITION making this type of post or at least a representive
This Michelle sounds like a great person to make a posting like this one-
or better yet to make a few phone calls to people raising the awareness. I know whenever I went about fundraising-I was on phones all day long campaigning-

Who is campaigning to the webmasters?

Has she Michelle Freridge gotten involved with the webmasters at all?

Also Connor in order to disagree with my posts here lately ( plural) I think you'd have to know more about what is really going on.


What other arguments on this board have you had a problem with me over?
Just curious...

Were these not the same people who were pushing the .xxx domain and was standing to profit a large amount of money from it? If I remember, they were going to get a cut from each one sold if they were able to get it into action.

Am I confusing them with someone else?

Bingo
but it didn't happen.

When you say "same people" do you mean FSC? Because you've just raised another great point in their favor. The FSC board voted AGAINST supporting the .XXX domain name extension EVEN THOUGH they stood to profit from supporting it. That of course speaks HIGHLY of their character. I wonder which people are supporting it now?