Quote:


Once again my congratulations to Mr. Hardcore for convincing the porno industry that their interests rise and fall with his thereby ensuring that they follow him like a puppy dog.






The irony is that Max should not need to convince the industry that their interests rise and fall with his, since that is indisputably the case.

Prosecutions against Max are the thin edge of the wedge. Assuming you know some law, you will know that it is better to make your test case someone further out on the margins of whatever industry the gov't is seeking to prosecute. If successful, the 2d round of prosecutions will be significantly more broad.

If the US gov't wants to shut down the entire industry (which they do) then the logical first step is Max. The 2d step will be JM, the third will be everyone else.

The latest charges are the third set levelled against Max. In 1998 The LA County charged him with production of child pornography - most charges were dismissed in light of the decision in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (feel free to read it, counselor).

Although all the charges under the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 were dismissed, LA persisted in trying Max on distribution of obscene material, which did go to trial, resulting in a hung jury (6-6 split). See AVN interview with Max and his counsel

Quote:

"Even after the first evenly-split jury rejected the city's attempt at criminalizing sexual speech, the city still hung onto its pointless crusade, " Douglas continued. "Though the City Attorney Rockard J. Delgadillo's office wouldn't even negotiate with me, no one could or would explain why the prosecutors were refusing to be reasonable despite the fact that the prosecution was, according to testimony from the first trial, admittedly based upon one sentence in the entire movie.

"The prosecution was malicious. The initial three-count complaint, all based on that one line, was one of the most irresponsible charging documents I have ever seen. Because of the spinelessness of the judiciary, it took over a year to get one baseless count dismissed, another year to get the second count thrown out, and now finally we got what our offer was on the very first day. This is what we offered the prosecution on the very first day."





Here's an interview with the prosecutor of that case from PBS' Frontline: Clicky
Quote:

Do you think Vivid, Wicked, VCA, and Larry Flynt's organization have anything to fear from you and the feds? Or are these guys too big and too mainstream now?

... I believe I may have seen some video productions from Vivid, so maybe. But I don't think that they're going to put that out there, the kinds of things that we're seeing. As far as the city is concerned, if it stays away from those general categories, we won't prosecute. They won't be seeing us.





It is no coincidence that Max's counsel, Jeff Douglas, is also board chair of the Free Speech Coalition - an industry funded organization. Clicky

I think that your naivete notwithstanding, the industry needs to treat this very seriously, and, in fact, it is.


Edited by soopergrizz (06/01/07 09:50 AM)
_________________________
You're all still alive?