Should Industry Attorneys Represent Those On The Fringe?

[Lee]

For example, producers of ***********, scat, and other such content, whilst still claiming to be 'industry' attorneys?

My personal feeling is that they shouldnt, for the simple fact that by being well known 'adult industry' attorneys, its tantermount to them saying the companies and individuals producing/distributing this type of content is common place in the industry thus tarring us all with the same brush.

What are your thoughts on this?

Should industry attorneys, who we all know, be representing people that dont have the industries well-being at heart by producing that type of content?

Regards,

Lee

[Squirt]

Our legal system dictates that everyone deserves representaion. Who better to represent those in the sex industry, then attorneys specializing in that area?

[Titanmen]

YES! Everyone, no matter how disgusting I think they may be, deserves legal representation.

[gaybucks_chip]

I think everyone deserves representation, and I also think that as soon as we start demarking what sort of speech is acceptable and not acceptable, we start down a very slippery slope.

It is true that some of the grosser stuff (and some would argue barebacking) is wrong or sends the wrong message, but the right of those producers to produce that content should not be abridged. As soon as we start saying that, for example, pissing isn't OK, then someone who is offended by gay sex or twinks or fat people or whatever can come along and say that's offensive to them.

We've already got enough issues with loss of free speech in this country thanks to the Bushwazee, let's not make it any worse by advocating restriction of expression in our own industry.

[chadknowslaw]

I agree that everyone deserves legal representation.


HOWEVER!!!!


That does not mean that everyone deserves legal representation from ME.


I am one of the strongest advocates of free expression but I cannot say that I could represent any client that handed me a check. I think my limit is a lot farther out there than most lawyers, because although I have seen stuff that makes me kind of ill to watch it, as long as there are only consenting adults involved I will defend the producer's right to make it and the consumer who wants to buy it.

My line is drawn at "consenting adults". That means that yes, I would represent someone who produces scat videos, I would represent someone who produces videos of vomiting and eating vomit, and all other really icky things that producers dream up.

I do not believe that animals can give consent, so I will not represent someone who wants to produce bestiality. I will not represent someone who has previously been convicted of child pron or acts with children. I don't handle criminal defense cases.

And I do claim to be an industry attorney.

[Lee]

That does not mean that everyone deserves legal representation from ME.

Exactly what im talking about, it would seem that most 'adult industry' attorneys will take any case without even thinking about the potential detriment to them or the industry as a whole.

Of course everyone should be able to have legal representation and i didnt mean it to sound like they shouldnt but some of the attorneys we have in 'adult' seem to be representing some real scumbags more and more lately and that has me concerned.

Regards,

Lee

[chadknowslaw]

some of the attorneys we have in 'adult' seem to be representing some real scumbags more and more lately and that has me concerned.

Regards,

Lee

I would still represent you Lee.

:haha:

[mickey]

YES! Everyone, no matter how disgusting I think they may be, deserves legal representation.

i agree.. and i agree with chadknowslaw.. its up the the individual lawyer to figure out if they want to represent someone or not..

[chadknowslaw]

There are some people I just would not represent -- and yes those would be the scumbags. I don't judge someone by their content [the consenting adults only requirement aside] but I do choose who I will work for based on their character. This is completely arbitrary and capricious on my part and entirely my right. If a company is consistently abusive to its models I would decline representation. If a company wanted to set up an arrangement to evade taxation or other laws I would most certainly decline. I like to get a feel for what kind of person is standing in front of me [and yes, I do prefer to meet all my clients before doing any serious work for them].

There are a number of lawyers that make my skin crawl they are so creepy. They will take on anyone for any reason. I don't work with those guys.

There are scumbag clients. They deserve scumbag lawyers.

[Squirt]

There are scumbag clients. They deserve scumbag lawyers.

Well said!

[Matt 26z]

Should industry attorneys, who we all know, be representing people that dont have the industries well-being at heart by producing that type of content?

"That type of content" provides a buffer zone between vanilla porn sites and the anti-porn groups.

If they were to succeed in shutting down everyone like Max Hardcore, Extreme Associates and Ray Guhn, they are not going to stop there and declare victory over porn.

[chadknowslaw]

"That type of content" provides a buffer zone between vanilla porn sites and the anti-porn groups.

If they were to succeed in shutting down everyone like Max Hardcore, Extreme Associates and Ray Guhn, they are not going to stop there and declare victory over porn.

I agree. That is why I do not judge potential clients by their content but on their character and reputation. I would take the site owner that produces manure-eating up-to-the-elbow fisting who lives in a warehouse in Detroit but is totally honest with me while I would turn down a MILF site owner who has no permanent address, will not tell me who he works with and tries to hide things from me.

[chadknowslaw]

"That type of content" provides a buffer zone between vanilla porn sites and the anti-porn groups.

If they were to succeed in shutting down everyone like Max Hardcore, Extreme Associates and Ray Guhn, they are not going to stop there and declare victory over porn.

You are very correct that it is the guys on the fringe that make life easier for the mainstream porn. If the extreme guys get run out of business, then they will come for you next. If the extreme guys win, we all win and can go about honest money making.

[gayporncowboy]

I respect Chad enormously , but this issue is so titanic and affects us all, so I consulted a higher authority

The First Amendment does NOT exist to protect popular speech goddamn it , It exists to protect UNpopular speech, that's the whole goddamn point !!

Supreme Court Justice Walter Matthau,

"First Monday in October " 1981 I love that movie. And in that movie, the issue WAS a porn film

[basschick]

i've thought about this thread a lot. for some reason, it got stuck in my mind. last night, i came up with a parallel. it's a long story, but i think it applies.

i was in a vicious custody battle years ago - one with a VERY weird commissioner acting as judge. my ex was going for blood and lying like crazy. on top of that, i was managing a strip club, and the judge decided that strip clubs were illegal here (they weren't). my regular family attorney - with like 40 years experience - was way out of his depth. this went on for 2 years.

so i got an attorney who was known to work with bad parents, and i feared i would be tarred with that brush. on the other hand, i needed someone who knew their stuff. the new attorney set me up with an expensive shrink who the judge liked to use, and i paid for my son and myself to be majorly evaluated. the lawyer also came up with something showing that strip clubs were legal in california. within one month, everything was over and our lives finally were our own again.

and having a lawyer who works on worse cases didn't hurt us at all!