Looks like we have a trial date for FSC's 2257 challenge.
 

Looks like we will have our day in court.:thumbsup

If you are an American webmaster, content producer or studio head, you've got skin in this game. Now is the time to step up and help us fund our effort to end 2257.:2 cents:

According to Mark Kernes at today's AVN:

"PHILADELPHIA, PA?In a move that reportedly came as a complete surprise to attorneys for the Free Speech Coalition and other plaintiffs in the lawsuit against the federal recordkeeping and labeling law, 18 U.S.C. §2257, as well as those for the defendant, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, Judge Michael Baylson today sent a letter to counsel stating that he would deny the Motions for Summary Judgment that each side had filed in the case last Friday.

"The judge said that he would deny the Motions and would send the case to trial on the merits," said J. Michael Murray, the lead attorney for the Plaintiffs, "and he indicated that he will issue a Memorandum early next week explaining his reasoning. But we're very excited about the fact that we are definitely going to trial, and the government will not be given summary judgment in this case, and so we're excited about presenting all of our evidence on both our First and Fourth Amendment claims, beginning on June the 3rd.""

I know the FSC has some detractors here on GFY; but, yet here we are about to begin one of the most important trials that affect our day-to-day operations and potential criminal liability for failure to maintain perfect records. The detractors will say "BS", the FSC waste money, the FSC Board is all incompetent, the FSC is controlled by Manwin....etc., etc., etc. I've heard it all; but, yet, here we are going to trial to end 2257 and we need your help.

Mark goes on to observe that since the costs of freeing the adult industry from the expensive and time-consuming burdens of 2257/2257A are already in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, Free Speech Coalition has asked that all personnel in, and fans of, the adult industry donate however much they can to offset these expenses. Donations can be made by a check or money order that can be mailed to Free Speech Coalition, P.O. Box 10480, Canoga Park, CA 91309.

Here is a link to the entire article: Judge Denies Motions for Summary Judgment.

Check it out.:2 cents:

How many 2257 convictions has there been?

you should have mention bitcoins, added some tits, or sprinkled in the words free/#1! in order to get responses here.

The FSC's constitutional challenges have been the main reason there have been no convictions.

Mark's article stated, "Also dealt with at the trial will be the Fourth Amendment violations committed by those charged with inspecting adult companies' records—at last count, 29 companies, all in 2006, none of which reportedly passed such inspection on the first try. (Some of the "violations" included such minutae as failure to keep the records in alphabetical order.)"

All inspections have failed. As I understand it and I stand to be corrected, there is no trial with a finding of guilt like a criminal trial; your guilt is self-evident in the failure to properly maintain the files. There is just some kind of administrative hearing with a finding of failure to maintain records to kick in the penalties. Worse case scenario, 2257 violations are heaped on other charges to get a confession of guilt.

:(Violators of 2257 are looking at up to five years for a first offense and 10 years for subsequent offenses.:(

Multiple offenses can be the result of a single inspection if more than one error is discovered in the company's 2257 records.

For a good review of the 2257/2257a statutes, visit Greg Piccionelli's website.

Imagine if the FSC just saved a big war chest instead of wasting money on all the other misc bullshit. They would have big dollars to fight this.

I would rather pay to the attorneys direct than the FSC.

If you wish to donate directly to the attorney, please send your donation to:

Attorney J. Michael Murray
Berkman, Gordon, Murray and DeVan
55 Public Square, Suite 2200
Cleveland, Ohio 44113

Please ask that the funds be applied to the litigation challenging 18 U.S.C. 2257 and notify Joanne Cachapero of your donation at the FSC: [email protected].

Any help is deeply appreciated. :thumbsup

If you wish to donate online :thumbsup, here is the link:

http://2257donate.com/

June 3rd is the trial date and the expenses are huge as we must pay for our witnesses' travel expenses to, during and returning from their testimony.

Any amount is deeply appreciated.

That's fucking crazy!!! I am glad I moved my servers out of the US.

Tony other than Obama being president what does make you happy?

I wonder if FSC didn't do what they claim is a good thing, if the adult landscape would still be the same it is now.

Personally, I think the two biggest recent game changers for the adult industry have been the rise of online piracy of content and the 9/11 disaster which derailed the Bush/Ashcroft effort to prosecute adult content creators and providers through obscenity prosecutions.

Also, in my opinion, the resulting "War on Terror" has made the DOJ's 2257 inspections a less than glamours task for assigned agents.:2 cents:

Ashcroft covered the partially nude statue of Lady Justice at the DOJ

Youre mistaken. I think he is awful with no backbone. But you want to criticize him use facts not made up right wing bullshit. Thats what makes me fucking crazy.

http://www.xxxlaw.com/section-2257/index.html

http://www.xxxlaw.com/articles/primer5.html

Thank you, Joe.

If you have any doubts about the importance of repealing 2257, take a few minutes to read some of Joe's webpages.

Good information.:thumbsup

Nobody is doubting that 2257 needs to be repealed, what they are saying is that the FSC are a bunch of money wasting scumbags who are just out to line their own pockets at the expense of the very same industry they are claiming to want to help protect.

Wy are there no publicly available audited records for where the FSC spend the donations, how much of every dollar donated goes towards 'actual' legal expenses vs. nights in fancy hotels, champagne receptions with lobster and caviar dinners using private jets and limo services?

i heard that''s the worst attorney in cleveland:Oh crap

I believe the FSC's financials are available for inspection during normal business hours by any current member at the Chatsworth office. I do know that the board members pay their own travel expenses to commute across the country for Board meetings without reimbursement.

If you really want to know what a bunch of scumbags comprise the Board, I'd suggest you run for the Board, get elected and find out for yourself.

Seems odd to fight something that was enacted over 10 years ago but never really enforced.

But if people have money burning a hole in their pocket send it over to fight the boogeyman.

Better safe then sorry.

Bump for the Saturday night crowd.....

He loves Evil Coffees

This should be pinned to the top until June 3rd ..

Agreed...

Redrob seems to have laid waste to the critics in this thread, I admit I'm not familiar with past FSC drama but what are the accusations of wasted funds by the FSC?

I agree, and have high regard for Joe's legal expertise!

So true, given the choice, the silver lining from 9/11 was one that no one wanted. On the other hand, at that time, the 2257 battle was a blessing in disguise. It caused the DVD companies to start sending out paper work to businesses that they provided product to. Going through the paper work I found out that the model I paid $1000 to was getting $500 from other companies for doing the same work. Guys that I was paying $500 to was getting $200. I now had enough information to lower my talent cost.

Somebody casually slandered Mike Murray in a post above. When I read it a few days ago, I rolled my eyes and moved on. But the sheer nastiness, ugliness, and stupidity of that post has kept coming back to me over the weekend and I have to reply.

I know Mike Murray through a group that we both both belong to and I've followed his nonstop crusade against Section 2257 that started in the Connections case, I think about fifteen years ago. He's been up and down between the trial court and the Sixth Circuit several times fighting the good fight, honing and refining his arguments, and now he continues that battle in the Third Circuit. It's a personal life-mission for Mike. No one in the world has more thanklessly fought against this horrible law. He's fought it without much of an incentive to make money. I know for a fact that he was paid pennies on the dollar in Connections and he's owed money in six figures in the present case. It's all been work of the highest quality - and it's all been done with the kind of zeal that should be an inspiration to every lawyer. He continues the aggressive fight whether he's paid or not.

I am not close to Mike, we are not close personal friends, we just see each other at meetings. But I know him to be a heroic figure whose life work stands a good chance of protecting the rights of everyone, not just people in this industry. Lawyers disagree about legal arguments and theories and that's a natural thing, but despite any of that, no one can take away from Mike that his work is simply excellent by every objective standard. His latest motion for summary judgment - which the judge will not grant because this judge is tired of motions and will press the case to trial so that it does not drag on further - shows that Mike is now in sych with the Third Circuit. The Third Circuit sees this case as one that goes to the core issues of the personal privacy rights of all Americans. If you read Mike's motion, he capably proves that Americans in numbers impossible to count with precision, but surely in the tens of millions, perhaps nearly half of the population, are using digital technology to take pictures and videos of highly personal intimate acts of affection. This is a very hard thing to prove, but I think he's done it. And because 2257 indiscriminately covers noncommercial depictions of actual explicit sex - it has to do that because almost all child pornography is made for noncommercial purposes - it improperly invades the bedrooms of all Americans. http://www.xxxlaw.com/news/Materials...L%20RESIZE.jpg I think that's the issue that this case will turn on at trial and in the inevitable appeal to the Third Circuit - and the Third Circuit has amply telegraphed how important this issue is to it. Listen to the oral argument last year. http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/oralargu...AttyGenUSA.wma and read the Third Circuit's opinion. http://www.xxxlaw.com/section-2257/4....3rd%20Cir.pdf

I think the odds are good that Mike will win in the district court at trial and that his victory will be upheld in the Third Circuit. He's got his ducks lined up on the issue that counts, the issue that has far-reaching privacy implications for everybody. The government just went too far in this law and Mike is ready to ram that home. What the US Supreme Court does later, if it takes this case at all, is anyone's guess, but Mike's on the right path here and now.

To defame this smart, hard-working lawyer on these pages is, to me, sad beyond comprehension and completely uncalled for. Shame on you.

Joe, I was thinking the same thing last night. Excellent response.

Some people on here will slam anyone or anything associated with the FSC without knowledge of the facts.

Interesting to see the FSC taking credit for essentially Rondee Kamins work, where were they when SHE was fighting this originally?

and for the record the FSC always SAYS their books are open to members but I defy you to try to see them....

they do have to file things though and those filings are online...I forget the site something like nonprofitwatch or something I can find it if anyone wants....

I'm no fan of the FSC from my own real personal experiences with them, but I do know of Mike Murray from my years running adult bookstores in Ohio and working with Connection Distributing, and only an idiot would question his expertise and skill.

Keep in mind the user that posted the line that irked you, 2013, is a pretty well known junkie and internet scammer from Van Wet, Ohio by the name of Chris Butler https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1102945 I wouldn't take anything that junkie and thief has to say to heart... :2 cents:

Bump for the Monday "I'm back to work" crowd.:thumbsup

So what is the FSC fighting for? To get rid of it? Or things like secondary producers?

Can I just get the bullets of the main things they are fighting for?

FSC is fighting to have the regulations declared unconstitutional.

Visit http://2257donate.com/ for more information.

Thanks JD for the orals link I had been searching for that :thumbsup

I got the OK from Peter Acworth, CEO at Kink.com to post a thread with a letter he has sent out to industry leaders today.

Content producers and webmasters who didn't receive a copy directly from Peter would do well to read the letter.:2 cents:

Link to GFY thread with Peter's letter to Industry Leaders

Morning bump.

Keeping the story in the news for your consideration.

This is an evening bump.

Hump day bump.

Have you donated yet?

It is a long way from LA to Philadelphia and the trial is expected to last at least two weeks incurring some serious expenses.

Help if you can.

I am so ready for the long weekend. Have a safe and happy weekend.

Help us invalidate 2257. We have a shot at the prize and need your help.