Critical Hearing re 2257 in Philadelphia, November 26

[Joe Obenberger]

http://www.xbiz.com/articles/156241

[Harmon]

[arock10]

chrome gave me a malware warning for xbiz

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by arock10

chrome gave me a malware warning for xbiz

[NaughtyRob]

Chrome sucks dick. I use Opera now.

[Rochard]

Someone need to learn how shorten stuff. This might be highly entertaining for an attorney, but not for the average pornographer. A summary would be great, because all that put me to sleep and was too complicated for anyone other than an attorney.

[fitzmulti]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Someone need to learn how shorten stuff. This might be highly entertaining for an attorney, but not for the average pornographer. A summary would be great, because all that put me to sleep and was too complicated for anyone other than an attorney.

I 100% agree!
SUMMARY: "" Critical Hearing re 2257 in Philadelphia, November 26 ""

Maybe details of results after Nov 26 might be more summarized and interesting, though. ;-)

[Barry-xlovecam]

On Aug. 20 just past, the Department of Justice filed its motion to dismiss in part and a supporting memorandum arguing that the Fourth Amendment claims about 2257 inspections are not "ripe" for consideration now;

"At least some future criminal defendants will likely be able to assert their own constitutional challenges if they are ever prosecuted, but it would probably spell the end of the so-called anticipatory challenges (i.e. those brought before enforcement). "

I has always been my contention that §2257 contains a serious 4th Amendment violation in the §2257 inspection regime.

"My point is not that 2257 inspections should resume, but rather that the government's choice in refusing to enforce the law should not act to block the courts from deciding the law's constitutionality."

Hence the "not ripe" assertion. We should wait for a real criminal case to raise that issue (we can keep the intimidation alive a bit longer ...</sarcasm>).

"If the Fourth Amendment search and seizure arguments are not dismissed, their ultimate resolution may be affected strongly by their potential effect on amateurs and on other private persons who are not involved at all in the commercial adult entertainment industry; the 3rd Circuit's analysis saw through the government's self-serving posturing that the law does not apply to them."

This issue was addressed in the 6th Circuit ruling then overturned en blanc by the entire 6th Appellate.

It is not to be neglected that despite the mandate of Congress for annual reporting in 18 U.S.C. § 2257A (k) as to the number of inspections, the number of open investigations, the number of charges brought, and the dispositions of the ensuing prosecutions, it does not appear that DOJ has reported any of those things to Congress since the first term of George Bush in 2003, nine years ago. (I've inquired of the Attorney General by use of the Freedom of Information Act and his personnel have responded to me that no such reports can be located in the Executive Secretariat of the Attorney General nor in the records of his Legislative Affairs Office; they suggested that I also make inquiry of the Criminal Division, and several months later, after it denied my request for a fee waiver because it disagrees the disclosure would be in the public interest, I am still awaiting those probably chimerical annual reports to Congress.)

(One wonders whether their apparent neglect of the statutory mandate and their apparent violation of 2257A (k) for nine years running makes the present and prior Attorney Generals the most flagrant violators of 2257 in the U.S..)

There's your answer Robbie -- they never reported it. I would draw the conclusion that it has been more of a threat under color of authority from a "bully pulpit." Further, this only proves the political agenda of §§ 2257, 2257A.

Good article Joe. If someone can be in Philly that day -- a court hearing report would be great.

[notinmybackyard]

Free Speech Coalition's constitutional objections to 18 U.S.C. § 2257 inspections, based on the Fourth Amendment's prohibitions against unreasonable searches and seizures, can go forward - or whether those allegations - and this set of arguments about the 2257 scheme's ultimate constitutionality - will be dismissed.

Now you know why that big tube site man is contributing to the free speech collition. If the United States started to enforce the current laws his sites would die and he would have to find another way to justify the source of income.

Smart pornographers would want the 2257 law to become even more strict and actively enforced.

[DWB]

Originally Posted by notinmybackyard

Now you know why that big tube site man is contributing to the free speech collition. If the United States started to enforce the current laws his sites would die and he would have to find another way to justify the source of income.

Smart pornographers would want the 2257 law to become even more strict and actively enforced.

I welcome it. As complex as they want to make it, bring it on and let the chips fall where they may.

[notinmybackyard]

Originally Posted by DWB

I welcome it. As complex as they want to make it, bring it on and let the chips fall where they may.

Well my americain friend with the asian girls in his avatar. I hope for you that the Free Speech lawyers fail. Good luck !!

[Joe Obenberger]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Someone need to learn how shorten stuff. This might be highly entertaining for an attorney, but not for the average pornographer. A summary would be great, because all that put me to sleep and was too complicated for anyone other than an attorney.

OK, I'll try to put pictures in my next article.

SERIOUSLY, these articles are written aiming at a tenth-grade level in plain and understandable language that people understand. That's how I speak at shows and that's how I wrote here. The issues are serious and a "legal issues light" version would only mislead people. Attention span can be lengthened with exercise.

[suesheboy]

Originally Posted by Joe Obenberger

OK, I'll try to put pictures in my next article.

SERIOUSLY, these articles are written aiming at a tenth-grade level in plain and understandable language that people understand. That's how I speak at shows and that's how I wrote here. The issues are serious and a "legal issues light" version would only mislead people. Attention span can be lengthened with exercise.

Excellent

[DWB]

Originally Posted by notinmybackyard

Well my americain friend with the asian girls in his avatar. I hope for you that the Free Speech lawyers fail. Good luck !!

Originally Posted by Joe Obenberger

OK, I'll try to put pictures in my next article.

SERIOUSLY, these articles are written aiming at a tenth-grade level in plain and understandable language that people understand. That's how I speak at shows and that's how I wrote here. The issues are serious and a "legal issues light" version would only mislead people. Attention span can be lengthened with exercise.

I can't speak for the rest of the goldfish here, but for me the problem is reading online, not reading in general. Bright white pages with endless text is not easy to read on some screens. That is why they created eReaders. I read everything on the page but my eyes were about to fall out of my head by the time I got 75% through it.

That said, you are always full of great information. Perhaps you should think about doing a podcast. Listening to you would be a lot easier than reading what you write. Not to mention, we can take you with us with our devices and listen to you anywhere we are. I can listen to you while I walk on the treadmill or sit outside while drinking a cup of coffee.

[Joe Obenberger]

Originally Posted by DWB

I can't speak for the rest of the goldfish here, but for me the problem is reading online, not reading in general. Bright white pages with endless text is not easy to read on some screens. That is why they created eReaders. I read everything on the page but my eyes were about to fall out of my head by the time I got 75% through it.

That said, you are always full of great information. Perhaps you should think about doing a podcast. Listening to you would be a lot easier than reading what you write. Not to mention, we can take you with us with our devices and listen to you anywhere we are. I can listen to you while I walk on the treadmill or sit outside while drinking a cup of coffee.

What's the price range to set up for podcasts?

JD

[Vapid - BANNED FOR LIFE]

Originally Posted by Harmon

A layer.

[tony286]

Originally Posted by Joe Obenberger

What's the price range to set up for podcasts?

JD

Hosting and a zoom mic.

[Joe Obenberger]

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

Good article Joe. If someone can be in Philly that day -- a court hearing report would be great.

I traveled to Arkansas to report on the jury trial in Forest City, and to DC to report about the Stagliano trial. It's just not in my budget to fly to Philadelphia to cover the hearing - and that sort of thing also takes time away from my own clients. But if someone wants to fly me out there to cover it, I guess I'm all ears.

Joe

[Joe Obenberger]

Originally Posted by tony286

Hosting and a zoom mic.

I got all the hosting I need (flat rate, not metered, because my site is not very media intensive, and the videos I use are embeds to YouTube) and the mike's covered. I suppose I could just make a digital recording on any computer. But isn't there some serious designer and script-writer time needed for podcasts? And editing unless I can do the whole thing in one perfect take. Costs to install that on the front page of xxxlaw.com?

Someone who's seen me speak just suggested that I start using videos more extensively on my site. I honestly just don't know where to start - they didn't teach that kind of stuff at the UW Law School in the Seventies. Editing, titling, watermarks, etc. What are the costs?

Many or most of you operate sites that are nearly totally video. My guess is that you all have the technical skills and time to do these things yourself. I can't.

Joe

[tony286]

Originally Posted by Joe Obenberger

I got all the hosting I need (flat rate, not metered, because my site is not very media intensive, and the videos I use are embeds to YouTube) and the mike's covered. I suppose I could just make a digital recording on any computer. But isn't there some serious designer and script-writer time needed for podcasts? And editing unless I can do the whole thing in one perfect take. Costs to install that on the front page of xxxlaw.com?

Someone who's seen me speak just suggested that I start using videos more extensively on my site. I honestly just don't know where to start - they didn't teach that kind of stuff at the UW Law School in the Seventies. Editing, titling, watermarks, etc. What are the costs?

Many or most of you operate sites that are nearly totally video. My guess is that you all have the technical skills and time to do these things yourself. I can't.

Joe

Let me do some research for you and I will email you.

[Joe Obenberger]

Originally Posted by tony286

Let me do some research for you and I will email you.

I definitely appreciate that.

[DWB]

Originally Posted by Joe Obenberger

What's the price range to set up for podcasts?

JD

Just logging on but it seems Tony has already jump on this. mp3 files are incredibly small, so I doubt hosting would be much of an issue. Or maybe someome would lend you a hand and host the mp3's for you.