Insight to the FBis Inspections

You are not logged in. [Log In] xxxPornTalk » Forums » XXX Porn Talk Discussion Forums » General Porno Talk » Insight to the FBis Inspections

JM Toys and More!!

New Release This Week

VOD / Download Links

New Release This Week

Internet Video Rentals

Adult Gossip & News

Forum Stats

19073 Members
14 Forums
40347 Topics
614147 Posts

Max Online: 639 @ 01/18/23 06:59 AM

Topic Options

#217491 - 01/18/07 06:48 PM Insight to the FBis Inspections
pornlaw AC Cream Wannabe Registered: 01/01/06 Posts: 459 Loc: California	Just posted a article about a discussion by the FSC legal team talking about the 2257 inspections by the FBI/DOJ There are more than 700 companies on the inspection list. Read it on AdultBizLaw.com Thanks Michael _________________________ Michael www.AdultBizLaw.com
Top

#217492 - 01/18/07 07:57 PM Re: Insight to the FBis Inspections
Uomo Grassissimo!! Porn Jesus Registered: 04/14/06 Posts: 14755 Loc: Busy downloading [LEGALLY!]	Michael: Just a curious outsider. It seems that violations that were noted were "technical" administrative issues in nature - a missing document, a missing picture, picture not close enough to the performer, a "commercial" from another source, etc. I believe that the purpose of the law was to protect minors from being used in the films. Were any such violations found or suspected or such complaints made? Or was all they after just administrative paperwork snafus? _________________________ Amo i Gemelli!!
Top

#217493 - 01/18/07 08:44 PM Re: Insight to the FBis Inspections
lance69 Kurt Lackwood's Fluffer Registered: 02/18/05 Posts: 1138 Loc: British Colombia	2257 regs are burdensome and overkill. The true purpose is to force people outta business, and to give the government a way to take out those they can't hit legitimately. No sane porn producer will shoot underage girls. You'd lose your livelyhood. The real criminals won't keep records anyway. _________________________ Blog About Bullshit Time to pull the pin on the social handgrenade.
Top

#217494 - 01/19/07 08:25 AM Re: Insight to the FBis Inspections
xvod Bukkake Boy Registered: 01/02/04 Posts: 698 Loc: CA	To take this conversation in another direction, if even simulated sex with someone depicted to be a minor is illegal under 2257, why aren't the producers of the new Dakota Fanning flick screening st Sundance being arrested??? I mean, she's in a scene being raped by an actor portraying her father for Christ sake. Fair is fair, right?
Top

#217495 - 01/19/07 11:11 AM Re: Insight to the FBis Inspections
Willie D Porn Jesus Registered: 09/20/05 Posts: 9181	Quote: To take this conversation in another direction, if even simulated sex with someone depicted to be a minor is illegal under 2257, why aren't the producers of the new Dakota Fanning flick screening st Sundance being arrested??? I mean, she's in a scene being raped by an actor portraying her father for Christ sake. Fair is fair, right? JM Productions v. Lifetime...Television for Wimmin.
Top

#217496 - 01/19/07 11:20 AM Re: Insight to the FBis Inspections
smutspov Porn Jesus Registered: 10/29/03 Posts: 9489	Quote: Just posted a article about a discussion by the FSC legal team talking about the 2257 inspections by the FBI/DOJ There are more than 700 companies on the inspection list. Read it on AdultBizLaw.com Thanks Michael Very informative, keep fighting the power! _________________________ "I only insult those who deserve it." - Alfred E. Neuman
Top

#217497 - 01/20/07 08:10 AM Re: Insight to the FBis Inspections
pornlaw AC Cream Wannabe Registered: 01/01/06 Posts: 459 Loc: California	Quote: It seems that violations that were noted were "technical" administrative issues in nature - a missing document, a missing picture, picture not close enough to the performer, a "commercial" from another source, etc. I believe that the purpose of the law was to protect minors from being used in the films. Were any such violations found or suspected or such complaints made? Or was all they after just administrative paperwork snafus? I dont believe any actual underage performers were found however, no one on the panel mentioned exactly what violations were there. I can only assume that the violations mentioned were technical. This is why this law is so difficult. Primary Producers can still go to jail even if everyone in the movie is 50 yrs old +. Michael _________________________ Michael www.AdultBizLaw.com
Top

#217498 - 01/20/07 08:45 AM Re: Insight to the FBis Inspections
Uomo Grassissimo!! Porn Jesus Registered: 04/14/06 Posts: 14755 Loc: Busy downloading [LEGALLY!]	Quote: I can only assume that the violations mentioned were technical. This is why this law is so difficult. Primary Producers can still go to jail even if everyone in the movie is 50 yrs old +. Michael Minors shouldn't be employed in porn and if this law further protects that, fine. But, it appears that a well intended law is being used as a harrassment tool. It seems to me that the present application is like having a "School Zone" 15mph speed zone and giving jail time for 16 & 17 mph after the "fast traffic" problem has been solved. _________________________ Amo i Gemelli!!
Top

Moderator: Jerkules, zenman

Shout Box

JM Productions

Gag Factor

American Bukkake

JM has the Best Variety !!