FSC Meeting

[Vink]

Anyone going to the Free Speech Coalition meeting tomorrow at the Universal Sheradon? I'll be there. Say hi. I look like my avatar.

[Bill]

I hope you'll give us a bit of a report on what happens there.

And thanks very much for keeping an eye on the FSC!

[Vink]

Just got back from the meeting. It was cool. We are so lucky to have these people fighting for us, cause we need it. The sky might not be falling but it's getting mighty loose.
You hardly ever see any talent at the meetings but hot ebony pornstar Vanessa Blue was there, just listening and supporting.
If enough people want a recap of what they talked about let me know and I'll do it.

[Bill]

Vink, I'd very much like to hear a report - sorry I let this post slip by me during the week.

Did they discuss HR4472?

For those of you who aren't following the politics that affect our industry, HR 4472 is a new law, which will almost certainly be signed by Bush in a few days, that attempts to pass as legislation a much stricter set of rules that will work pretty much like the worst of the 2257 changes made by Gonzales last year.

Nobody seems really sure exactly what HR4472 is going to mean for us - what I have read of it's language seems deliberately obscure.

It's attack legislation, aimed right at our heads. While we twiddle our thumbs, 2257 and it's more dangerous cousin 4472 are coming back for us.

"For instance, H.R. 4472 adds producers of any "digital image" or "digitally- or computer-manipulated image of an actual human being" to the list in subsection (a) of §2257 of those who must keep records of performers of "actual sexually explicit conduct" and index them, while another section adds a §2257 labeling requirement, already mandatory for every magazine, videotape and DVD containing sexually-explicit matter, for "every page of a website on which matter described in subsection (a) appears."

http://www.avnonline.com/index.php?P...tent_ID=272347

[DJilla]

Bill,

Quoting you from an earlier post I think that this is the far more ominous paragraph:

Amends the federal criminal code to: (1) establish recordkeeping requirements for the production of matter containing simulated sexually explicit conduct; and (2) prohibit the production, with the intent to transport in interstate commerce, of obscene matter. "

#2 is the time tested fed trick of making something illegal on the basis of interstate transport. When you combine the nebulous term of "obscene" with the modern method of transport (the net) you get a whole new swamp of legal wrangling that could take things back to 50's

[tickler]

I see Hollywood is getting mirror legislation that exempts them from 2257. Wouldn't want them to lose out on those million dollar production location grants.

One good point about the Hollywood stuff, is that it tries to create two forms of protected speech. I remember Roberts answering during the hearings that using different classes of free speech wouldn't fly.