You may be a pornstar, and not even know it!

I came across something online yesterday that didn't sit too well with me.

It is a video on AEBN that includes several scenes shot at various parties in Las Vegas at this last year's Internext. A particular site had a bunch of their models in attendance at the parties, and during the parties these models engaged in various sex acts with one another, in front of attendees and during the party.

The problem with it is that in the background of much of this footage can be seen most every webmaster who attended any of these Vegas events (The PrideBucks Q-Fest and Cybersocket after parties that my company sponsored). So simply by attending what you looked forward to as a business and networking event could very well have landed you in - without your knowledge or express permission, I'd imagine - someone else's porn video now being sold and distributed for profit in DVDs and on at least one VOD site.

I know I didn't sign a release to be in someone else's video, yet I spotted myself talking to a couple of webmasters near the bar in the background of a scene with a few of this companies models having sex in the foreground. Even walking past the action on your way to the bathroom or bar could have landed you a close up cameo in the video.

No one was made aware there was filming going on that'd be released in a for-sale product. The video is from a company that wasn't sponsoring at least one of the events in the movie and so had no part in organizing it and no opportunity to warn webmasters what would be taking place.

And if you walked by the models while they were naked and giving eachother blowjobs on the floor and decided to smack one of them in the ass, are you now a participant in a sexually explicit act on video that requires your 2257 documentation?

There are a host of dubious elements to this all.

Shouldn't we, as webmasters and business folk attending an event to conduct business and further the interests of our businesses in a networking environment not have to worry about ending up in someone else's porn production, without our permission and even without our knowledge?

I would hope that the company responsible would either remove this video as a professional courtesy to other webmasters unwittingly featured in it, or at the very, very least edit it so as to remove any scenes of dubious nature from the production.

How do you feel about it? Do you think that by attending one of these events you pretty much grant anyone with a camera the right to capture you on film and turn the finished product with you present in to a for-profit video? Do you think I'm just being too much the party pooper here? Or do you also feel this video's release was an unwise idea?

That isnt the only movie.

I noticed a couple of other sites that have used content that has been shot in Vegas at the webmaster shows inside their members area... Including a couple of REALLY well known sites.

I guess if someone pays out money for a party they think that they can also use that content (including shots of webmasters) inside their members areas.

Im in agreement with you BTW, if *I* attend a business event for webmasters, i dont expect any footage featuring me in it to be utilized in a movie or inside a sites members area. Thats also a reason why as of late, Gary and I have made it a point not to attend those parties where there is fucking going on, we noticed this has been happening on and off for the last 3 years and, i am really suprised that it has only just been made public info now.

Regards,

Lee

I think that it should be standard practice that if a DVD was going to be produced out of those events that the people attending should have been notified. Then, they could make their decision about attending or staying out of the line of fire, as it were.

What has been done is a severe breach of privacy. The attendees at those parties did not consent to appearing in a porn video and may not appreciate being in one, even as a spectator.

What I find more astonishing is that none of this crossed the minds of the producers. Just because we work in porn doesn't necessarily mean that we want the whole world knowing what we do.

Finally, the companies sponsoring these events may have their logos appearing in the video. The free publicity is certainly nice, but it's always nice to be asked if you want it there in a DVD.

Not nice.

Michael

I have a feeling there are some laws being broken and that these guys have taken on some liability. Has anyone here ever lived in Los Angeles, Vancouver, NYC, or any other place where they film mainstream movies.

I can't count the number of times I've been walking through LAX or been somewhere in Manhatten where they are filming some scenes for a movie. There are signs everywhere saying that they are filming and that by entering that area you are granting your right to appear in that production.

Even at the Phoenix Forum, they were webcasting the sessions. Sure enough there were big signs saying they were filming and that you were granting your permission to appear.

I'm sure there are laws that cover these things which is probably why those companies put up all those signs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JustBryce

I'm sure there are laws that cover these things which is probably why those companies put up all those signs.

---

I haven't been to any of those forums, but in my experience in most cities when a filming permit has been issued, notices go up and that serves as your release.

Granted, I think most of those are for mainstream films and not adult films.

For me the legality aspects of it all is just one part of it.

The other is the lack of professional courtesy. It was a business function organized and set up to provide an entertaining, networking opportunity for webmasters. Internext is a b2b show; the party was a business function.

Webmasters attend the event to conduct business and establish contacts, not end up without their knowledge in another company's porn flick.

I don't have a problem when my picture ends up on webmaster-geared sites such as FUBAR and such after attending such an event. But I'm none too fond of ending up in a porn video that is being released to consumers at large.

Further, my company sponsored one of the parties that ended up in the video. We sponsored the party to expose ourselves to other webmasters and offer up a fun, networking opportunity to other webmasters along with the party organizers and other sponors. Not end up having our logo splashed around someone else's consumer-oriented, for-profit production. Some would suggest that any exposure is good exposure, but I happen to believe that losing control of one's trademark and branded imagery could be detrimental to a degree that outweighs any potential benefit from exposure for sake of exposure alone. We didn't sponsor the event to provide a venue for someone else to shoot for-sale content displaying our logos, displaying our persons, and displaying the webmasters invited to the event to conduct business.

Again, it was a business function designed to and intended to cater to webmasters and other industry folk and offer up a networking, business-accomplishing opportunity and venue. It wasn't an event set up and organized to offer a particular company or any companies the chance to shoot content for sale and profit, displaying and exposing potentially any and everyone in attendance without their permission or knowledge.

That link goes to the CollegeBoysLive in Vegas movie. They were shooting that at the webmaster parties too?

Or did AEBN switch it out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MWCren

That link goes to the CollegeBoysLive in Vegas movie. They were shooting that at the webmaster parties too?

Or did AEBN switch it out.

---

That's the movie I started the thread about, so it's going to the correct destination.

I think its tacky as hell to use that footage in a movie they are selling. For christ's sake, they didn't have enough footage without it?

Send them a talent fee invoice for appearing in the movie, they didn't negotiate your appearance, so you can charge what you want. I'd say $25,000 is fair.

But seriously, its classless and very smarmy.

I'm not certain, but I was told at one point that for ANYONE appearing in a film containing sexually explicit content, full 2257 docs were required... whether they are clothed, unclothed, have a walk-on role with 3 lines, or are an uberbottom servicing a dozen guys.

We've always opted for the conservative approach just because we didn't want to get our asses in trouble. I think some companies just take more risks.

Another brilliant example of stupidity is the new "DaVinci Load" video which features a large picture of the Mona Lisa on the cover. I'm willing to guess that the producer of that film has no clue about intellectual property rights.

I wanted to step in here and give my two cents since Q-Fest was mentioned

As far as I can tell the Qfest party is not included in this DVD. The CBL crew didn't arrive till around midnight from their flight so I'd be surprised if there was any footage from Qfest on this DVD.

I don't know if Lee's comments were directed at us, but I will respond as if they are. If it wasn't then I apologize for being defensive as we go to great lengths to not include guests in sexually explicit scenes. I find it best to not be ambiguous and call it out.

We have hosted the Qfest party in Vegas for past three years. It is labeled as a PHOTOSHOOT party where webmaster can grab free content for their websites.
Generally, the photo shoots happen in a bedroom separate from the main gathering area. In 2004 and 2005 we had some spontaneous and some planned action late into the night in the main room when things thinned out considerably.

While we can not completely control what others film at our parties, we can control 100% what we disseminate on our websites. We pick thru every picture and every second of video shot and do our best to avoid letting pics or video slip thru that are not exclusively of the paid models. Regardless if someone steps in and starts hogging down on some cock while the models are being filmed we cut it from the final footage. Quite frankly we do not shit where we eat!

In other forums we have hosted parties and after-hours too. Yet while these were not supposed to be sexually explicit parties there always ended up being someone in our webmaster community getting blown or blowing someone. Therefore, in Qfest06 there was no action outside of the photo shoot room. Also, this is why at the recent Phoenix forum we didn't want our talent to get naked at all because we wanted to set a specific tone. After two years of throwing some off the hook parties we've decided its best to not allow members of our community to be put into compromising situations that they may regret.

Now back to the topic of discussion. It’s my opinion that including footage on a DVD of webmasters networking is apprehensible. The DVD should be pulled and at least re-edited to not include this.

Corbin,

You have a better arguement going after them by using a "rights of publcity" infringment, then you do using 2257 arguement. 2257 is a criminal statute, you can't go after someone else based on that.

You can however use a civil agrument of "rights of publcity" infringement, or a trademark infringemnt if your logo is trademarked. You are a recognizable enough "star" that using your image without your permission in a commercial product is against the law.

Maybe Chad can get everyone here a little instructional course on what "rights of publicity" are all about. Oh Chad....

Um... Joe, isn't it illegal to film porn in a Las Vegas hotel room?

Well at this point I'm more pointing out different reasons the producers of the film in question should, of their own accord, remove the product or, at the very least, edit it considerably. Certainly no one but the government can take 2257-based action against them, but their own newfound awareness the film likely doesn't conform to 2257 regulations should be reason enough for them to remove it on their own.

And while a case could certainly be made regardling trademark infringement and the like, I'd hope that simple professional courtesy (because it's professional courtesy I feel has been violated most of all here) would be enough to bring about the video's removal from distribution or, at minimum, alteration.

CorbinFisher_BD, I love you, but you're making a mountain out of a molehole.

The event was billed as a "photo shoot". This quote is from the press release:

"Webmasters won’t want to miss this party as there will be free content for the taking all night long. Just show up with your camera and click away so you’ll have loads of fresh pictures and videos to start off the new year."

Didn't you know what event you were attending? If you are afraid of being in the background of a porn shoot - don't go. If you show up and see cameras - leave. It's like driving through a carwash and then sueing the owner for getting your car wet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xstr8guy

Um... Joe, isn't it illegal to film porn in a Las Vegas hotel room?

---

I know there has been speculation in the past brought up on this board. We called the Las Vegal filming commission to aquire a permit. We were advised that as long as we are not in a public area we were fine and did not require one.

Also, what I can tell you is that no fewer than 10 of the hotels staff including the food and beverage coordinator and event manager were well aware of what we were doing. In fact 2 or 3 including the in room dining manager attended as guests that evening. Further we specifically hire security directly from the hotel who stood outside the door and walked around the penthouse suite. I could virtually copy and paste the exact same thing from two years ago at the Mandalay Bay.

Mark,
I made it a point to refer to parties beyond just the Q-Fest ones, because that was the only event billed as the photoshoot party. The Cybersocket parties (and I checked that movie on AEBN and saw plenty of content shot during the Cybersocket party) was not billed as or presented as a photoshoot party.

There was no suggestion to anyone attending those events that they ran the risk of ending up in a porn movie.

As for the Q-Fest ones, I know those are photoshoot parties and most people should be clearly aware filming will take place at the event. We didn't sponsor that event and I didn't really reference that one much in my post.

But even Joe at PrideBucks, the organizer of Q-Fest, says they make a concerted effort to limit and even prevent entirely anyone but contracted models from showing up in the content they use from that shoot.

I saw myself in a scene from this movie taken at the Cybersocket party (I knew it was the Cybersocket party because I could see our promotional material spread about the room and it's the Cybersocket parties we sponsored).

I was standing in a totally different room from the one the models were engaging in sexually explicit acts in. On the opposite side of the room. Yet there I was nonetheless. But because of where the cameraman was standing, you could see out the doorway of the bedroom he was in and in to a completely different room.

So... at a party that wasn't billed as a photoshoot or ever presented or promoted as such, are you saying that because some models decided to get wild and crazy in a room I wasn't even in, I should have left the business function my company was sponsoring so as to avoid appearing in a for-profit adult video production some attendees spontaneously decided to film in another room?

With the additional detail, I see your point now.

Hi all. I must first apologize for any inadvertent actions that has cause problems, the video was more a reality documentation of the cbl boys going to las versa and attending internext, 90% of the stuff on the dvd is around and outside internext, we do however show shots and stuff from within the parties. We apologize if you were caught on film in the background as we went around, we were mostly trying to focus on our guys.
We have asked aebn to remove the dvd and the sales on our site have been halted and we will be re editing the dvd starting tomorrow. I would like to use some footage from the party since it explains why they are there, so I am asking if you were there or have made it into the video and don’t want to be there, let me know and I will make personally sure you do not appear in there. I will also make sure no one is caught in a compromising position. Again although we have been doing the reality thing from the house for many years this was our first outing like this. So once again, sorry if we caused any problems.

zac

This has been a policy of events hosted by Cybersocket from the very beginning:

Any reproduction, broadcast, or commercial use of any portion of the events, in whole or in part, in any form, without the express written consent of Cybersocket is strictly prohibited. Still photographs and video recordings may be taken by sponsors upon prior approval, and designated press photographers.

We never knowingly have live sex performances. Though we try to remedy any and all inappropriate behavior at these events, we are unable to monitor people at 100% of the time - we have allowed designated spaces to be free from constraint however, these suite parties in Las Vegas were not such spaces.


Sincerely,
Cybersocket Management

Quote:

---

Another brilliant example of stupidity is the new "DaVinci Load" video which features a large picture of the Mona Lisa on the cover. I'm willing to guess that the producer of that film has no clue about intellectual property rights.

---

A bit of a hijack, but isn't the Mona Lisa in the public domain?

The painting is over 500 years old. I thought the maximum time a copyright could be enforced was 95 years and that all works created prior to copyright and patent law were in the public domain?

I'm legitimately curious.

(a) well, I'm not an IP attorney, but my understanding was that, even with old paintings/photographs, there were certain IP rights that go beyond copyright (perhaps held by the owner of the painting or photograph.) I could be wrong on this, and if I am, I'd be delighted for someone to correct me.

(b) I wanted to offer an opinion on the Qfest thing. We were cosponsors of Qfest 2005, and it was our photographer who shot almost all of the video content. We worked with Joe and the rest of the Pridebucks crew, and even though there was clear understanding on the part of attendees, wemade an effort to exclude any identifiable images of people other than the actual models participating. In the later evening, those who not our models who were actively participating were all individually asked before our photographer shot video of them, and even so, in almost all cases, that footage wasn't used at all.

I've always found Pridebucks approach to everything they do to be completely professional and with forethought.

Well I'm glad a number of people have come in to this thread to clarify things and especially that CBL has removed the video from AEBN and is re-editing it, as it was CBL's actions and their's alone that inspired my creating this thread and that I had a problem with.

So thanks to everyone for that.

Well. I guess the infamous Internext Las Vegas 2006 now has one more thing for us all to fondly ruminate about.....:rolleyes:

Steve

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LavenderLounge

This quote is from the press release:
"Webmasters won’t want to miss this party as there will be free content for the taking all night long. Just show up with your camera and click away so you’ll have loads of fresh pictures and videos to start off the new year."

---

Mark,

It's not a mountain, Brian has a legitimate point. And the above statement said nothing about "come to the party and be in a video."

In future, at these types of events, it might be a better idea to limit the action to the bedroom and put a sign above the door: "If you enter this room, you may become content."

Kudos to College Boys Live for pulling the video and doing a redit. It's the right thing to do.

Cheers,
Michael

Quote:

---

Kudos to College Boys Live for pulling the video and doing a redit. It's the right thing to do.

---

Not a problem. we will also be running the re edit past people like morgan at cybersocket and various others, so this time we get it right :)

luckily, in the 3 hour video the parties do not make up the bulk of the video so editing shoulnt be to tedious or time consuming, lol maybe we need a GWW screening when its done :)

but can i keep the shot of Lee in a wig and a dress in ? PLEEEASE :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dzinerbear

Mark,

It's not a mountain, Brian has a legitimate point. And the above statement said nothing about "come to the party and be in a video."

In future, at these types of events, it might be a better idea to limit the action to the bedroom and put a sign above the door: "If you enter this room, you may become content."

Kudos to College Boys Live for pulling the video and doing a redit. It's the right thing to do.

Cheers,
Michael

---

Hi Michael,

Like they say, its all about the details.

At the Q-fest Party, the action was indeed limited to one designated bedroom in the suite and even more so, the actual bed where the action took place was literally roped off to keep the crowd away and going one step further this year, it was even broadcast on the tv's throughout the suite so people didn't have to fight the crowds to see the show if they did not wish to shoot the content themselves.

The footage that inspired this thread where webmasters wound up as unknowing extras was not even taken in the "sin room" at all - but in the main area of the suite at both ours and the CyberSocket parties.

It would be sad if a "If you enter this room, you may become content." sign
would need to be hung at any webmaster function; after this thread and the excellent points made, I trust that won't be necessary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boyfunk

I've always found Pridebucks approach to everything they do to be completely professional and with forethought.

---

Thanks Chip for the kind words!!! We feel the same way towards you and AJ!

Fill free to record me in the background of any of your porn movies, I try not to do anything in public that, I would be that embarrassed about. Hell about every time I go out to a club they have some photographer take shots of me, normally I get a drink out of it but that about it. :pimp:

I think that it'd be unfortunate if party organizers had to run around policing their own events and making sure everyone was behaving. It shouldn't be up to PrideBucks or Cybersocket or any other party organizer to have to obsess over assuring proper conduct. I'd hope that at a business function geared towards industry professionals, the attendees would take it upon themselves to have a clear idea as to what was and what was not appropriate, and what their gracious hosts may and may not appreciate.

But, again, I'm glad it's resolved and CBL pulled the stuff.

Thanks, everyone!

No way. That's pretty shady. They should have at least blurred faces of people in the background. It's common practice to have anyone sign a release form if they are going to appear in a video.

On the flip side, too bad they didn't capture any footage of this hottie in the "I Masturbate" T-shirt when he was rubbing his crotch while watching those models have sex. I was standing next to him, and my mouth was SOOO watering! :)

http://photos.imageevent.com/lalalif...e/IMG_0688.JPG