GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - View Single Post

RawAlex · 08-29-2007, 03:48 PM

c-lo, in the end, your intial point about few CP producers getting stopped as a result if the main reason why the secondary producer clauses can (and likely will) be challenged in court. Similar to COPA and COPAII, the law doesn't further the stated intent of the law (stop child abuse), and further it does it in the most abusive and most labor intensive method possible.

All of the seconda

ry producer requiredments could be simply handled with a standardized document. Name of performers in the work, the month and year of birth of the performers (and date if it is the same month as thier 18th birthday), the date of the production, and a sworn statement by the primary producer that they have all the documents on hand at their primary producer, reference number XXXXXXX. it would accomplish the same thing without risking the privacy of information of the performers, and not requiring all sorts of people not involved in the contracting of performers to retain records on them.

The statement of the primary producer should be more than enough, because in reality they could provide false, misleading, or altered documents for an underage performer under the proposed rules and secondary producers would have no way to check it. Primary producers have the method to actually touch and see the ID material in question, which gives them an advantage.

There is no "honest" CP in the adult industry, there are occassional (maybe one or two cases a year) of underage performers attempting to get into a porn movie with false or stolen ID. I can think of two cases in the last couple of years, one female and one male performer that I can remember there being an industry wide notification.

CP isn't part of the adult industry. Burdening the adult business with a heavy paperwork load won't further the government's stated interest in the slightest. It does further the conservative agenda to limit the free speech rights of those in the adult industry, effectively raising the cost bar if free speech much higher, and forcing secondary providers to make their addresses public on their websites, which could lead to harrassment and thus cooling free speech.

Your comments are spot on!

08-29-2007, 03:48 PM
RawAlex So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In a house. Posts: 9,465	c-lo, in the end, your intial point about few CP producers getting stopped as a result if the main reason why the secondary producer clauses can (and likely will) be challenged in court. Similar to COPA and COPAII, the law doesn't further the stated intent of the law (stop child abuse), and further it does it in the most abusive and most labor intensive method possible. All of the seconda ry producer requiredments could be simply handled with a standardized document. Name of performers in the work, the month and year of birth of the performers (and date if it is the same month as thier 18th birthday), the date of the production, and a sworn statement by the primary producer that they have all the documents on hand at their primary producer, reference number XXXXXXX. it would accomplish the same thing without risking the privacy of information of the performers, and not requiring all sorts of people not involved in the contracting of performers to retain records on them. The statement of the primary producer should be more than enough, because in reality they could provide false, misleading, or altered documents for an underage performer under the proposed rules and secondary producers would have no way to check it. Primary producers have the method to actually touch and see the ID material in question, which gives them an advantage. There is no "honest" CP in the adult industry, there are occassional (maybe one or two cases a year) of underage performers attempting to get into a porn movie with false or stolen ID. I can think of two cases in the last couple of years, one female and one male performer that I can remember there being an industry wide notification. CP isn't part of the adult industry. Burdening the adult business with a heavy paperwork load won't further the government's stated interest in the slightest. It does further the conservative agenda to limit the free speech rights of those in the adult industry, effectively raising the cost bar if free speech much higher, and forcing secondary providers to make their addresses public on their websites, which could lead to harrassment and thus cooling free speech. Your comments are spot on!