Anyway, cool thread. These hypothetical scenarios are always good for coming up with new ideas.

It is interesting. I suspect it will be at least another year before we know anything about what the government's going to try to do. It's been kicked back to the lower court, and they'll probably take a while, then it might go back to the Supremes right away.

If not right away, then there are certain to be numerous specific Supreme Court appeals over a period of many years.

How many of us will still be in the adult industry in 10 years?

Quiet is ready to retire.

Who else is out?

Who's in?

but by that same token, the works of william shakespeare are one of the few true examples of public domain. so are many greek tragedies and a lil book called the bible. your thoughts are free. demanding payment for forms of entertainment is not an attack against the poor.

we also have a responsibily to the public. we offer something that a whole lot of people under a certain age shouldn't see. the combination of payment and age verification seems to me to be a better solution to zealots that wish us dissappeared then waiting till free porn gets so out of hand online porn is banned altogether.

i might be ready to retire (i could have a long time ago). but my company isn't going anywhere. it is simply growing larger and larger - and will continue to do so once i'm gone.

i'll be 'retiring' next year (after i turn 30). because i'm successful and have understood this biz for the past 7 years. even treated it like a business lol. it's a cross i'll just have to bear ;)

Adults have that right but children don't. Mr.Fiction, am I right when I say that your concern about using credit cards to verify age is that some adults do not have credit cards and as such wouldn't be able to access the same porn that adults with credit cards could? Certainly a valid concern.

Would you say that a method of verifying age that didn't insist on a credit card was still unconstitutional? Like mailing in a copy of your drivers license or other legal ID?

cheers

but adults will allways access 'offensive' material - they'll just have to pay for it - or at least show they can pay (and are of legal age to do so).

You are mixing issues. If the Federal Government demands payment for access to certain types of constitutionally protected content, then that could, in fact, be an attempt to take constitutional rights away from the poor.

You're trying to make an argument that you, yourself, charging for something isn't wrong. Fine, we agree on that. My argument is that the government can't make the KKK, or Bianca's Smut Shack, not you, but those private individuals, charge for access to offensive material that they want to distribute. Further, the argument is that the government can't make people pay for their free speech rights. In the constitution, it doesn't say that only rich people have a right to read or write what they want.

Again, if the government made a law that every library in the country had to get credit card info before you could look at a book, that law would be struck down faster than you can say "show me the money!"

We can go deeper into this argument as well. You assume that porn is bad for children, right. What about racist speech? Violence? Anti abortion propaganda? Certain religions? The bible, pro drug literature, blonde jokes, gay rights info? You might think that porn is harmful to kids. Someone else might disagree. Someone might argue that bikini pics are harmful to kids. Many people argue that rap music is harmful to kids. So, who decides what is harmful? Who decides what is porn? Is 2 Live Crew porn? Is the Kama Sutra? Is the Bible?

In my opinion, you are not looking at the big picture. Again, that's your right. You can make this simple. We all make more money, everyone is happy. That's not the way that I see it. We disagree. That's allowed. God bless America.

you actually think its that simple?
only way to solve the problem is to move out of the states

you heard of free AVSs? and the government can't and won't make anybody pay for porn - but we can and should...lol

It seems like the price of traffic would increase slightly as more money would need to go into buying type-ins... The SE's and browsers would probably cut more profitable private deals -- old media (print, TV) would make more money with people paying $$$ for type-in traffic...

I'm guessing this would help the popularity of softcore sites -- wherever the government drew the line is where the most traffic would be -- paysites like Oliver Klozov would probably end up with more traffic... Probably bikini sites would be more popular. I wouldn't complain about that.

As it is now I don't give away any hardcore pics -- mostly just tits -- just like the Amateur Pages tours -- I'd be really suprised if they made pics of tits illegal -- because I think a woman's body will be protected by free speech because it's a popular subject for artists -- so I suppose not much would change for me -- if there was an AVS law I wouldn't need to change any of my sites -- but in the future maybe I'd have to waste my time pixelating cock in Photoshop.

I don't know why we are calling this an AVS law though -- IMHO AVS is pretty lame compared to a real paysite... The thought of everyone kissing AVS ass really seems pathetic to me.

people will always want and pay for hardcore

Exactly.

Move to Pornolia... they will protect your rights.

"You are mixing issues. If the Federal Government demands payment for access to certain types of constitutionally protected content, then that could, in fact, be an attempt to take constitutional rights away from the poor."

you're mixing issues. porn is not constitutionally protected speech. It's an adult product/form of entertainment. The government (as far as i know) doesn't charge a penny for information. they have other ways to block the stuff the don't want you to know. Of course, this is the government of the United States I'm talking about.

The "government" can't make up laws for the Internet that would be in denial of existing ones in real life. Plenty of real world companies produce porn and controversial books and movies every day. In America, we get the right to pay for porn just like we do cable or our Internet connection.

There are two parts of this question:

1. In theory, I would have very little problem with an AVS system that didn't prohibit adults from viewing content they want to view. I don't think a credit card system is the right solution. If there was, for example, a system that you could easily sign up for once, using a state issued ID or something simple, and then you could go wherever you wanted on the web, and it wouldn't track your browsing patterns, then I think it would probably be acceptable. It would have to allow anonymous browsing, at least as anonymoust as browsing is currently, once you are identified in some way. I'm not sure if Adult Check, for example, tracks each login, at each site, for each member. I don't think monitoring every site visited is acceptable. Courts have ruled that library records, for example, are protected. So too should web browsing records.

2. Now we come to the complex issue. What sites would be behind an AVS system? This is not an easy one to answer. I certainly don't think that any site offensive to any child anywhere in the U.S. should be required to be behind an AVS. That's insane. Jews would want Catholic sites banned, Muslims would want Jewish sites banned. Christians would want Mormon sites banned. Right wingers would want gay rights site blocked, gays would want religious sites blocked, anti gun people would want the NRA blocked, Rush Limbaugh would want BillClinton.com blocked, and so on.

I'm not sure what the answer to the second part of this question is. I guess a voluntary system to start with, and then the government would have to start trying to prosecute sites that they think are too offensive or something. Then, the rules would be written as juries either clear people or convict them. That's pretty much how porn law is made. Precedents. What's obscene? Whatever some jury finds obscene. Maybe that would be the standard under a new system as well. Whatever some jury says is really really offensive to some kids, and whatever the Supreme Court doesn't overturn.

It's complex. I personally believe that web filtering should be voluntary. Again, I am on the side of more, not less freedom. I know that opinion is not shared by everyone.

John A-s-h-c-r-o-f-t, is that you?

"There are two parts of this question:

1. In theory, I would have very little problem with an AVS system that didn't prohibit adults from viewing content they want to view. I don't think a credit card system is the right solution. If there was, for example, a system that you could easily sign up for once, using a state issued ID or something simple, and then you could go wherever you wanted on the web, and it wouldn't track your browsing patterns, then I think it would probably be acceptable. It would have to allow anonymous browsing, at least as anonymoust as browsing is currently, once you are identified in some way. I'm not sure if Adult Check, for example, tracks each login, at each site, for each member. I don't think monitoring every site visited is acceptable. Courts have ruled that library records, for example, are protected. So too should web browsing records.

2. Now we come to the complex issue. What sites would be behind an AVS system? This is not an easy one to answer. I certainly don't think that any site offensive to any child anywhere in the U.S. should be required to be behind an AVS. That's insane. Jews would want Catholic sites banned, Muslims would want Jewish sites banned. Christians would want Mormon sites banned. Right wingers would want gay rights site blocked, gays would want religious sites blocked, anti gun people would want the NRA blocked, Rush Limbaugh would want BillClinton.com blocked, and so on.

I'm not sure what the answer to the second part of this question is. I guess a voluntary system to start with, and then the government would have to start trying to prosecute sites that they think are too offensive or something. Then, the rules would be written as juries either clear people or convict them. That's pretty much how porn law is made. Precedents. What's obscene? Whatever some jury finds obscene. Maybe that would be the standard under a new system as well. Whatever some jury says is really really offensive to some kids, and whatever the Supreme Court doesn't overturn.

It's complex. I personally believe that web filtering should be voluntary. Again, I am on the side of more, not less freedom. I know that opinion is not shared by everyone."

and my question to you is, who is going to pay for this nirvana cyberwonderland you speak of?

you are overcomplicating a very simple issue. a major point we want to make here and one even free speech activists should be able to grasp is that porn is a business and we should be in it to make money - i don't see what you're doing here otherwise.

You're confusing AVS's with parental controls. The legislatures wanted libraries to use parental controls, but parental controls block non-adult sites as well as adult sites.

No system will be foolproof, but AVS's require credit cards, and the legal assumption has been that wherever there's a credit card, there's a responsible adult. So, if a kid gets through using an adult's card, at least it's the responsibility of the cardholding adult, not the site operator.

don't tell my girlfriend that -- she may start charging for access.

HAHA

my first 100th post - and on such a good thread - i may as well retire now...lol

Cheers,
The Machine

Mr Fiction. I see from your profile you run a story site. So I understand your interest in protected speech might differ a bit from those who deal in pictures. Is erotica considered porn? Well, you might find that you don't see too many straight-out porn novels in the library. You and I both know the difference between a porn story and erotica. The "government" knows it too.

You should consider the difference between erotica which is protected speech and porn which is adult entertainment. If your stories have no artistic merit and are purely porn, then why on earth are you giving away one of the hardest to produce forms of adult content?

Again, you can charge for porn to your heart's content. Have fun. No one is going to stop you. I would encourage you, smile, and give you a big thumbs up to boot.

However, if you both want to make everyone else start charging for access to "offensive material", then we have a problem. You don't have a right to make other people charge for certain content if they don't want to charge.

If an artist or author wants to give away offensive material to adults, they have that right under the constitution. If you don't like it, then all the better. That's why we're in America. You don't have to like what I do and I can love everything you do. Hurray.

Again, the motivation of the person wanting to give away offensive material is totally irrelevant. The fact that he wants to give it away to adults is enough. It's legal, it's constitutional, it might even be fun and exciting.

I can $ee the motivation for wanting to make everyone pay for free speech, but once again, to me at least, freedom is more important than money. I don't expect everyone to agree.

Live free or...PAY UP! :)

wait a minute - you are telling me content providers produce adult content because they want to share their artistic endeavors - and they want to give it away for free? i hope you are joking lol

We don't give anything away, really. We provide a forum for authors to share their art. It's sort of a free speech community kind of vibe. :)

The only kind of speech, though, that isn't protected is obscene material. Porn is protected, unless it is found to be obscene. On a huge website, it is my belief that the website as a whole would have to be looked at, not a specific story or picture. It's like a movie, they have to look at the whole movie, not just one scene. What is the context of the content?

We're always ready for a brawl if they come after us. More publicity = more traffic = more money, right? :)

well, then you have a page of a different color don't you?

ps: as a writer, i have to say that we adult writers are highly undervalued and i'm sick of seeing good authors trade their rare skills for links and traffic. this shit ain't easy muthafuckas! My wonderful boss pays me. Does yours?

Very well put. I'd say that we are basically on the same page (same chapter anyway). I'd only add that I think existing norms for published media could be extended to the 'web' publishing and as such internet content would be subject to the same definitions of what is and is not acceptable for minors. An ever shifting set of rules made to represent the norms of society balanced by court review. Not an easy line to walk. Mistakes have been made (and will be again).

I don't really see how the question of free porn has anything to do with verifying age. The cost of doing business and your business model should establish the price of your product. I only dabble in pornography, by day I am a software developer for a company providing open source solutions to business and by night I have a small partnership developing web applications (non open source). Both business models work though at first glance one model appears to be giving software away for free and the other appears to be charging for it. Both models generate revenue.

quiet should start more threads, this one was a great read ;-)

cheers

yeah, but he's gone to bed now ;)

Your argument is flawed. There is no comparison between either rental agencies or the adult industry to their adult counterparts. When a hotel requires guests have credit cards, they are doing so voluntarily - the government isn't intervening <i>whatsoever</i>. You're comparing voluntary business practice to industry wide regulation.

Love ya work.

You haven't been to an art museum lately...

heh just like telling microsoft how they cannot put an IE icon on the desktop... :) oh wait, they DID try to push that law!

yes but then porn isn't really comparable to a hotel or rental agency, is it? and we are talking about something that will be good for the business, aren't we?

If I had a dollar for every webmaster who came to me and told me they need 200 exclusive niche stories and they want to pay no more than $200, I'd be as rich as quiet. :)

People don't understand that one story does not equal one picture. You can take 500 pictures in an hour. How many stories, even shitty ones, can you write in that hour? Zero. Maybe in a couple hours you can bust out something ok, but even that won't be quality.

I understand that webmasters can't pay more than they are going to make back on a story, but what author is going to write exclusive stories for $1 each? None that I've ever met.

By the way titmowse, maybe you will find this funny, maybe not, but I have long had a theory that Stephanie Sarge is one of the most read english language author in the world. :) :) :) Does anyone even know who "Stephanie Sarge" really is? Her stories are on every free site that has a story. Someone should track her down and interview her. :)

"Your argument is flawed. There is no comparison between either rental agencies or the adult industry to their adult counterparts. When a hotel requires guests have credit cards, they are doing so voluntarily - the government isn't intervening whatsoever. You're comparing voluntary business practice to industry wide regulation.

Love ya work."

Thank you.

yes there is a link between the rental agencies and hotels and porn, they require responsibility on both the parts of the service and the customer. a hotel or rental agency will not sell their services directly to children because children are not old enough to do so responsibly.

"By the way titmowse, maybe you will find this funny, maybe not, but I have long had a theory that Stephanie Sarge is one of the most read english language author in the world. Does anyone even know who "Stephanie Sarge" really is? Her stories are on every free site that has a story. Someone should track her down and interview her."

heehee. good idea. lol. i may just know somebody. lol

This whole AVS deal could spawn a new wave of profitable cyber-theft --

fake "prequalified" traffic

*evil laughter*

But what's the point of even mentioning this -- a hotel or rental company can just ask for a driver's license.

yeah and if you don't pay what then - there is obviously a good reason why they don't do that. (plus a fake license is always an issue)

and it seems you guys have never tried avs sites - too bad, oh pardon me - very good ;)

ok, time to go to bed - nice talking to you all ;)

later

The Machine

"But what's the point of even mentioning this -- a hotel or rental company can just ask for a driver's license."

it was an analogy to argue the point that there were other businesses who demand credit cards than porn companies. while the hotel one is a bit weak, because you can still pay for your room with cash but can't make a reservation without a cc. the rental one is strong cause you can have a wad of hundred-dollar bills, a driver's liscence, you birth certificate and a letter from your mom, but you still ain't getting no car without a cc.