RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer

RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Alternative Lifestyles in the News

Message

rulemylife -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/9/2008 4:48:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lynnxz Max Hardcore has a bad rep of forcing girls to go way beyond what they agreed to in their contracts. shrug He's a little bitch. If he was "forcing" someone then he should have been prosecuted on rape and kidnapping charges. Your personal opinion of him doesn't alter the fact that courts have been ruling porn that includes many of the topics discussed in these forums to be so socially unacceptable as to warrant prison sentences. Somehow, I don't find that a welcome trend.

TheHungryTiger -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/9/2008 5:03:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OneMoreWaste The defense made a very logical case against the Postal Service charges- that MWE was being prosecuted for the shipping of these videos to a Florida address, when in fact all they did was ship them to a distributor. It was the distributor who actually mailed them to that address via USPS and committed the "crime". The "reasonably forseeable" clause is the result of a very convenient (for prosecutors) extension of the law in question used to jack up content creators. Witch is why the Postal Service charges are so critical important. Everyone SHOULD be paying attention to this as it is a very dangerous and troubling point. Maybee I should try comming from this at a difrent angle. Lets toss around some hypethotical cases. ..... Say for example a porn producer was charged with failure to pay back taxes, but in court was able to produce a cancled check demonstrating that he had. Woudl people be arguing about tax law? or would people be saying 'well if the videops wernt obscene there would be at tax payment case in the first place'? ..... Say for example a porn producer gets a trafic ticken for running a red light. But pics from a trafic camer proves in court that the light was still yellow when his car was in the intersection. Would people be artguing over the unfair proscution of the trafic ticket? or would people be arguing 'well this wouldent be in treafic court at all if there were a better legal defention of obscene''? People, please .... the involvement of JKG, Inc. in this case is IMPORTANT and needs to be brought to peoples attention. Someone realy needs to beworried about this. I know that the 'who defines obscene' argument is a lot more popular, and in the 35 years since the miller test it has been used so often that it iss the only argument people have the ability to give. But if we just nitpick over the semantics of a word we miss the danger that this presents.

rulemylife -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/9/2008 5:07:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado The confusion seems to revolve around the recently evolved principle that one usually cannot consent to being the victim of domestic abuse...which is not the same as making the blanket assumption that no one can consent to being simply assaulted. It's not a recent principle and there is no confusion. Assault is illegal. You cannot give consent for an illegal activity. What would be considered assault is far more vague but doesn't preclude the possibility that an over-zealous prosecutor could find legal ground to bring charges for a simple spanking.

TheHungryTiger -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/9/2008 5:07:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OneMoreWaste I know you don't care much about mass media, but the L.A. times said (in a very matter-of-fact way) quote: Justice Department spokesman said the prosecution was an outgrowth of a government anti-obscenity initiative started in 2001 under former U.S. Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft. http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jun/01/local/me-porn1 Well, since everyone seems to be ignoring the real actual danger in favor of the panic induced hysteria of 'the close minded prudes in government hate sex' line I might as well jump on board ..... You do realize that this is second time that MaxHardcore was taken to federal court? The first time was in 1998 under 'child porn' charges. I guess this proves that John Ashcroft is a renegade time traveler?

TheHungryTiger -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/9/2008 5:12:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife .... courts have been ruling porn that includes many of the topics discussed in these forums to be so socially unacceptable as to warrant prison sentences. ..... And again I need to point out that it is not the raw EXISTENCE of the porn that landed him in jail, its that he (not actually him but his subcontractor) sent the videos through the mail If he had walked over, knocked on the customers door, and handed them the video, there would have been no charges.

OneMoreWaste -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/9/2008 6:36:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: Lynnxz Max Hardcore has a bad rep of forcing girls to go way beyond what they agreed to in their contracts. shrug He's a little bitch. If he was "forcing" someone then he should have been prosecuted on rape and kidnapping charges. Oh, come now. Do you think a state or federal prosecutor would be willing to take on a big-name porn producer over something as trivial as rape, assault, or kidnapping? [&:] And it's not like the media would want anything to do with something so scandalous! Clearly, he's abusing the power of his office to get away with all sorts of violations. As every gangsta knows, REP is king.

OneMoreWaste -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/9/2008 6:45:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHungryTiger Maybee I should try comming from this at a difrent angle. Lets toss around some hypethotical cases. ..... Say for example a porn producer was charged with failure to pay back taxes, but in court was able to produce a cancled check demonstrating that he had. Woudl people be arguing about tax law? or would people be saying 'well if the videops wernt obscene there would be at tax payment case in the first place'? ..... Say for example a porn producer gets a trafic ticken for running a red light. But pics from a trafic camer proves in court that the light was still yellow when his car was in the intersection. Would people be artguing over the unfair proscution of the trafic ticket? or would people be arguing 'well this wouldent be in treafic court at all if there were a better legal defention of obscene''? You gotta be yankin' me. [sm=Groaner.gif] I'm too old to be getting trolled like this

TheHungryTiger -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/10/2008 3:18:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OneMoreWaste You gotta be yankin' me. [sm=Groaner.gif] I'm too old to be getting trolled like this If what I say is so outrageously stupid then by all means prove me wrong instead of just tossing out comebacks like 'your a troll'. Explain to me why we should NOT be concerned over a violation of the fourth amendment and instead be spinning the argument to make it appear as if everything is is violation of the first amendment? Its my contention that anyone who ignores the fourth amendment violation in this case just to fall back on their old well rehearsed speeches about 'community standards' is complacent in the fourth amendment violation ..... Explain to me why my fears of the fourth amendment violation are unjustified. If Im so crazy and so out of touch, it should be amazingly easy for you to point out that the fourth adnment violation is realy not that big a deal But if you instead want to just toss out personal insults instead of addressing the fourth amendment violation, then may I suggest you drop the 'troll' one and instead go for the 'your a right wing neocon who just believes whatever Fox news tells you'

rulemylife -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/10/2008 5:37:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHungryTiger quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife .... courts have been ruling porn that includes many of the topics discussed in these forums to be so socially unacceptable as to warrant prison sentences. ..... And again I need to point out that it is not the raw EXISTENCE of the porn that landed him in jail, its that he (not actually him but his subcontractor) sent the videos through the mail If he had walked over, knocked on the customers door, and handed them the video, there would have been no charges. Of course it is the existence of the porn. You're trying to split hairs. Would he be going to jail if these were Disney videos he distributed through the mail?

OneMoreWaste -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/10/2008 5:56:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHungryTiger If what I say is so outrageously stupid then by all means prove me wrong instead of just tossing out comebacks like 'your a troll'. I'm running out of ways to say that the charges he faced hinge around the videos fitting the definition of obscenity. He's not being charged with selling DVDs without a license, or selling DVDs in a no-DVD zone. "Obscene" is right there in the text of the charges! quote: Explain to me why we should NOT be concerned over a violation of the fourth amendment and instead be spinning the argument to make it appear as if everything is is violation of the first amendment? Fourth Amendment now? Where's the search and seizure? The DVDs were mailed to a police officer. Are you making the argument that this is an entrapment case? quote: But if you instead want to just toss out personal insults instead of addressing the fourth amendment violation, then may I suggest you drop the 'troll' one and instead go for the 'your a right wing neocon who just believes whatever Fox news tells you' I have no idea what your politics or your TV habits are, but I'm getting tempted to diagnose delusions of persecution...

TheHungryTiger -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/10/2008 12:23:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife Would he be going to jail if these were Disney videos he distributed through the mail? Would he be going to jail if he has simpled owned the videos personaly and hadn't sent them through the mail?

TheHungryTiger -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/10/2008 12:26:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OneMoreWaste "Obscene" is right there in the text of the charges! So is 'through the mail'. Why is it that one part of the text can be safely ignored yet another part of the same text is the end all be all central core of everything? If both are in the text of the charges, shouldn't there be at the bare minim at least SOME attention paid to the 'through the mail' part?

shatteredplaster -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/10/2008 3:06:44 PM)
I've read all the articles posted here on this issue and I'm just going to throw my 2 cents in on this. I believe very strongly in the protection of the people's rights. The issue in this case was "morality," and what met community standards. This was evident in that AVN article you posted where three of the jurors approached the defense team and tearfully apologized that they were forced to return a guilty verdict because of the other jurors. I will repeat that...TEARFULLY. At one point, one of the jurors even riposted his refusal to the judge to order the forfeiture of the house. There is a dangerous precedent being set here. I'm not a conspiracy theorist...I am a student and a veteran of the United States Army. I took an Oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. This is nothing more than a group of people imposing their moral willpower upon others. You cannot, and must not legislate morality...that in and of itself is a violation of the 1st, 4th, 6th, 8th, 9th, 14th, and 15th Amendments either in part or wholly.

TheHungryTiger -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/10/2008 4:41:33 PM)
quote: that in and of itself is a violation of the 1st, 4th, 6th, 8th, 9th, 14th, and 15th Amendments either in part or wholly. Totally agree .... witch is why I get so frustrated by people ignoring the violations of the 4th, 6th, 8th, 9th, 14th, and 15th and only focusing on the 1st. Heck, I would call it progress if anyone mention (even just mention in passing) the other two prongs of the miller test instead of just repeating the 'community standards' line over and over.

ExKat -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/11/2008 5:11:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHungryTiger Heck, I would call it progress if anyone mention (even just mention in passing) the other two prongs of the miller test instead of just repeating the 'community standards' line over and over. "Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, Whether the work depicts/describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory functions[2] specifically defined by applicable state law, Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value." from Wikipedia, source of all knowledge. So....are you seriously implying at Max Hardcore's pornography isn't patently offensive? Or that it has some redeeming literary or political value? His pornography, love it or hate it, is hardcore shit that would be patently offensive to the vast majority of people. I'm more than moderately kinky and I like to think I'm pretty open-minded, but the extreme humiliation in his videos Is Meant To Be Offensive! Max Hardcore WANTS it to be offensive. So, prong 2 is a moot point. Dude-porn doesn't really have any redeeming value. Max Hardcore doesn't make attempts at plot beyond "So we found/kidnapped/have this girl, and we're gonna do weird shit to her....". The reason the case focuses on the first prong is because the other two can be dismissed out of hand by a reasonable person. Yes, I'm sure there are people on the message boards who will disagree. Perhaps you find a woman sobbing about how she was going to "be somebody" while men take turns urinating on her to be artisticly beautiful. Probably that isn't patently offensive with you. However, you aren't the average reasonable person. No matter how kinky you may be, the fact that you're on CM indicates you're at least relatively interested or open-minded towards the humiliating, deragatory, excretory acts involved therein. Hungry....your Law & Order knowledge of the legal system doesn't really take into account the legal realities. Lawyering is about wordplay and defining words. The court has to prove that he sent obscene material through the mail. As such, they have to prove a) that it was obscene, b) that it was offensive, and c) that it went through the mail. The obscenity clause is the only one particularly interesting to kinksters, unless they happen to really, really like the mail. As such, it's not surprising that's what we're talking about.

TheHungryTiger -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/11/2008 5:56:18 AM)
quote: So....are you seriously implying at Max Hardcore's pornography isn't patently offensive? Im implying that the whole issue of 'is it or is it not obscene' is a red herring. Something that gets people distracted from the real actual serious dangers that SHOULD be freaking everyone out. I cant believe that its me that is getting accused of 'ignoring the danger'. The secondary libality and invasion of privacy issues that this case brings up are totaly terrorifing. Yet it seems that everyone, media included, is so well practeced and well rehersed in making the 'well, what realy defines obscene' retoric that when these huge problems come along they are totaly unprepared to deal with it so instead fall back in their fimilar old ways. Bread and circuces. When people are kept distracted with nitpicking on semantics they are asleep to the real threat.

TheHungryTiger -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/11/2008 6:23:41 AM)
Theoritical question ..... is it at all posible, for there to ever, in any way, be any court case at all involving a porn company, where the key issue at play was anything at all besides 'what is the definition of obscene'? I can remember at least a dozen actual cases over the pat 10 years where there has been some other element at play. Ranging from money laundering to copyright law to theft to murder. But lets not even deal with that (If I cant convince anyone that their are other dangers involved in the max hardcore case its doubtful I could convince anyone there are other factors involved in those other cases) So lets just talk purely theoritical here. Its a thought experement and Im asking 'is it even within the laws of physics for this to exist'? Is there ANY posible way, at all, for there to ever be, in any situttion, a case involving a porn company where 'what is obscene' isnt the main point? Or is it always the case that just the mean mention of the word 'porn' at any point whatsoever anywhere even remotly related to the case automaticly makes it so that 'what is obscene' is the most critical issue there is? ..... I again come back to my example in the above post. If a porn producer got a trafic ticket, then would 'what is obscene' be the most important aspect of the case?

OneMoreWaste -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/11/2008 5:13:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ExKat Dude-porn doesn't really have any redeeming value. I beg to differ. Masturbation aid = value. Now "Deal or No Deal"... THAT has no value whatsoever [>:]

XFactor2008 -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/12/2008 10:48:10 PM)
[color=#0066ff size=4] [color=#0066ff size=4]Hi everyone, [color=#0066ff size=4] [color=#0066ff size=4]To convict the man of a federal felony for pornography is absolutely ludicrious. The women who chose to participate in his videos do so on a 100% consentual basis. [color=#0066ff size=4] [color=#0066ff size=4]X-Factor

MrRodgers -> RE: Federal Conviction for Hardcore Porn Producer (10/13/2008 5:53:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CalifChick Being hit during an organized sport is not the same as being assaulted. There aren't many sports where being hit is the point. Cali This is incorrect as evidenced by all of the mayhem that occurs in hockey. Where were the crimial charges anywhere near this when a high stick...some of them obvioulsy swung at an opponent with the obvious intent to injure and often cause real permanent and sometimes career-ending injuries ? Some of the most aggregious inujuries in sports is deemed by the courts to be as a result of...consentual conduct. He got bad advice from his attorneys as this case should have been presented to a jury. If it had...I don't think he would have been found guilty. BTW, Max is known in the porn business as a video pimp making the claim that many of his 'stars' are his whores.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875