Wautier

IIRC, you shoot from when they enter the premises, up until the point they leave.

Legally, you're more than covered.

No one can claim that you barricaded someone into a room, gave them alcohol, or intimidated them -- physically.

But let's say... a model wants to have her scene removed. She sends vague threats. You tell her to buzz off and forget about her. She gets in contact with a few other models, and they find an attorney. They then decide that the x,xxx they got paid for the scene wasn't worth it for lifetime exploitation rights, and that they can't find employment due to the scene(s) that they shot for you.

If they shot a scene for Playboy, then they likely wouldn't be able to make as good of a case as if they shot a scene for Facial Abuse.

So I think it matters. A lot. Especially if they can prove their state of the mind, their living situation, financials, etc. A good litigator could argue that they wouldn't have made the choice in a different situation, and that you took advantage of them.

That's why I think that letting it go to trial is a very bad idea for the porn industry as a whole, and that the class action suits like the one that brought Girls Do Porn, and crippled MindGeek are the future, and the paysite operators should be very, very careful.

They will most likely need to implement straightforward policies when it comes to removal of scenes (whether to purchase them back for a nominal fee, or to take them down completely, and assist in removal from the Internet) and do both pre and post interviews talking about their mental state, and if anything is even remotely off, then they shouldn't shoot a scene like that. They have to be made aware of the viral aspect of such content, and the fact that they may regret it sooner rather than later

Honesty is the best policy, and we absolutely agree there.