Free Speech Coalition/2257

[dexxxter]

I received this in my email the other day. Is this true that I have to join to get protection from prosecution? I just want to be sure it's not a scheme to get my money.





This is Steve Hoffer with the Free Speech Coalition. We are the
national trade organization for the adult entertainment industry. I
wanted to get in touch with you today to let you know the latest urgent
news regarding 2257 that applies to EVERYONE working in the adult
entertainment industry.

We recently sued the federal government and won a
temporary restraining order protection for our members against 2257
prosecution and jail time. The judgment stipulates that in order to
qualify for this protection from prosecution you must SPECIFICALLY BE A
MEMBER of the Free Speech Coalition. Without 2257 protection, you open
yourself up to regular record keeping inspection of your business by
the federal government and threat of jail time. As of right now,
companies or individuals without FSC protection are currently required
by federal law to schedule 20 hours a week of availability to allow the
government to inspect your model release records if they suddenly have
the desire to
do so.

[collegeboyslive]

I think chad, in another thread said that the law MUST be applied equally while it is a good thing to be a member I beleive chad ( please correct me if I am wrong) said the DOJ cant protect one set of people and go after another in this manor.

[Lee]

I just want to be sure it's not a scheme to get my money.

Nah the FSC would never do anything like that

Regards,

Lee

[dexxxter]

not so much a scheme. As an example there are companies that contact retailers and state that they must have federal posters that state the minimum wage, working conditions, etc and that they have them for sale (usually around $50 a shot) when actually they are usually obtained for free. I don't know how he got my email address.

[chadknowslaw]

Mom told me if you can't say something nice, shut the fuck up. However, this latest email is just too much.
The injunction and "protection" they are telling you about is an injunction against the Department of Justice from enforcing a law. The DOJ is a federal government agency and that means the US Constitution governs its actions--and our Constitution requires government to treat all people equally. That means that the injuction will prevent the Attorney General's office from enforcing the regulations against anybody, whether they have paid their dues to the FSC or not. In fact, I will personally represent, at no fee, ANYONE that is NOT a member of the FSC who is inspected and charged with a 2257 violation during the period of injunction that would otherwise be enjoined if they had FSC membership. I am quite confident there will be no takers.
I think the strong arm tactics that have been used by the FSC, and the outright deceptions they have put forth undermine their credibility and their purpose. To make matters worse, the Chairman of the FSC, Jeffrey Douglas, is representing a convicted child pornographer in a civil case. To be fair, I admit that I am opposing counsel on that case, but if I were a member of FSC I would be furious. I may represent the guy who performed underage, but I ain't Chairman of the FSC. An attorney does get to chose his clients, and if your face is in the spotlight, you don't take on dirty ones.
Dexxter, you do not need to pay for "protection" and you definitely don't need to pay for membership in an organization with a leader who represents a convicted child pornographer.

[sarahwebinc]

First I heard about that case. Is there somewhere I can read about. I know as you are involved maybe it is wrong to ask you Chad but as someone who donated it would be good to know.

[sarahwebinc]

and I guess while I am at it - what was the deal with the names of members being sealed in an envelope somewhere. Is that something that would really happen?

[chadknowslaw]

This is the man that Jeffrey Douglas represents:

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?n...d=455154&rfi=8