Quote:

---

---

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.

---

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."

---

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.

---

Quote:

---

Max's work as has been described by others here looks like a textbook example of material that will fail the Miller v. California Test. 413 U.S. 15 (1973)

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Max's work as has been described by others here looks like a textbook example of material that will fail the Miller v. California Test. 413 U.S. 15 (1973)

---

And yet, LA City prosecutors failed to get a conviction against Max on exactly that basis. Source

---

Quote:

---

People have warned the adult community to censor itself before the government did. No one listened and now when the next generation of obscenity law comes down, it will be based on Max Hardcore films.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

People have warned the adult community to censor itself before the government did. No one listened and now when the next generation of obscenity law comes down, it will be based on Max Hardcore films.

---

Censorship should never be static, to be encapsulated in a time where only "these things.." are accetable and {so with,} regardless of the growth (so be advancement or decline) of our society; they should be ever present and enforceable with prejudice, is just another form of puritanical law.

The appetite of the American public for sexual gratification and exploration by testing the boundaries of our freedoms is our right and duty, in this day and age, where even Sodomy is against the law in some states, is just arcane and unacceptable.

---

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.

---

Quote:

---

In Brockett v. Spokane Arcades Inc, 472 U.S. 491 (1985) prurient is material which has a tendency to excite lustful thoughts but excludes "materials which "excite lustful thoughts" but "provoke only normal healthy sexual desires."

---

I'm not a fan of the content Max produces so the biggest obstacle for me would be proving that his stuff excited me in the slightest, never mind produced lustful thoughts. Under cross examination, I doubt anyone would keep a straight face (no offense Vanessa) when that question came up...