Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer

Join Our Community

Collarchat.com

Home Login Search

Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Alternative Lifestyles in the News >> Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/5/2008 12:09:48 PM

Posts: 11
Joined: 9/17/2008
Status: offline

Here is the original news article, and fantastic, surprising commentary by my favorite political analyst, Glenn Greenwald.

I only hope there is an appeal to the state and federal supreme courts underway, lest the erosion of personal freedom and intrusion of federal government continues.

Considering the reasons cited for the conviction were pain, degradation, and humiliation, does the not open the door for the dismantling of everything from the many BDSM pay sites to the Folsom Street Fair? Since all of the members involved were consenting adults, does this make sadomasochistic play illegal in one's own home? Do any precedents exist that could somehow reverse this decision?

Finally, is it possible for ordinary citizens to somehow make a stand?

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/5/2008 12:28:45 PM

Posts: 4813
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Atlanta
Status: offline

Max Hardcore has a bad rep of forcing girls to go way beyond what they agreed to in their contracts. *shrug* He's a little bitch.

_____________________________

HBIC

(in reply to Diatribe)

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/5/2008 1:21:56 PM

Posts: 10717
Joined: 10/28/2007
From: California
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Diatribe
Since all of the members involved were consenting adults, does this make sadomasochistic play illegal in one's own home?

I've got a news bulletin for ya... sadomasochistic play already WAS illegal in your own home, in most places.

Cali

_____________________________

AKA "The Undisputed Goddess of Sarcasm", "Big Bad Cali" and "Yum Bum". Advisor to the Subbie Mafia, founding member of the W.A.C. and the Judgmental Bitches Brigade, member of the Clan of the Scarlet O'Hair-a's and Team Troll

(in reply to Diatribe)

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/5/2008 2:01:59 PM

Posts: 11
Joined: 9/17/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lynnxz

Max Hardcore has a bad rep of forcing girls to go way beyond what they agreed to in their contracts. *shrug* He's a little bitch.

That would seem like grounds for a collection of breach-of-contract lawsuits, though, regardless of feelings about the individual.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CalifChick

I've got a news bulletin for ya... sadomasochistic play already WAS illegal in your own home, in most places.

Where does the line get drawn, then? Is any type of activity where consensual pain comes about illegal? For example, I do jiu-jitsu, love the hell out of it. If you get caught in an opponent's move, you're either going to get choked, or feel a good amount of very-intentionally-caused pain. What prevents this sport from falling under the umbrella of the above?

I appreciate the warning, though. I had no idea.

(in reply to CalifChick)

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/5/2008 2:35:40 PM

Posts: 5560
Status: offline

The US Supreme Court ruled quite some time ago that the government had no business saying what sexual activities were or weren't allowed in the privacy of consenting adults' bedrooms. That's why all the sodomy statues were tossed out.

In the case of BDSM, the problem is in distinguishing between domestic abuse claiming to be consensual, and other behaviors.

The OP case is one where the feds are attempting to criminalize content based on nebulous terminology like 'extreme'.
As you pointed out, one of Professor Wally Jay's small circle demos on tape would match criteria given by the judge and prosecutor.....pain, humiliation, etc. EMS training videos include depictions of vomitng, urination, blood, etc.

So we are back to the same old story of politicians trying to pander to voters by legislating morality.

(in reply to Diatribe)

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/5/2008 2:41:59 PM

Posts: 10717
Joined: 10/28/2007
From: California
Status: offline

The only line is the one drawn in the sand... during a windstorm. The basic premise is that in most places, you cannot consent to be assaulted. The fun part comes when you try to define assault.

Cali

_____________________________

AKA "The Undisputed Goddess of Sarcasm", "Big Bad Cali" and "Yum Bum". Advisor to the Subbie Mafia, founding member of the W.A.C. and the Judgmental Bitches Brigade, member of the Clan of the Scarlet O'Hair-a's and Team Troll

(in reply to Alumbrado)

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/5/2008 3:02:21 PM

Posts: 5560
Status: offline

The basic premise is exactly the opposite, people consent to being hit all the time as already mentioned in sports, etc.

(in reply to CalifChick)

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/5/2008 3:11:49 PM

Posts: 10717
Joined: 10/28/2007
From: California
Status: offline

Being hit during an organized sport is not the same as being assaulted. There aren't many sports where being hit is the point.

Cali

_____________________________

AKA "The Undisputed Goddess of Sarcasm", "Big Bad Cali" and "Yum Bum". Advisor to the Subbie Mafia, founding member of the W.A.C. and the Judgmental Bitches Brigade, member of the Clan of the Scarlet O'Hair-a's and Team Troll

(in reply to Alumbrado)

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/5/2008 3:38:21 PM

Posts: 2792
Joined: 9/25/2004
Status: offline

Yet, here we are, coming up on "Saw V" for Halloween... how fucked up is THAT?

We're all perfectly fine with movies raking in millions of dollars based on the idea that young people deserve to be tortured to death because they have been sexual, (take your pick, Halloween, Friday the 13th, Nightmare on Elm St., Hostel, Saw...) but when we pretend in front of a camera for the purpose of actually arousing someone, then it becomes criminal? WTF?

(in reply to CalifChick)

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/5/2008 4:49:31 PM

Posts: 11
Joined: 9/17/2008
Status: offline

I thought that in the case of assault, the assaulted had to be the one to press charges, and if they didn't then no case existed.

I guess it just comes to "conservative morality" trumping legality in the minds of the judge and prosecutor. I really do hope this is appealed to a higher court.

(in reply to CalifChick)

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/5/2008 5:07:07 PM

Posts: 52100
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Savannah, GA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Diatribe

I thought that in the case of assault, the assaulted had to be the one to press charges, and if they didn't then no case existed.

I guess it just comes to "conservative morality" trumping legality in the minds of the judge and prosecutor. I really do hope this is appealed to a higher court.

IN many jurisdictions, I believe, LEOs can make the charge. This came about because of the tendency of the abused to 'forgive' their abuser.

_____________________________

polysnortatious
Supreme Goddess of Snark
CHARTER MEMBER: Lance's Fag Hags!
Waiting for my madman in a Blue Box.

(in reply to Diatribe)

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/5/2008 5:13:18 PM

Posts: 10717
Joined: 10/28/2007
From: California
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Diatribe
I thought that in the case of assault, the assaulted had to be the one to press charges, and if they didn't then no case existed.

No, although many cases won't go forward if the assaulted does not cooperate. It's a criminal action, and you will see "The People versus..." whereas in a civil trial, you will see "Joe Schmoe versus Jane Doe."

My ex violated a restraining order (he did not physically assault me, but he did violate the order). As soon as the report is finished (any day now), then the police will send it to the District Attorney. At that point the District Attorney will decide whether to press charges against him or not. It is not my decision, even though I am the "victim".

Cali

_____________________________

AKA "The Undisputed Goddess of Sarcasm", "Big Bad Cali" and "Yum Bum". Advisor to the Subbie Mafia, founding member of the W.A.C. and the Judgmental Bitches Brigade, member of the Clan of the Scarlet O'Hair-a's and Team Troll

(in reply to Diatribe)

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/5/2008 5:26:11 PM

Posts: 5560
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CalifChick

Being hit during an organized sport is not the same as being assaulted. There aren't many sports where being hit is the point.

Cali

Assault and battery is defined legally as any harmful or offensive touching... and yes, there are several perfectly legal sports etc. where assault, i.e. hitting another person with a fist, stick, kick, prop sword, shoulder, etc is exactly the point.

Didn't they have dodgeball where you went to school? That's assault and sadism.... but legal...

The confusion seems to revolve around the recently evolved principle that one usually cannot consent to being the victim of domestic abuse...which is not the same as making the blanket assumption that no one can consent to being simply assaulted.

So that leaves the question as to whether consensual BDSM in the bedroom falls into the category of domestic abuse, or into the same category of consensual assault as do martial arts.

A couple of whack job judges and prosecutors have essentially said they saw no difference between domestic abuse/illegal assault and BDSM activities... I for one think they are full of it.
While the equally BS federal campaign against 'extreme' porn would seem to dovetail with their views, it still doesn't make BDSM illegal everywhere unless some other things change drastically.

(in reply to CalifChick)

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/5/2008 8:49:05 PM

Posts: 54
Joined: 7/24/2008
Status: offline

consent what a difficult thing to understand.

(in reply to Alumbrado)

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/6/2008 6:39:31 AM

Posts: 3432
Joined: 11/8/2006
Status: offline

Consent is not actually all that difficult to understand..If I say yes lets do..then it is consent. If I say NO or any word we have agreed upon meaning stop it or else..I have withdrawn consent. It would be nice to think that this conviction will be overturned on appeal..but to be realistic the Supreme Court is probably not going to do it without a lot of public pressure having been displayed before it reaches them. It is possible that the appeals court will over turn it..but the prosecutors will just push it up the line where the Judges are appointed for life and beholden only to the House and Administrators of this country.

As Carlin said..I love this country for the rights we USED to have.

poenkitten.

(in reply to Marion001)

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/6/2008 1:29:10 PM

Posts: 454
Joined: 3/9/2004
Status: offline

Oh for the love of pete, this again?

Folks, this is a MAIL FRAUD trial. Not miller-test junior. The charges of mail fraud are critically important and NEED to be discussed. But what possible hope is there to talk about what actually happened in this trial when everyone is just freaking out nitpicking over the exact definitions of 'obscene' and 'consent'.

But then again, this is the internet after all. Apperently people would much rather spend hours on end arguing back and forth over semantics than to ever address the real problem.

_____________________________

Bondage Ropes
High quality center-marked
bondage ropes and supplies.
www.kinkyropes.com

Ads by Goooooogle

(in reply to Diatribe)

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/9/2008 6:05:28 AM

Posts: 910
Joined: 8/24/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHungryTiger
Folks, this is a MAIL FRAUD trial. Not miller-test junior. The charges of mail fraud are critically important and NEED to be discussed. But what possible hope is there to talk about what actually happened in this trial when everyone is just freaking out nitpicking over the exact definitions of 'obscene' and 'consent'.

?

From the article (boldface mine):

quote:

Little and his attorneys argued that his conviction in June for 10 counts of distributing obscene materials over the Internet and through the mail had devastated his business and left him near ruin. That, they said, should be punishment enough.

It's inappropriate to trivialize the definitions of "obscene" and "consent" when they can be the basis of criminal prosecution for acts that we might engage in with the best of intentions. In this case, the definition of obscenity appears to be the deciding factor in the judgement.

_____________________________

-and the few still remember passion over rage-

(in reply to TheHungryTiger)

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/9/2008 9:13:18 AM

Posts: 2045
Joined: 2/4/2008
From: Washington, DC area
Status: offline

I'm not sure all anti-sodomy laws have been overturned...

ETA ... I'm wrong... Lawrance V. Texas

< Message edited by Madame4a -- 10/9/2008 9:16:28 AM >

_____________________________

You're crazy bitch
But you f*ck so good, I'm on top of it
When I dream, I'm doing you all night
Scratches all down my back to keep me right on

(in reply to Alumbrado)

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/9/2008 2:39:44 PM

Posts: 454
Joined: 3/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

It's inappropriate to trivialize the definitions of "obscene" and "consent" when they can be the basis of criminal prosecution for acts that we might engage in with the best of intentions. In this case, the definition of obscenity appears to be the deciding factor in the judgement.

It is just as inappropriate trivialize the definitions of 'over the internet' and 'through the mail'. Especially considering that the prosecution was done under the US Post office and not the FBI 'porn squad'.

But I guess the trivializing of the 'through the mail' part is the only way people are able to recite their pre-memorized speaches about 'who is to say what comunity standards actualy is'. Just reciting the standard retoric about how the evil prudish victorian minded christian fundementalists in goverment just hate sex. It is as if everyone is totaly incapable of independent thought and have to fall back on the old 'christians hate sex' mantra that they use for every single situation that comes up ever that happens to have the word 'porn' in it.

For the record, the trial did NOT turn on the definition of what is or is not obscene. And its clear to me since I have been folowing this case for 3 years now that you havent bothred even reading the very basics of the case and are instead just reciting the 'who defines what is obscene' argument. The foreman of the jurry himself said after the trial that the whole case came down to the two words 'reasonably foreseeable'. Was it reasonably foreesable for Paul Little to assume that JKG, Inc. woudl use the US mail instead of some other alternitive shipping method.

Like itsd going to do any good to post this link, but try reading about it from an actual porn industry review journal instead of some mass marketed put-the-word-porn-in-the-headline-to-grab-peoples-attention tabloid newspaper. http://www.avn.com/law/articles/30615.html

_____________________________

Bondage Ropes
High quality center-marked
bondage ropes and supplies.
www.kinkyropes.com

Ads by Goooooogle

(in reply to OneMoreWaste)

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer - 10/9/2008 4:08:04 PM

Posts: 910
Joined: 8/24/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHungryTiger
(me)

quote:

It's inappropriate to trivialize the definitions of "obscene" and "consent" when they can be the basis of criminal prosecution for acts that we might engage in with the best of intentions. In this case, the definition of obscenity appears to be the deciding factor in the judgement.

It is just as inappropriate trivialize the definitions of 'over the internet' and 'through the mail'. Especially considering that the prosecution was done under the US Post office and not the FBI 'porn squad'.

Huh? Who's arguing over the definition of 'over the internet'? If the videos were judged to not be obscene there would be no charges. Your original post referenced "mail fraud", and even in your article I saw absolutely no reference to fraud. Are we even talking about the same case?

quote:

Just reciting the standard retoric about how the evil prudish victorian minded christian fundementalists in goverment just hate sex. It is as if everyone is totaly incapable of independent thought and have to fall back on the old 'christians hate sex' mantra that they use for every single situation that comes up ever that happens to have the word 'porn' in it.

You're the first person in this thread to mention Christianity. Are we even reading the same thread?

quote:

The foreman of the jurry himself said after the trial that the whole case came down to the two words 'reasonably foreseeable'. Was it reasonably foreesable for Paul Little to assume that JKG, Inc. woudl use the US mail instead of some other alternitive shipping method.

The defense made a very logical case against the Postal Service charges- that MWE was being prosecuted for the shipping of these videos to a Florida address, when in fact all they did was ship them to a distributor. It was the distributor who actually mailed them to that address via USPS and committed the "crime". The "reasonably forseeable" clause is the result of a very convenient (for prosecutors) extension of the law in question used to jack up content creators.

All of which would be IRRELEVANT if the videos were not determined to be obscene!

I know you don't care much about mass media, but the L.A. times said (in a very matter-of-fact way)

quote:

Justice Department spokesman said the prosecution was an outgrowth of a government anti-obscenity initiative started in 2001 under former U.S. Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft.

http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jun/01/local/me-porn1

Would you prefer it if we just changed the subject to reference the Hard2Find Videos case?
http://www.avn.com/law/articles/32590.html

_____________________________

-and the few still remember passion over rage-

(in reply to TheHungryTiger)

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Alternative Lifestyles in the News >> Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

1.889