|
Oh and ADG...
The government is gathering information they have no rights to in the first place. Think about that for a minute. WIth this latest action, they are not inspecting. They are gathering information. You still feel free? |
It will boil down to this ..... we are our own worst enemy .... try and defend this ....
http://www.pornotube.com/media.php?m=13114 |
Quote:
I am being serious... I find the idea of a "debate" of whether FSC is to be the organization to represent the biz is fruitless and unwarranted. Its far easier to take an existing operation and help mold it, to make it represent the interests of its membership, rather than trying to start something new. First thing you need is money, lots of it.. in being able to hire lobbyists to help influence laws as MikeSouth and others have pointed out. It takes lots of money to hire 1st amendment attorneys to fight bad laws. This money can only come from the membership, which means people have to join. The Robin Hood model doesn't work, where bigger companies should carry the financial burden. As Rashan was pointing out, the bigger companies have their acts together. They paid money for attorneys to handle their 2257 issues, got compliant, and probably make some of their political contributions for issues that affect them. Its the mid to smaller sized companies that have the larger numbers that are best served by a representative body like FSC. While FSC can't play the surrogate role to watch over its members 2257 compliance, it does provide a circling of the wagons when it comes to larger issues. For this to even be a debate, there needs to be the proposal for another plan. So to the thread topic of starting a new org.. my points have been on target to that topic in saying there is an answer, FSC, but i will agree with many of you, that improvement can be done in various areas, but there is alot that goes behind the scenes.. and in this age of instant communication and cameras everywhere, i can understand the desire to want to know each and every thing.. but their is a practical matter and there is also the issue if even there was complete full disclosure and transparency, how many would actually read through all of it? I made some suggestions as well, like somewhat of a representative body, where people on various boards who were active and concerned with adult industry issues, could act as like representatives... with interaction with FSC staff to voice concerns and be conduits back to the community boards. As with all ideas, it takes time and assignment of priority. Not renewing your FSC membership dues or not joining FSC will cause a negative impact on the industry, if there isn't enough funding to keep FSC going. Who's going to deal with COPA in october? Who's going to continually litigate on 2257? Who's going to address the various labelling laws and such? ACLU and EFF might on certain issues, but they don't represent the interests of the adult biz. Let FSC die on the vine, and what goes with it, is the only defense for this industry. Fight the soapbox! |
FTP
Heres the problem...we all know the FSC needs money its been needing money for more than 10 years...and thats the problem...many of us have sen money and donated only to see it squandered...10 years down the road is not the time to preach send us money now and we will really really put it to good use THIS TIME. Thats why the FSC needs to be torn down and started over...the mere name brings up images of ineptitude, greed and pure laziness. Toss the old FSC out on its ass and replace with something that can effectively represent us...maybe open an ACLU chapter...point is do SOMETHING The time to tell us how much we need you has long since passed you have proven time and time again that we dont need you because when we do...you aint there.... |
Quote:
I hope the new Executive Director candidates do read your ideas as well, as you have touched upon a broad range of topics. The problem is that it is a broad range of topics, which means a bigger staff is needed.... Look at the NRA... 3M+ members and a huge staff (budget) to boot. There is still so many affiliate webmasters who aren't FSC members, so many other paysites, performers, and businesses that aren't members. Money buys you opportunity. Lack of money binds your hands. All of your great ideas require alot of resources for focus, and so, my reiterating point.. support FSC, get involved, and help shape it. More members coming in means more money to do more things. more members means more potential active involvement by members to shape and contribute to the organization. I'll stop repeating myself now. Fight the loop! |
I applaud FSC!
Rather than rag on FSC, I've tried to help a little (have YOU??)---for the last nine Lobbying Days events in Sacramento, I bought my own plane ticket and paid my own hotel bill, donated my own time away from performing, etc (having an AVN Award Winner like Mike South participating would have helped a LOT, had he been one of the stars in attendance!). In the early days, legislators were shy to acknowledge us; but, every trip provided more and more recognition and acceptance, thanks to the everyday hard work of FSC's Kat Sunlove who now has staffers and legislators often seeking her FSC thoughts BEFORE they propose some intrusive legislation; thus, instead of us having to fight legislative grandstanding and get bills shot down in committee, FSC heads them off before they sometimes even get written. The Calderon (Taxation) Bill was killed after mucg work by FSC, the Return of Business Records Bill which was supported by FSC and it's allies in Sacramento and was passed into law, secondary effects and taxes on stripping along with 6-foot rules were killed, etc etc.
FSC is now expanding into other states and into D.C., and many of the things (and much more) that Mike mentioned are already being worked on. It takes manpower, and manpower costs money--maybe more volunteering and less griping/sniping might help more than the constant complaining???? Because of financial constraints, FSC can't financially-legally fight each and every screw-up one of us makes in our own hometown, but they do indeed take on appropriate stuff that affects the Adult Industry as a whole. Had all of us who joined FSC last spring/summer to cover our 2257 exposed asses actually all paid our full rightful dues (instead of joining as the cheapest category we could rationalize into---are YOU one of those?), perhaps FSC wouldn't be so constrained in the fights they can take on, and might even have some financial resources to do some of the other things Mike and others (including the VERY active FSC Board) suggest. I've noted lots of efforts by FSC to foster connections with the Adult Internet (appointed Connor Young to the FSC Board, attended webmaster events, held FSC meetings at Cybernet and other gatherings, strongly supported ASACP, etc etc. FSC has also integrated the Adult Entertainment/Gentlemen's Clubs into the fold. FSC is NOT just about video/dvd! IMHO, FSC has made SIGNIFICANT headway, has set up even more advances, and has access to the best legal minds in America. What it needs to do is somehow wave a magic wand and get EVERYONE on board, both with dues and with positive assisting. Carping at FSC is not gonna make us stronger as the Adult Industry! I wonder if the feds are smiling tonight because of this (negative) thread being started!!?? Just my humble opinion! Though I will monitor this thread, I will not post or respond to the snipers. I urge you to thing objectively, and as things apply in 2006, not as you or others subjectively react to FSC matters from years ago! Dave Cummings |
Dave you're my hero.
Well said. |
Quote:
|
Dave I love ya but I hate to tell ya that you are a primary producer and the FSC injunction doesn't help you or exempt you in any way.
FTP We have all heard the mantra about getting things done takes money many many times before...problem is we haven't seen any return on our investment. The FSC does a piss poor job period, if it didnt it woulkd have a lot more money so far only one person has taken up my challenge to name only 3 accomplishments the FSC has made in ten years...a dubious record What the FSC lacks and has always lacked is accountability and as such it lacks credibility something about trust but verify |
Quote:
It would appear from the outside looking in that FSC has not done a great job of promoting itself. Blowing its own horn so to speak. One really can't say they have done nothing and have few accomplishments. I think there are those in the industry that would like to start something apart from the FSC. Suspect the reasons are motivitaed by money and power. I'm not a player at all in all this. Interested in what others in the know have to say. |
Thanks for your efforts Dave Cummings! I wasn't aware of your activity.
|
Quote:
If you produce your own content, then you are required to keep proper identification records as defined by the 11+ year law. While FSC is challenging all of 2257, i believe that the provisions for primary record keepers will stick. It makes sense... that primary record keepers be responsible for ensuring that minors are not used, and to document which production material the performer was in.. such that in case it was a minor (ie. they had fake documentation), then it would be possible to track down the instances of that performer in content, and have the word be broadcasted out to take down that content. Websites that license the content have on the whole, failed in their responsibilties of 2257.. that so many can't identify which content came from which place. the 2257.html page is not good enough for compliance and does nothing to be able to do something when finding out that a particular content set or video was found to be underaged. Compliance with 2257 means taking the law seriously and understanding what to do.. which i have had countless threads and posts to explain it. and for the most part, is quite easy.. its a recordkeeping issue, which the word "recordkeeping" is in the title of 2257. What is a problem is the new 2257 language introduced by ashcroft to require secondary record keepers (websites that use the content) to have the 2257 documentation. This is quite burdensome and a great violation of privacy towards the models.. that when you license content, it should be the responsibility of the content producer to have good records, but also the responsibility of the website that shows the images to be able to attribute each and every image to which content producer. Going forward, the simple answer is to tag the filename or the folder with some ID that ties back to where the content came from. So the FSC can't really help content producers, they have a legal responsibility that in the original 2257 language seems reasonable.. the new additions to both primary and secondary record keepers goes over the top and does further to protect child from being used in content, to actually be used to shutdown adult websites due to ignorance in the law and the burdensome requirements to do so. This is one of the main challenges FSC is doing on the secondary record keeper front which is VERY significant and very much needed. Content producers for the most part on the video site, have been complying with 2257 for a long time.. it's the internet side of content producers who have enjoyed the wild west of growth and have largely ignored the responsibility to document properly and failure to even consult with an attorney with 2257 understanding. Has this clarified the issue on 2257 and primary record keepers and FSC? Fight the 411 on 2257! |
Quote:
point taken.. and i would say that FSC is accountable.. its accountable to its members... if the members don't like what is going on, there are many forums where they are able to express that in votes and in various meetings. If you believe there are sufficient problems at FSC, then FSC directors should be held accountable, and that is done by the members expressing themselves. As an independent thinker, you could do more for FSC with your constructive criticisms and ideas by getting its members to pay attention to the deficits and hold the directors accountable. If the directors are doing their job in steering the organization, then the members are being represented.... if they are not, then new directors should be voted in. FSC directors are voted by the members....... if you don't vote, you can't bitch. Fight the beep! |
Quote:
Here is something that I think you left out, the reason the FSC does not have support of our industry is because of this very reason...lol you opinion matters and it is important to you...but as you said. yes the Video biz is heading digital, and we better wake the fuck up. I have been ringing this bell on this board so long my arm now hurts...nobody in our biz cares...its sad really. Many friends of mine in the Video biz kind of laugh at the internet group, "not to smart" are what they say. So I say this...instead of pointing out all the faults of a group that clearly is trying to help us, why doesn?t someone come up with a plan to put our entire biz together as one group? And. it?s not fair to the none member?s of the FSC (they have zero protection), that would mean they either did not support the group or did not pay or both, and last time I checked none of my lawyers work for free... So our industry would be better off it got smart stopped drinking themselves to death at shows and took the biz as serious as they should.....big brother is circling the wagons and nobody seems to give a fuck... We support the FSC, they work hard its not a game, it must be hard to go to bat for an industry that cares more about the dumb shit stuff instead of staying in biz So I say 'LAY OUT A PLAN THAT WORKS FOR OUR INDUSTRY...AND LETS RUN WITH IT" it?s easy to play "Arm chair quarterback" loll Here is the best part of all this , I read this blather from folks on this board that consider themselves ?gifted? or ?super intellectuals? boarding on ?genius?s? and all I see all the time is Blah blah blah?post post post?blah blah blah?.all of your mighty words, and NOT ONE SINGLE ACTON?NADA?NOTHING? I don?t know about anyone else if you want to sit back and say somethings not right and go on and on about it, do this, ?shut the fuck up, and do something about it?.how about that?lol This does not apply to any one person or group but to just about ?everybody? .:2 cents: |
Actually it makes no sense whatsoever
alcohol and cigarettes are far more harnmful to children so would you advocate forcing alcohol and tobacco companies be subject to the same regulations? Why should someone be jailed and fined for not being able to prove that he didnt commit a crime that never happened? So its OK for you that the FBI can enter your home or business with no warrant, no probable cause and no due process, just so that they can "protect the children"? At what point do we just get rid of the first fourth andf fifth amendments completely and roll over and allow the feds to do as they please with us so long as they protect our poor children from evil Fuck you |
Should we start our own? Maybe, maybe not.
The adult industry desperately needs an industry trade group whose leaders are elected by the membership and who have strict term limits. This group should retain its own lobbyists and actually organize things and go after some cases. When I think of the FSC, I cannot recall any remarkable accomplishments they have made. So yes, a change is in order. On the other hand, this industry is plauged by alot of thick-headed fools who are so greedy that they dont realize they are cutting thier own throats a few years down the road. Alot of people in this industry fail to see that sometimes we need to come together and join even people we utterly detest in order to get something done for the good of all. This industry has failed to organize in the worst way. It continues to remain fragmented with everybody doing thier own thing and no real game plan for the future. But the one thing we should NOT do is support the ACLU. The ACLU has done very little in representing real free speech cases. They spend an incredible amount of time and resources making sure that women can get an abortion at taxpayer expense (I'm all for abortions, but not at public expense) and making sure illegal immigrants have all the rights I am supposed to be enjoying (which I am not for) and am entitled to. Look at the cases the ACLU is fighting now and you'll see most of them have to do with protecting the "rights" of foreigners and illegals and fighting for free abortions. I dropped my membership in the ACLU years ago when they stopped fighting the real issues. |
Quote:
The law is the Law.... and the only way to change that is to help shoot down the law before it gets to be the Law (ie,. lobbying), or litigate to have it taken to the supreme court to be overturned. There is no use in equating what other industries are doing, or even trying to address the issue of 2257 in the name of "protecting children". If the DOJ said that they are enforcing 2257 to protect penguins, it doesn't matter what name they do their enforcement to.. they are enforcing the law.. that's what law enforcement does. if you don't like the law, you change the law, move to another country, or abide by it. FSC has opposed Laws many times and on many fronts. Yes, litigation is painful and slow and costly... and it would be better if congress worked with the adult biz like California congress does with FSC when it comes to adult issues, but its quite clear, that these new set of laws do more towards trying to curb/eliminate adult content, then to actually protect children. Are you going to lobby congress against bad bills? Are you going to litigate against bad Laws? Who will? Who or what organization can allocated millions of dollars over time to such activities? Larry Flynt could.. but that was in his own cases. As a whole, only a trade association can leverage the financial resources of its membership. Want a new organization... no problem... rally up the following: 50 companies to pay 10K per year 1000 companies to pay 5k per year 2000 companies to pay $2500 per year 5000 affiliates to pay $300 per year 20,000 surfers to pay $25 per year this should be sufficient to hire attorneys since Lee and Douglas offer so much of their time for reduced or no compensation. This amount of money can fund enough people to cover all areas of adult as well as legal coffers to mount several litigations and PR efforts. Fight the telethon! |
Quote:
you must not realize that every year, there is a ballot for new directors and the members of FSC cast their votes? you must not realize that very few lobbying groups will take on FSC as a client due to it being an adult organization? you must not realize that FSC is engaged in multiple lawsuits CURRENTLY, as well as over the years that have gone all the way to the supreme court? You would be not alone in not knowing these things, so i am not singling you out. Fight the ignorance! |
|
Quote:
hey yer the one said it makes sense to you...well Im saying it doesnt make sense to me. |
Quote:
|
Some good ideas there Mike Hawk...
The adult web would greatly benefit from a summit meeting to focus on the major issues impacting our businesses (content theft, copyright violations, etc), and to develop proactive solutions to dealing with legislation such as 2257. For example, there should be a standardized 2257 form used by all, and a database where individual members could access standardized software for maintaining their required documentation (paid for as part of their Membership dues). A similar database could be used for content sellers, and yet another module could be used for verifying talent IDs and documentation. If such systems were developed there would be no need for inspections of the member organizations. I hope some of the big players at Internext give some thought to organzing a summit focused on aiding the industry as a whole instead of simply hustling for their own individual business and partying like fools. As the saying goes, United We Stand, Divided We Fall... ADG Webmaster |
Quote:
Every show does have panels to address many of these issues, but the attendance is very low.. even the popular topic panels where the room is packed is still small subset of the overall attendance. It would seem that an online summit would be the way to go... wheels starting to turn. Fight the churning! |
wow great reading in this thread ...ROFL
|
Quote:
The effort to start that would be minimal. A simple PHP board gets it off the ground. It could be part of FSC. Would it get the attention needed to make a difference? At conventions it seems most are there for the party aspect. Sure biz is done at the parties etc. A trade organization requires a different approach. The need for a strong trade organization has been a round for a long time. The problem is getting the attention and action on the part of everyday webmasters. I'm sure you know that all to well as you fought the patent. Seems like like there is talk by a few and then it fizzles. |
I would have to agree that the FSC doesnt communicate with its member base very well, especially those members who are chipping in just a few bucks. A rep to discuss some matters on the boards would seem to be of good value to the FSC, but there are obvious issues with this. Any FSC rep on this board would immediately be asked to provide legal advice and people here would not be satisfied with the general, non specific answers that replying on a message board like this demands.
Right now the FSC is actively litigating cases that impact the adult industry in Colorado and Utah. Huge amounts of money are being spent in these cases. The FSC was involved in the .xxx and have been working on developing guidelines for the industry to impose self regulation. Self regulation would seem to be a difficult path to take due to such an emphasis on self interest among the industry, but self regulation has worked before in the past, most recently in Europe in the mobile market. I dont think its feasible that the FSC should be held to a standard that they are a prepaid legal defense team for its members. There just isnt enough money raised through its membership base to offer this as a viable option. Mike South, $1000 a year wont get you much hand holding by a law firm in your state but you seem to be asking for that and alot more from the FSC. |
actually I spend less than 1K a year for my attorney (knocking on wood) and he is VERY pricey and widely considered to be the best in my area...Alan Begner
|
Quote:
I like your revolutionary spirit Mike, but I think it would be wiser and easier to build upon the FSC, than it would be to create a wholly separate organization (although I am not opposed to that notion either if it is porperly funded and managed well). ADG Webmaster |
mike south is the man
|
Speaking personally, I visit with webmasters every chance I get. I was at the Las Vegas Internext, the Phoenix Forum and the XBiz Forum so far this year. I saw the number of people who attended our meetings.....
The issues that concern me the most at the moment are bittorrent piracy, 2257 litigation, Utah/Michigan litigation, FSC staffing, obscenity prosecutions, and age verification. Net Neutrality is a big issue too; but, as an industry, I think we still have our heads in the sand. Some people are always ready to take a free ride or criticize that which they cannot understand or control. I am alway ready to receive criticism and apologize when my efforts do not achieve the desired results...so I will do so now and redouble my efforts to affect positive change. Please realize that the FSC Board of Directors all have their own businesses, families, and personal issues to deal with. Still we donate our time, gathering at our own expense, paying for our own airline tickets, hotel bills, and meals in order to try and affect positive changes for our industry. We lay out our own cold, hard cash to the tune of $1,000s of dollars a year to make it happen. Our "hidden" agenda is to protect this industry to the best of our ability and make hard decisions as a group that affect us all. Any member of FSC is welcome to run for a position on the Board and join our efforts. We seek ideas, money, and time from everyone involved in our industry. Our needs are as bottomless as the government's coffers whom we challenge. All I ask is that before you criticize the FSC, ask yourself, what have I done beyond the very minimum necessary of buying a membership? Have I donated to a fellow webmaster's defense fund? Am I active in my local politics getting out the vote or becoming a precint chairperson? Do I have a link on my site where my customers can register to vote? Have I sent emails to my customers expressing my outrage at how the government treats our industry? Have I written letters to my representatives in Congress? Have I spoke out against censorship at my local library, schoolboard or city council meeting? Do I know the other adult industry owner/operators in my area and do we have a local organization to help us with state and local issues? What have you done to further Freedom and the 1st Admendment? In truth, "freedoms" are all connected like a giant web with our govenment trying to knock out the supporting strands, one by one.....phone tapping, military tribunals, Gitmo, East European secret prisons, bank account monitoring, and who know what else... IMHO a few do much; some do little except express rage at their own sense of impotence. I'd suggest you focus your rage on those that are causing the problems rather than those who welcome your participation and are trying to solve the problems. The FSC's main means of communication are the Free Speaker weekly newsletter and the FSC website. With over 3000 members, contacting each member on a regular basis is difficult. We maintain the website, produce weekly newsletters and attend trade events. The desire to contact everyone on a personal basis is there, the means to do so are not. If you have suggestions or concerns, go to the website http://www.freespeechcoalition.com and let us know what you think. And, again, I am just speaking personally from my own experience. |
I'm quite puzzled about why this is such a big deal. It's not like this industry is going to magically start holding hands and singing kumbaya overnight, no matter who or what sort of organizations you start.
Too many people in too many countries with too many different acceptable standards and laws to make the internet one big happy family. Make your money while you can, follow the law (and from whats been posted about the actual wording of the Walsh bill it's not that hard to follow going forward) and be looking for your next business, job, project, whatever pays your bills. This is not rocket science, never has been, never will... and until porn makes as much money as tobacco or oil or pharmaceuticals, the odds of getting any sort of serious lobbying going on just aren't there. Those are industries where they all hate each other and would steal food from their competitors childrens mouths, but the dollar figure is so fucking big they have no choice but to pay the bill for getting their way. |
PS....excuse my spelling errors. I need a spell checker for Christmas.
|
Quote:
Lenny2's post gives a clue to the barriers that have to be overcome before any organisation can make real progress. He claims to have spent thousands of dollars on legal advice re 2257 and then - reasonably - asks why he should share that information with others. What he doesn't apparently question is whether it was reasonable for him to spend all that money in the first place. There are only a handful of lawyers with special knowledge in this area, so one is forced to wonder exactly how many times they have been paid over the past 18-24 months for giving out broadly the same advice. Yet despite that and all the other time and money which has been invested in this topic, AFAIK there still isn't a resource which provides an A-Z dummy's guide to 2257 compliancy. Certainly FTP doesn't point to one and if there were one, surely he would know. I'm not sure it applies in the US, but if you look at a set of audited accounts in the UK, they are always signed off in a near identical way. That is because after any change in the law or new case law, the Institute of Chartered Accountants sends out a template to all its members. As an industry, we should have been able to get a clear guide for the standard business models long ago, leaving people only needing to consult lawyers if their businesses do not fit one of those models or if they want to know what-if I push the envelope here or here. It is crazy that as some have said, after all this time we are still telling everyone to consult a lawyer, when in most cases that simply should not be necessary. You cannot blame Lenny2 or anyone else who chose to seek their own counsel, rather than waiting to see if the industry would get its act together in time. But in terms of a more effective direction for FSC or whoever, it's far more important to persuade the likes of him as to the benefits of collaboration in certain areas. It may be more comfortable to complain about the small-time webmaster who contributes neither financially nor practically, but by definition his impact would be limited even if you could stir him up. The people with both the most to lose and the most to gain are the ones who need to be motivated and mobilized, because they have the most resources and (potentially) the most influence. For the sake of what-if, what if sponsors who were members of an industry association required all their affiliates to be members of that association. That would solve the financial problems of the association without putting an undue burden on any of its members and incidentally, also pave the way for an association involved in more than just legal matters. The problem is that you would immediately run into what I meant earlier when I wrote that this industry hadn't matured enough yet. For every sponsor who could see the advantages in that route, there would be half-a-dozen (at least) looking forward to the extra affiliates they would sign up if a handful adopted that policy. This industry includes a lot of people who have made a great deal of money, but they haven't magically become far-sighted businessmen as a result. It likely won't be until the post-2000 generation dominate the top spots that we are going to understand that collaboration can sometimes be more profitable than competition. |
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:42 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123