I Hate To Say It But.. I Told You So...

CANOGA PARK, Calif. - The Free Speech Coalition (FSC) has announced a second round of fundraising efforts to pay for expenses associated with its legal challenge to U.S.C. 18 §2257, the federal labeling and record-keeping requirements.

-advertisement-

The initial 2257 fundraising effort, which began before the FSC filed its original complaint in Denver federal court in June, succeeded in reaching the target goal of $200,000, an accomplishment for which FSC said it is profoundly indebted to the industry. That money has gone exclusively to pay for a world-class legal team that has performed brilliantly in court and behind the scenes, FSC said.

But the case itself has barely reached the halfway mark, and there is still a full trial to prepare for.

In a statement released today, FSC said, "In order to finish what we have begun, to break the back of these unfair and punitive regulations, and to send a clear message that the adult entertainment industry will not succumb to malicious and unconstitutional attacks upon its inherent legitimacy, we have set a specific goal of raising $250,000 by the end of January, every penny of which will be earmarked for the 2257 Legal Defense Fund."

“On behalf of virtually the entire adult industry,” says FSC Board Chair and attorney, Jeffrey Douglas, “the Free Speech Coalition hired attorneys who brought the United States Government to its knees. Although we are still awaiting the judge’s ruling on our motion for a preliminary injunction, the effort of our attorneys has prevented the enforcement of regulations hostile to, and inconsistent with, the business models of adult companies doing hundreds of millions of dollars annually.

“These seven attorneys, plus two volunteer attorneys, put in extraordinary time and effort on extraordinarily short notice to achieve the restraining order and likely preliminary injunction. We need to raise the money to pay for this outstanding effort, as well as the legal expenses yet to come. If the industry had been obliged to pay for this effort separately, rather than through the collective efforts of the Free Speech Coalition, hundreds of thousands more dollars would have been spent.

“Not only was the work done with remarkable efficiency, but each of these attorneys discounted their hourly rate to support the cause.

“Please donate generously to compensate these warriors for your freedom: Louis Sirkin, Paul Cambria, Arthur Schwartz, Jennifer Kinsley, Roger Wilcox, Michael Gross, Gregory Piccionelli and David Fisher. We need to pay them now.”

The FSC will be holding fundraising events over the coming months and into next year, and will announce them at the appropriate times, but for those who want to contribute now to either the 2257 Legal Defense Fund or to the organization generally, donations can be made through our website, www.freespeechcoalition.com, or by phone or mail.

If by mail, and the money is to be used only for 2257, please note "Only for 2257 Legal Defense Fund" on the check and mail it to: Free Speech Coalition, P.O. Box 10480, Canoga Park, Ca., 91309.

http://www.avnonline.com/index.php?P...tent_ID=244084

Anyone who thinks these guys are looking out for the 'adult industry' needs to have their heads examined, they are interested in lining their pockets with 'funds'.

Regards,

Lee

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee

Anyone who thinks these guys are looking out for the 'adult industry' needs to have their heads examined, they are interested in lining their pockets with 'funds'.

Well, the same could be said about any presidential candidate who asks for donations to their campaign, or the HRC or L.A. Shanti or any other organization who seeks donations in order to work for a cause. I don't see how starting a fundraising drive to support a legal battle on our behalf proves that they are only "interesting in lining their pockets with 'funds'" as you put it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by XXXWriterDude

Well, the same could be said about any presidential candidate who asks for donations to their campaign, or the HRC or L.A. Shanti or any other organization who seeks donations in order to work for a cause. I don't see how starting a fundraising drive to support a legal battle on our behalf proves that they are only "interesting in lining their pockets with 'funds'" as you put it.

Ken,

Are saying that you dont find it the littlest bit odd that we only hear from these people when they need 'additional funds' ?

Come on, i know you arent that niave.

Regards,

Lee

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee

Are saying that you dont find it the littlest bit odd that we only hear from these people when they need 'additional funds' ?

Come on, i know you arent that niave.

Huh? I get weekly newsletter emails from the FSC.

And if they need another contribution from me, all they need to do is ask! As far as I'm concerned, they have been very effective in delaying the full enforcement of the new 2257 regs. Hopefully they can continue to pressure the courts to throw them out completely.

This newsletter is sent free of charge to FSC members and supporters. If you no longer wish to receive this newsletter, please reply with "Remove" in the Subject line and you will be promptly deleted from our list. For personal contact, call 1-800-476-7813.
Free Speech X-Press
Delivering Weekly Censorship Updates to the Adult Industry

Vol. VII, No. 48, Oct. 14, 2005 -- A Member Service of the Free Speech Coalition
__________________________________________________ ________
Free Speech X-press is researched and edited by Kat Sunlove and Layne Winklebleck.
Copyright 2005 Free Speech Coalition. Permission to reprint granted to FSC members; please give credit.
__________________________________________________ ________
VISIT OUR WEBSITE FOR FSC MEMBERSHIP INFORMATION
http://www.freespeechcoalition.com
__________________________________________________ ________

FSC OFFERS REWARD FOR A FEW GOOD WORDS
CANOGA PARK, CA -- For many years the Free Speech Coalition motto on its website and in publications has been “Freedom Isn’t Free.” A fine sentiment and true. But now we live in edgier times and FSC is looking for a new motto with more punch. Some good ideas are being considered, but so far no decision has been made. Any wordsmith who comes up with the perfect phrase will be rewarded with a one-year membership fee credit up to $300. Deadline for submissions is November 1. Send ideas to Tom Hymes (tom@freespeechcoalition.com).
__________________________________________________ ________

LAP DANCE BAN PROPOSAL MOVES FORWARD
LOS ANGELES, CA -- The city Police Commission, predictably, has recommended that City Councilmember Jose Cardenas’ proposed ordinance requiring exotic dancers to stay six feet from patrons be approved. The regulation would effectively end lap dancing in the city’s clubs.
The six-foot rule was passed by the Council in 2003 only to be subsequently repealed when a consortium of dance club owners threatened to put the issue on a citywide ballot. Attorney John Weston, on behalf of about twenty club owners, has now promised another referendum effort and perhaps a legal challenge.
Cardenas no doubt feels confident that the ordinance would withstand a court battle because of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Gammoh v. City of La Habra last January. The court upheld La Habra’s 2003 ordinance requiring exotic dancers to keep at least two feet away from customers.
The Police Commission recommendation now moves the measure to the City Council’s Public Safety Committee.
From Jill Leovy, L.A. Times, 10/12/05
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/lo..._angeles_metro
And from the Associated Press, 10/12/05
http://www.kfty.com/news/state/story...3-B3557896AD1B
__________________________________________________ ________

PENCE BILL GETS ATTENTION FROM HOLLYWOOD
WASHINGTON, DC -- Hollywood lobbyists are hoping to derail provisions of Representative Mike Pence’s Child Pornography Protection Act, which passed the House as a rider to another bill and is now being considered in the Senate. Pence’s bill, which is obstensibly aimed at child pornographers, actually dramatically expands obscenity law assets forfeiture provisions, grants new subpoena powers to law enforcement in obscenity prosecutions without having to demonstrate probable cause to a judge; and criminalizes the production of “obscenity” as well as the transportation, distribution and sale of it. All of these provisions target the adult entertainment industry.
Pence’s bill also greatly expands the reach of U.S.C. 18 §2257, the federal record keeping law currently being challenged by Free Speech Coalition in the courts. For example, it broadens 2257 to apply to “lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area,” which of course could be construed to apply to most nude models in adult entertainment materials, and perhaps even some clothed ones. Pence’s bill also strikes the word “actual” from the phrase “actual sexually explicit conduct” in the 2257 law, thereby expanding the law to apply to simulated sex such as might appear in mainstream films.
It is this latter provision that concerns Hollywood, and well it should. But will the American Federation of Television and Radio Arts and the Motion Picture Association of America have enough influence in the U.S. Senate to change the bill? Perhaps not. According to an insider source quoted in an L.A. Times piece, the Senate bill will likely mirror the language of the House version. Backers of the measure contend that the broad language is needed to close loopholes that could be exploited by child pornographers.
From Jube Shiver, Jr., L.A. Times, 10/13/05
http://www.calendarlive.com/movies/c...,3151483.story
__________________________________________________ ________

ADULT STORE CLERK NOT GUILTY OF OBSCENITY
HOUSTON, TX -- A jury here has found Jose Escalante not guilty of “obscenity by being in possession of sex toys with the intent to promote and sell them.” Prosecutors had justified the June arrest of Escalante, a clerk at Adult Video Megaplex, by claiming he was a “manager” and therefore was in “possession” of items at the store. Anyone caught in possession of six or more adult toys deemed obscene by the law is presumed to be promoting them and can be arrested, said prosecutors.
So what kind of objects are deemed obscene? An adult toy is obscene if it is contained in a package with a label that indicates the toy is designed to be used in a sexual act, explained an officer during the trial.
Richard Kuniansky, Escalante's attorney, has said all along that he thought the case was ridiculous. The jury apparently agreed.
From Internet Broadcasting Systems, 10/12/05
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/irre...16/detail.html
And from KPRC TV, Houston, 10/13/05
http://www.click2houston.com/news/5093539/detail.html
__________________________________________________ ________

WAR/PORN WEBMASTER RELEASED
LAKELAND, FL -- Chris Wilson has been released from jail after bail was posted by his parents in a doubly bizarre case -- bizarre in the way the 27-year-old’s website gained a high profile notoriety, and bizarre in the way prosecutors filed charges.
Wilson’s amateur website, nowthatsfuckedup.com, accepted and posted user-submitted pictures. Wilson had a policy of granting free access to any American military personnel stationed in Iraq provided that they submitted proof that they were serving overseas. Many of the soldiers submitted pictures of dead Iraqis, which were subsequently posted on the website, which in turn caused an investigation by the United States Army. The posted photos were often gruesome and sometimes included captions posted by the users making light of the war images, a nexus of adult entertainment and disturbing war zone photos which did not go over well with the army or with the Florida cops.
Did the army ask the cops to raid Wilson’s home and arrest him? Unknown. What is known is that prosecutors charged Wilson with one count of wholesale distribution of obscene material and 300 misdemeanor counts related to 20 online films and 80 photographs obtained from his Website. For each film and photograph there were three counts -- distribution of obscene material, offering to distribute obscene material and possession of obscene material with intent to distribute. All the charges involved so-called obscene content, not the war photos. There is no law regulating war images on websites.
Wilson’s total bail on multiple charges was set at $151,000. But his parents had to cough up double the usual 10% for the bail bondman because state law requires that the minimum charge for each count be at least $100.
From The Ledger, 10/12/05
http://www.theledger.com/apps/pbcs.d...510120352/1134
__________________________________________________ ________

FCC ON THE OBSCENE, INDECENT… AND PROFANE
WASHINGTON, DC -- The Federal Communications Commission has issued a detailed explication of its mandate under U.S.C. 18 § 1464, which prohibits the utterance of “any obscene, indecent or profane language by means of radio (now broadcast) communication.” Using careful, measured language, the FCC document notes, among other things, that “obscenity” on the airwaves is not permitted at all, and that “indecency” is allowed during the safe harbor period from 10 PM to 6 AM when children are presumed asleep, but during other hours certain words may be indecent or profane depending on context and certain factors such as whether words are used in an explicit manner, to dwell on sexual matters or to pander or create titillation or shock.
We knew that. But what was new to us in the analysis were several mentions of regulating “profane” material in broadcast. The word “profane” has long been in the law, yet not mentioned in all the recent controversy over broadcast indecency.
And, the last time we looked, the word profane had religious, rather than sexual, connotations. Supreme Court decisions supporting the FCC powers, notably FCC v. Pacifica Foundation (1978), turned on regulation of “indecency.” Now, the FCC chooses to clarify that it has a legal mandate to prohibit “profane language,” which is defined as words that are so highly offensive that their mere utterance in the context presented may, in legal terms, amount to a “nuisance.” We’re guessing here, but could “taking the Lord’s name in vain” qualify, in context, as “highly offensive,” profane language?
Perhaps not coincidentally, this FCC analysis comes only a few months after Peggy Nance joined the agency. Nance is a former a lobbyist for Concerned Women for American, an organization that promotes Christian family values. She is presently an advisor at the FCC’s Office of Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis. Did Nance’s office prepare this analysis? We aren’t certain.
From the FCC document
http://www.fcc.gov/eb/oip/FAQ.html#TheLaw
__________________________________________________ ________

EIGHT-YEAR-OLD ORDINANCE TAKES EFFECT
NASHVILLE, TN -- The Nashville and Metropolitan Davidson Country (Metro) government has begun moving to enforce a long dormant adult businesses ordinance, which among other provisions includes a rule requiring dancers to stay 3 feet from patrons. Metro has mailed out notices to adult business owners, giving them 60 days to conform to certain licensing provision under the ordinance. The owners must disclose past criminal convictions, register with Metro and sign an oath of understanding that prostitution is illegal.
Meanwhile, a new regulatory board has begun meeting that will have subpoena power for background checks and will decide on licenses for dancers and club operators. A new compliance inspector will shortly be hired.
All this is taking place eight years after the ordinance was originally passed. The constitutionality of the law was tied up during that time. And over the years some 30 of the adult businesses that were the focus of the ban were shut down through a series of highly publicized prostitution busts.
There is by no means unanimity of opinion on the old/new regulations, even on the Metro Council. Councilman Adam Dread said he is not sure the law is needed, especially given the police sweeps that shut the establishments that were promoting prostitution. The ones left are running "above-board," pay taxes to the city and help draw in tourists and conventions, he said.
"I hope we don't over-police it, running into the potential of making the customers nervous and uncomfortable," said Dread.
From Lee Ann O’Neal, The Tennessean, 10/12/05
http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs....59/1009/NEWS02
__________________________________________________ ________

FBI RAID STARTS INDUSTRY CONTROVERSY
PITTSBURG, PA -- The content of text stories, without photos or videos, may be the target of an FBI raid on the home of Rosie, an erotic stories website operator. Charges have not been filed, and Rosie’s attorney Larry Walters said that the FBI will have a difficult case if the raid was merely over text stories. The FBI now has access to past customer information, however, which is a chilling consideration.
The stories on red-rose-stories.com, now closed down, included fantasies of bestiality, urination, scat, BDSM, slavery, threesomes, orgies and sex with children. The Red Rose raid has already set off a firestorm of opinions on adult webmaster chat boards, says Ynot.com Editor Conner Young, with some people expressing dismay that stories of this type could fall under obscenity laws, and others stating support for the FBI in its targeting of such materials.
From Connor Young, YNOT.com
http://www.ynot.com/modules.php?op=m...ticle&sid=9854

__________________________________________________ ________

UpComing Events

OCT 21-23 -- The Everything to do With Sex Show, Automotive Building, Toronto, Canada -- http://www.everythingtodowithsex.com/

OCT 22 -- Exotic Erotic Ball, Cow Palace, San Francisco, CA http://www.exoticeroticball.com/

NOV 2-3 -- Adultcon Las Vegas 2005 -- Riviera Hotel, Las Vegas, http://www.adultcon.com/

JAN 5-7 -- Internext, The Venetian, Las Vegas, NV http://www.internext-expo.com/index.shtml

JAN 5-8 -- AVN Adult Entertainment Expo, Sands Expo Center, Las Vegas, NV, http://show.adultentertainmentexpo.c.../v42/index.cvn

JAN 7 -- 23rd Annual AVN Awards Celebration, Sands Expo Center, Las Vegas, NV , http://show.adultentertainmentexpo.c.../v42/index.cvn

__________________________________________________ ________

Subscriptions to Free Speech X-Press are FREE to FSC members. Contact us at Sunlove@direcway.com or 800-476-7813.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee

Are saying that you dont find it the littlest bit odd that we only hear from these people when they need 'additional funds' ? Come on, i know you arent that niave.

I, in fact, hear from them all the time. But that's neither here nor there.

All I know is that A) regardless of their intentions, an important job is getting done, and sometimes the means to an ends aren't as important as the ends themselves. And B) my former editor is now employed with the FSC, and I know him very well from having worked with him for over 2 years, and I have much respect for him. And I would like to think that, knowing him for the thoroughly decent human being he is, he wouldn't knowingly be part of an organization that only had its own self-interests in mind.

I certainly understand your concerns. I have my own issues with only members of the FSC being protected from prosecution for 2257 violations, but I also think there is something larger than self-interests at work here, and until I discover differently, I'm quite content in that philosophy. :)