Guess some of the girls got together and are suing them; mostly for lying to them that the videos would not be distributed in the US and they were only for DVD's; and some other things. There have been some online postings from various models claiming the same thing. But, I would guess the GDP guys have a pretty good documentation process for models, so I'm guessing they are legally protected. Just sounds like their used car salesmen bits work on some of the models; anything to get them in the door. Not sure how much sympathy a jury would have for females that are paid to have sex om camera.

http://www.courthousenews.com/2016/06/09/women-call-socal-pornographers-brutal-liars.htm

"Gender violence", "coersion"... This may be the case that finally does it. When John & Jane Q. Public get a gander at the media exhibits in the courtroom (presumably accompanied by testimony from the gals, which usially is not the case) and learn that it ubiquitous and not an isolated horror, all hell may finally break loose. Pornography, the throatfucked and humiliated crows may finally be coming to roost.

I don't know, think a decent attorney would shred these girls on the stand. Did you sign the release forums? Did you willingly remove your clothes? Did you willingly have sex?....... I'm not on anybody's side, but it's tough to see any jury or judge for that matter having any sympathy for any female that's has sex on camera for a couple of thousand dollars.

I think fact that the attorneys are framing it in those terms I quoted is pretty indicative that they smell blood of a different sort than the usual "obscenity" approach. This seems new to me and not something to be fobbed iff to a high court somewhere. This is zeitgeist shit.

When the cash is gone, all that is left is the shame.

Apparently there are 4 plaintiffs here and from what I can surmise by this single writeup these do not appear to be societal "undesirables" or degegenerates, but seem to be people for whom shame within an ordinary social circle was invredibly traumatizing. The motivations of the "producers" of this "content" are no mystery and beneath consideration or interest. And even though the crime here is fraud, cruel fraud, the question remains what was the motivation of these women whose concerns over the thought of having sex on media with strangers were seemingly calmed by an assurance that it wouldn't be seen by friends or family?

These guys pretty much bragged about doing what they're accused of on their own forums. They're as screwed at the Girls Gone Wild douchebag who was convicted for filming underage girls when they were under the influence.

Bragging about it will get the Fed on your ass every time. Just ask Max and a few others.
I'm not sure I understand the gist though. Is the content extreme or what? Was there actual coercion or just play acting? What's the deal?

The girls contend that they were told that the video would be for private use and printed on DVD in Australia, never to be distributed online. Also, the lawsuit contends they were pressured to have sex off camera. Another part of the lawsuit says another model was not told there would be sex until she arrived in San Diego. That's all fine and dandy, but GDP films each model as they sign all of their release forms. Again I say, if these girls were ever put on a stand by a decent attorney, they would be shredded to pieces. They also contend that their names were released to porn forums by the GDP guys. Porn WikiLeaks had a forum dedicated to the models being outed. I would guess about 80% of the models real names were posted on that forum. That forum was deleted a few days ago the same day the lawsuit became public. Thing about GDP, they hands down produced the best looking amateur first time models in porn, hands down. It's when they began to scour Instagram for models that the quality and frequency of their models went through the roof. They literally spend days on Instagram soliciting females.

Got a link? I never buy the shit afterwards. I think it's almost always regret.

No, I was a member of GDP and would always run through the forums; mostly to see the upcoming model previews, but never saw or read anything by them "bragging" about their exploits of any type. In fact I have never read or heard anything directly from the three guys involved in the suit, other then social media pictures that exposed who they really where. There was a Reddit Q&A was a GDP model who pretty much explained everything that was in the lawsuit; so I'm guessing she's one of the plantiffs in the lawsuit. I know as soon as "Rick" from Backroom Casting Couch pretty much had to out himself, though his name and picture were on the internet, just not as exposed to the point it's everywhere; he sold Backroom to PornHub.

I googled it when I first heard about it but it seems to be scrubbed off the forums now. From what I recall they laughed it off but didn't deny it, which doesn't prove their guilt but wouldn't look good in court. I'm sure anything they said there and on Porn Wikileaks was already grabbed by the lawyers if they have the slighest idea what they're doing. The accusations have been floating around for years. Could be regret but it seems to be more than a few isolated cases and their name comes up again and again. Similar to that dude in Phoenix with the clap. Bunch'a Donny Longs in training. And although the girls are hot they still manage to make shitty porn on top of it all.

I really don't think any of the guys from GDP were posting, trolling, etc on Wikileaks. Not sure how it would benefit them in anyway. And to a point, it's beneath them. These guys are soliciting and hiring the hottest amateur first timers in porn, why would they waste their time going on Wikileaks trading barbs with guys living in their parents basement. Just makes no sense.

Uh, do you know anything about mopes? Kurt and Donny got to fuck gorgeous women at certain points in their career, that didn't stop them from exposing themselves as fools on multiple platforms.

I don't buy the whore's stories post-Max. Duke and Red from Facial Abuse used to post here and they explained how they MUST dot every lower case j and cross every t these days because of the litigiousness/abuse claims floating around. I just can't see these guys fucking it up. The girl on the AMA was incredibly unconvincing.

Several of you are very intelligent and knowledgable, even moreso than me, but you are overlooking a essential point in all this. To scum like us, pornography is normal. To a majority people on an average jury pool, it is going to be horrifying. A young woman hanging her head upsidedown while a penis is shoved violently into her mouth with the clear intent to cause her to make disturbing noises and vomit may seem old hat to us, but to someone who has not watched hundreds of hours of this stuff it is going to seem extremely shocking and bizarre to put it mildly. And this is just one of many sadistic, hateful, violent, misogynistic acts in our modern pornography. So I feel that this notion that a jury is going to feel no sympathy for these "whores" is amusingly antiquated. This isn't 'Boogie Nights'.

Sadly, not only is Windsock probably correct, but he also got wood writing the above post.

It is all about the contract or agreement that was signed and the claims are what lawyers and judges call "parol evidence."

From Wiki

The parol evidence rule is a substantive common law rule in contract cases that prevents a party to a written contract from presenting extrinsic evidence that discloses an ambiguity and clarifies it or adds to the written terms of the contract that appears to be whole. The term of art parol literally means "word" and comes from Anglo-French, Anglo-Norman, or Legal French, which in turn is derived from ecclesiastical Latin "parabola", which means "speech". It does not directly translate as "oral", which has a different origin in modern English, coming from the Latin "oralis", which meant "mouth".

The supporting rationale for this rule is that since the contracting parties have reduced their agreement to a single and final writing, extrinsic evidence of past agreements or terms should not be considered when interpreting that writing, as the parties had decided to ultimately leave them out of the contract. In other words, one may not use evidence made prior to the written contract to contradict the writing. A common misconception is that it is a rule of evidence (like the Federal Rules of Evidence), but that is not the case.


All their allegations will be inadmissible. They signed contracts to suck cock for money on film and they sucked cock for money on film. That is all the court will consider.

Windsock: best post from you.....ever!

"This isn't 'Boogie Nights'."

This 'juries hate whores' theory didn't save the asshole in the Girls Gone Wild case. We'll see. As I recall most on here thought that Max and Venice were going to get off too and we know how those worked out.

Max screwed himself because he let a "Euro" version of one of his DVD's to be shipped to Tampa or somewhere that had declared that porn violates community standards. He knew that parts of his scenes couldn't be safely shipped in the U.S., and he did it anyway. Costly mistake.

Hubris, plain and simple.

Thanks for the new sig.

Did the video contain like a father/daughter incest thing? I can't imagine what would be so offensive considering what the FacialAbuse guys been putting out for years. I did notice many mother/daughter videos began using disclaimers at the beginning of the video where the two actresses would say we are not real mother an daughter. And Max's case was criminal, the GDP is civil. Not a lawyer, but imagine might be a difficult case. I really don't know how rich the GDP guys are if they are considering maybe doing an out of court settlement. I have read it's a team of 5 guys who all scour Instagram looking for models and each of them pays for the girl they bring in. But these guys work in the shadows. These models have never heard of GirlsDoPorn or watch to much porn. So, recruiting models fr them won't be an issue if this lawsuit gets continued exposure.

Max got dinged for obscenity in a criminal case. These are some whores trying to grab some extra dosh in a civil case, no? My point earlier about him is that him and the FA guys are extra careful with all this crazy rape hysteria shit. I guarantee GDP has their shit on lock.

The implication that these girls who shoot for them have no idea what they are getting into is laughable. Another fantasy of the sex trafficking brigade.

Sorry, I didn't mean to divert the thing. But you're correct.

Most of the "edgier" studios like Meatholes, Max and others always filmed their performers signing model releases. Max even went so far as to film his whores watching previous scenes to know what they were getting into. I think Kink also releases lots of BTS where the whore sits after the shoot and tells everyone how much she liked it. Fine, she may be bullshitting and high on Fentanyl, but it's on camera for a court to see. The GDP people appear to be of the same vein--make sure the whore knows what she's getting into before she has a mope's dick in the back of her throat.

They do film their models signing the release; the have even posted pictures and video of it; case in point, the Teen Miss Delaware. The video of her signing her model release paperwork was posted online. Yea, these guys have all their angles covered, I mean the parent company is some offshore entity; so they spent money being legally protected. It's possible they do use "used car" salesmen tactics, but at the end of the day, every one of the videos they have released, the girl is on the bed knowing she's ready to Fuck. That's why I don't get the lawsuit. Now, part of the lawsuit is the girls being exposed, but, I mean, these girls are all 18-21; I'm willing to bet a large percentage of 18-21 year old male's watch porn; so for the girls to be recognized by somebody is pretty easy I would imagine. I don't think the GDP producers would post the model's name anywhere. Wikileaks took down the GirlsDoPorn Forum, but I thought the whole reason Porn Wikileaks existed, was cause they were legally ok with female names being posted. I mean, are they really braking any laws?

Yea, I don't understand the mentality of the girls who shoot for FacialAbuse; though there are plenty of scenes, and I imagine many more not posted, where the girls don't make it ten minutes into the scene. That's is some pretty significant torment to take for $2,000; not that I'm judging, I think their videos are awesome. I just can't imagine there are women out there who would expose themselves personally and publicly to such insanity. Where can I meet such women?

We'll see how it pans out. This is a civil case so you never know.

^That can make a big diff.

"...knows what she's getting into."

I ask that all please offer a very detailed explanation of what this "what" is exactly that all these shes are getting into. Because it seems to me that the implication is that these shes should know better and that this business transaction is not a goid one at all on the shes end. That implication seems clear. Set me straight if I'm wrong. But if it is (which it is) why do you take such conscienceless joy and delight from a product based in such an inequity?

In English please!

In reading what was exposed of the lawsuit; the "models" were claiming that their names were released to the general public and they were harassed on social media. I'm thinking, the attorneys are just going to thrown as much mud as they can and see what sticks; maybe get a nice out of court settlement. The models are videoed signing all the release papers, videoed being picked up at the airport, there was even one model who got dropped off by her mom and they interviewed both of them. I mean, I'm thinking this is just sour grapes for being outed. I can't tell you the endless stories of GirlsDoPorn Models that have surfaced online and the personal consequences. We all know of the teen Miss Delaware. There's also the Baylor University track athlete whose scholarship was revoked and was barred from campus. Miss Teen Colorao appears to be a whore anyway if you read about her social trangressions online, so she does not count. But, point being, these girls just don't know how popular porn and certain porn sites are these days; how easy it is to be recognized and when you are, the trash heap your social life can become.

The Parol evidence rule roughly translates to Whores Lie! If these girls had expectations on where these scenes would be released and what would become known, then then it needed to be in the contract. If it was not in the contract, it is inadmissible.

Apparently the ancient wisdom of old doth say "Whores lie. Absolute whores lie absolutely."

I thought it was a distributor and not him? That is what he said in an interview prior to the trial. Distributor was instructed not to sell Euro versions in the US and not to ship via US Mail.

Thank you.

The Euro versions have piss in the scene. Piss during a sex scene is considered "obscene" in the US.

I remember a FA scene from years ago where a whore tapped out and walked.

Hmm, I thought that was the JM/5-Star Video trial. Now I'm a bit confused.

I don't know where I found it, or who sent it to me, but it was in an interview Max did right after he shot the Bonnie Rotten scene, and she was around for the interview. It was just audio, like a podcast or radio show or something. He said it was the Euro/piss version of one of his dvds sent via US mail by a distributor. He could have been bullshitting, but that's what I remember him saying. Maybe they were both set up the same way?

There's quite a few scenes with the Facial Abuse guys where the girls don't make it ten minutes into the video. If you ever are a member, there are videos where they are only 10, 15, 20 minutes long, compared to the full 40 minute videos. The shorter ones are obviously where the girls just could not handle it and didn't finish a full video. Best scene I have ever saw of is with Jasmine Gomez; if you ever watch it, she's literally dehumanized. According to an interview she did, when she got back to her hotel, she took a taxi to an ER where she had to get some type of injection to calm her down. She retired from porn after the video, only to come back a year later.

Sounds like a whore on Latina Abuse. I rarely watch that.

I always envision the GhettoGagger whores being sent there by a pimp who is tired of beating them for not bringing in enough money.

Yea, it was LatinaAbuse. One of the more recent ones on there said she thought she was going to get pissed and shitted on and it's what she was prepared for, but apparently the guys told her it was against the law. Pretty much made my top 5 classic lines in porn of all time.

I hope someone has assured this young woman that there is little to no possibility that any males would use this information to sadistically enhance their enjoyment of her pornography scene. I hope she knows that men that horrible and despicable are exceeedingly rare.