WTF Is This Shit?

WASHINGTON - In a historic development, Paul Cambria, the First Amendment attorney who is also general counsel for the Adult Freedom Foundation (AFF), and fellow industry attorneys Jeffrey Douglas and Greg Piccionelli, today met with FBI officials regarding the 2257 inspection process.

Cambria said the meeting signaled what appears to be the beginning of a better dialogue between the FBI and the industry as the random inspections continue.

“We just met with a number of FBI agents who are in charge of the 2257 inspection process,” Cambria told AVN.com. “A number of companies were invited and we just came to that meeting at the FBI headquarters in Washington. The purpose of the meeting as described by the FBI agents, by the attorneys and offices of general counsel, was to explain the inspection process to us and attempt to have a dialogue which would result in an easier inspection process.

“And we did have that dialogue and I think it was beneficial to the adult industry. We have a clearer understanding now of their procedures and I think that we have opened up a channel of communication to try to make the inspection process a more productive and less onerous one from the standpoint of the adult industry.”

Douglas told AVN.com that the FBI indicated it is open to "a variety of means of communication," and it is not limiting those opportunities to industry heavyweights. The bureau is open to a dialogue with companies both large and small, regardless if they have attorneys representing them, he said.

"Collectively, we are working on ways for the FBI to communicate their goals and their methods, to communicate that which needs to be communicated to the industry," Douglas added.

"... This is a historic meeting between representatives of adult entertainment companies and the government. There has never been a meeting of this type."

According to Douglas, a particularly noteworthy moment on Thursday came when Chip Burrus, the FBI's assistant director, criminal investigation division, acknowledged that his organization "cannot effectively inspect or regulate an industry without an understanding or dialogue with the industry."

"It was a rare and precious moment that they acknowledged they are attempting to regulate an industry without a dialogue," Douglas said. "They are attempting to regulate us but won’t talk to us."

"And they were seeking to remedy that with this dialogue that they have commenced," Piccionelli said.

Both Piccionelli and Douglas indicated the group was seeking to expand that dialogue with the "broadest possible representation of the industry."

Cambria concluded, "It was a positive meeting and beneficial and we’ve opened up a line of communication. We clarified some areas that we thought were gray areas."

The FBI over the summer began making unannounced visits to adult production companies to check 2257 records. Under Section 2257 of Title 18, Part I, Chaper 110 of the United States Code, the producer of any book, magazine, video or film is required to keep records of anyone performing sexually explicit acts after July 3, 1995, such as their name and date of birth along with documents providing proof of such information. That includes other names the performer has used.

The companies that have received visits so far are Legend Video, Darkside Entertainment, Diabolic Video, Sunshine Films and Robert Hill Releasing.

In another development, FBI officials indicated in Thursday's meeting they are considering releasing an official statement about the 2257 inspections to industry news websites in the near future. That statement will be published here as soon as it's available.

http://www.avn.com/index.php?Primary...tent_ID=277280

So what the fuck, this meeting was 'for the industry' yet we didnt get to fucking hear about it until it was a done deal?

Something is so fucked up about that its unreal, how can someone 'speak for the industry' when we dont even know what the fuck you are going to be saying or, when we dont even know about the meeting... PERIOD!

Anyone else find this disturbing?

Regards,

Lee

I find it disturbing, that things were cleared up and worked out, yet the details aren't being disclosed...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by deanb

I find it disturbing, that things were cleared up and worked out, yet the details aren't being disclosed...

---

Indeed.

Why has this been the first we have heard about it?

What was being discussed? How is it going to effect us all?

Lots and lots of scary questions need to be answered now.

How do we know, that the meeting wasnt about 'shopping' any of us to the Feds? i can see it now.. 'Go visit Maxpower, you'll find some good shit there'.

Scary stuff :eek:

Regards,

Lee

Personally, I don't see the need for Cambria and the others to notify the entire industry of the meeting before they have one. These guys know what they are doing; they know the industry inside-out, and what the legal ramifications of the business are. They are fully capable of taking meetings without asking our permission or soliciting our opinions first. I seriously doubt that they were going into these meetings to give people over to the FBI.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XXXWriterDude

Personally, I don't see the need for Cambria and the others to notify the entire industry of the meeting before they have one.

---

You are kidding right? When it concerns the ENTIRE industry, of course they should notify us.

Quote:

---

These guys know what they are doing; they know the industry inside-out

---

Really? How many of those 3 do you think has EVER built or submitted a TGP gallery? How about a free site? What about promoted a sponsors paysite?

They know about the mechanics behind the industry but i highly doubt they know the practicalities of the industry, the inner workings.

Quote:

---

They are fully capable of taking meetings without asking our permission or soliciting our opinions first.

---

Well it certainly seems that way, doesnt it.

Quote:

---

I seriously doubt that they were going into these meetings to give people over to the FBI.

---

You know that how? I agree it is unlikely but, we dont know that for certain.

Regards,

Lee

Think its positive that they actual got a dialog, thats a start...
fucked that, nobody knew a shit about the meeting before it was over..
All the religious dicks should be locked away.... they are all behind this madness, and they are the worst sex crimes in the entire history..
last day i´ve wacth a documentar about the priest in US, 4,500 on trial for sex abuse of kids... thats SICK MAN!!!!
they should never ever have any chance to make/suggest any laws about anything, special the adult entertainment...arghhhh make me sick.
I really hope the goverment would get more knowledge about the industry and understanding, and accept that its simply entertainment, like many other thinks, like movies where people are getting killed etc. its setup and its only for entertainment purpose:-)

Its the difference in the population, that makes a society rich, on good and bad

So, basically what this article says is...

Us and them got together to talk

We had thought about talking and decided that it was about time.

So we got together to talk

We had many things to talk about. You should have heard us.

Oh, we are glad we talked. It was a good talk.

Now if only we knew what they talked about!!! :shock:

The way I see it is, attorneys like Cambria and Larry Walters and Greg Piccionelli are the ones who are out there fighting on our behalf, and they don't have the time to notify the industry of every meeting they intend to take, especially given the potential for thousands of webmasters and industry players to bombard them with emails and requests and suggestions. In situations like this, attorneys don't have the time to get the industry's input first -- nor should they be expected to. It's enough that they are the ones out there on the front lines fighting on our behalf. They have our best intentions at heart. They have to. If we go out of business, so do they. And unless you're employing Cambria's (or one of the other guys' services), you're expecting a lot of something for nothing.

These guys know how the industry works, Lee. They make their money solely off defending us. They know what our issues are. They don't need to post a TGP gallery to know what a TGP gallery is and what is potentially illegal about it or what wembasters have to do in order to keep the content on TGP galleries legal.

I agree with DonMike that there's not an awful lot of information in that story, but to expect these guys to make a huge announcement and solicit our opinions before every meeting they take is really a rather ludicrous expectation.

I agree with Ken on this point.

Dealing with the Feds is a delicate matter, and these guys have shown before that they have the ability to do so with the sort of tact and cooperative approach that is likely to help the industry as a whole.

All we need is for a bunch of arrogant webmasters to go in half cocked and cause the FBI to pull back on its interest in communicating with the industry to make the regulatory process as simple and painless as possible.

I for one don't really see any issue with this, as long as FSC keeps its members informed (which I'm sure it will)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaybucks_chip

I for one don't really see any issue with this, as long as FSC keeps its members informed (which I'm sure it will)

---

This wasnt anything to do with the FSC as far as i can see though, it was just 3 attorneys getting together with the Feds.

Regards,

Lee

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XXXWriterDude

The way I see it is, attorneys like Cambria and Larry Walters and Greg Piccionelli are the ones who are out there fighting on our behalf

---

Ken, come on, you are smarter than that.

Yes they fight on certain companies behalfs, not mine by the way, and at the same time, they get PAID for the work they do.

Quote:

---

In situations like this, attorneys don't have the time to get the industry's input first -- nor should they be expected to. It's enough that they are the ones out there on the front lines fighting on our behalf.

---

As i mentioned to Chip above, they acted on our behalf, not as part of the FSC or AFF, as 3 attorneys who just decided they were going to represent the 'whole industry'.

Quote:

---

They have our best intentions at heart. They have to. If we go out of business, so do they.

---

So in reality, they have their best financial interests at heart.

Quote:

---

And unless you're employing Cambria's (or one of the other guys' services), you're expecting a lot of something for nothing.

---

Huh? How do you figure that out? I certainly dont recall giving any of those 3 attorneys permission to speak on MY behalf, im part of the adult industry, so how can they decide to speak on my behalf without my permission?

That would be like me writing to Paul @ AVN and handing him your resignation. So what if you didnt give me permission to do so, i just decided im going to speak on your behalf about that.

Quote:

---

They make their money solely off defending us.

---

I think we both agree with that.

Quote:

---

I agree with DonMike that there's not an awful lot of information in that story, but to expect these guys to make a huge announcement and solicit our opinions before every meeting they take is really a rather ludicrous expectation.

---

No it isnt, not when they are speaking on behalf of the 'industry' if they were speaking on behalf of one or two companies, i agree with that stance but, when they talk about things that could potentially affect MY business without MY knowledge, thats a violation of my rights.

Regards,

Lee

At no point in the AVN article did these attorneys state they will share publicly the information they received. This leads me to believe that these three have a privileged dialogue representing our industry with the FBI that only their clients will be privy to, and benefit from.

Here we have three people who met on our behalf and have stated that the FBI is "..considering releasing an official statement about the 2257 inspections to industry news websites in the near future."

So as an industry we have not benefited from this dialogue at all, we only know that it happened. So if one of these three isn't your attorney, at this point, none of this means anything to you. It's like saying "I met with God today and had a great discussion which included the meaning of life" ... yeah... and?

I'm glad that some attorneys who know the industry met on our behalf, to a minimal extent. I've never hired the attorneys mentioned so I can't say I support, or don't support them. With the exception of Chad Belville, it seems a few adult attorneys have a club mentality, which I find disturbing, as it can be used to manipulate the industry to their discretion, and benefit.

What are your thoughts?

This makes absolutely no sense to me. Everyone was talking about how smoothly the inspections went, da da da... ok, it's all good right ? so why now do we need dialogue ? exactly who is going to benefit from this ? Inspections are inspections. There's no mystery to them, they simply are what they are.

I really can't imagine what was said at this meeting. why do I feel like someone did a plea bargain for me and i'm not guilty of anything.

If the FBI or anyone wanted to talk to "the industry", who do you think they should try and contact? I agree that going to these specific lawyers who aren't really "part" of the industry may be less than ideal, but is there an alternative? some sort of a union that can carry a dialogue with the authorities and truly represent adult webmasters?

i feel fairly sure the lawyers went to the fbi, not the other way around.

and yes, we do - the FSC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tigermom

If the FBI or anyone wanted to talk to "the industry", who do you think they should try and contact? I agree that going to these specific lawyers who aren't really "part" of the industry may be less than ideal, but is there an alternative? some sort of a union that can carry a dialogue with the authorities and truly represent adult webmasters?

---

Quote:

---

10-12-2006 07:34 PM
DonMike So, basically what this article says is...

Us and them got together to talk

We had thought about talking and decided that it was about time.

So we got together to talk

We had many things to talk about. You should have heard us.

Oh, we are glad we talked. It was a good talk.

Now if only we knew what they talked about!!!

---

Ahhh, it all makes sense now! ;)

Sorry guys, I was in a mood and felt like being facetious.

I'm not really sure how I feel about this subject, my post was just about the fact that the article took a whole page and really didn't tell us anything more than the fact that they got together to speak. At any rate, I was recently called on my shit by a friend who reads my online journal. I was whining and complaining about how I'm not happy with a lot of things in my community and she pointed out that it's really easy to bitch and moan about something that other people are doing, but it's not constructive. Why not follow up a rant with a possible solution.

So, to all of you who have spoken your unease about this situation, what would you suggest be done differently and how can you be a part of it?

I don't know. Kinda sounds to me like we're letting the fox in the chicken house.

Bill

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hdkbill

I don't know. Kinda sounds to me like we're letting the fox in the chicken house.

Bill

---

Yeah. One that's already tasted blood too