So I just got back from the FSC meeting...
 

I know Bill and a few others had asked about the FSC meeting in Woodland Hills...I just got back from it. Those meeting are always very interesting becasue it is pretty much ground zero of what this industry is doing to ward off the many threats against us.

Among the topics discussed is Utah spam bill (should be called "scam" bill -- this really will not effect many here unless they mail), the Atlanta Court of Appeals CP ruling, dot xxx, the porn tax, political activism, and (of course) 2257 -- which is a long way from being over.

If anyone has any questions about what was said...post them here and I will tell you what I heard. I was there for the whole meeting and had a good chance to chat with the board members and layers before and after the even.

So, post you questyion if you are curious about anything.

None of you guys freak out or anything...I'm not suggesting anyone send them any money or anything, so calm down - let's not turn this into another flame.

Was wondering about that myself...seems like a lot of webmasters slipped back into the comfortably numb phase of doing business as usual...seems to happen when the threat is pushed aside for a bit. If there's anything new in that area I'd be interested in hearing it.

ok, i'd like to know why, despite assurances, none of them have bothered to come back and address or even update those of us here.

and why, after being challenged to "go public" and sending personal email, not even an email was sent to announce this meeting.

I agree. I remember when you could look at the board and there was nothing but 2257 threads.

2257 has a temporary injunction (restraining order) against the "secondary producer" verbage in 2257 for FSC members. It is unlikely the feds will do anything to any secondary producer while the law is enjoined, but technicly the injuction just covers FSC memebers.

Menwhile, Congress is now attepting to re-write 2257 again and include secondary producers in the new draft. The new 2257 draft is going to be expanded to include mere nudity (including R rated films). If they do push it through the current 2257 injunction will be moot and the whole litigation will have to start over again.

I got an email weeks ago.

Funny.. now that you mention it, I didn't get an email either. I'll have to look into that bullshit. Anyways I'm sure all the right questons will get asked here so I'll just wait.

But thanks for being such a soilder as to come right back after a long meeting and posting! |waves|

You might want to check your spam box...I noticed my FSC emails were getting flagged as spam too.

Well, I could bombard you with questions, but lets deal with one or two at a time...

Did they talk about money much? What do you think they are planning to spend the bulk of their money on the rest of this year?

How much did they mention or talk about the online sector?

Who were the most interesting people there, and by interesting I mean of use to the online sector and with enough juice to exert some influence?

Not at all.

No.

Yes. There were actually more online people than video people at the meeting. Slowly, I think they are getting the message.

The lawyers are always the best. They had like 3 of them. One guy was doing the Utah litigation. Jeffery Douglas was supposed to speak, but he was in jail...apperently, there was a riot in the county jail (where he was visiting a client), they locked the whole thing down, and he got stuck in there.

He's really an amazing guy. Very intelligent, loves to stand up to the goverment, seems to be into it for the right reasons, and doesn't seem than concerned with money.

I had the pleasure of meeting Jeffery Douglas at a Cybererotica meeting and you are right...he knows what's what.

Yep, I am pretty much in awe of the guy. He's easily one of the smartest guys I've ever met.

I got at least one email about the meeting and I think it was mentioned in a couple of the news letters, which I read every week.

Other then knowing that congress is working on it, did they have additional information about it such as what secondary requirements might be and where it currently stands? I always like to be prepared.

I went to the meeting also.
Jay if I knew what you looked like I would have introduced myself.
I got to meet my new hero, Dave Cummings. What a cool guy.
The FSC is really busting their ass for this industry, and we need it.
As an industry and as people we will always be under attack from crazy Christians and politicians that want to stand for so called family values.
It is really up to us to take action in the up coming elections. State, local and national all matter. In the meeting last night Michelle said they are going to make up a score card for everyone running for office telling how they voted on the issues in the past.
Michelle also said they are redoing their website and it should be up in a few weeks.
I would write more but I got to get my submissions in.

They are not done with the whole secondary producer arguement. The goverment know that porn is constitutionaly protected speech, so their best way to try to shut us down is by burnening us to the point where we have to shut down. Getting secondary producer through is key to that.

They haven't given up yet.

Okay, here's the next batch...

Did they hand out any documents? If they did, what did the documents say?

Who chaired the meeting? Who seemed to be the primary political organizer of the meeting itself?

You mentioned some issues they discussed - can you rank them in order of importance _from their point of view_. (What do you think _they_ were saying was the most important issue, the next most important issue, and so on.)

This last thing I want to mention is a comment, not a question. If they weren't talking about money, then it seems to me that it was more of a public relations meeting than an organizational meeting. I wonder how we could get into one of the organizational meetings?

Vink, when you get your submission done, come back and give us more impressions.

For instance, did you get a sense of what the changes in the new website would be?

Just a letter to iCann opposing dot xxx. You can get a copy on thier websites and it tells you where to send it.

LOL - I forgot here name, but I'm really bad with names..might want to ask ving.

It was just a meeting.

I would say 2257 was considered the most important becasue they saved it for last and spent the most time on it. Then dot xxx, the Utah deal I would guess.

Become a board member or donate a bunch of time I would guess. Worldwidecontent will have the entire meeting posted on their site.

What is the proposed duration of the 2257 re-write in the house? 2 years? 4 years? or more?

Does the re-write include literature? I heard about an attempt to ban anything even "simulated" to be under 18. I suppose some bottom feeder will eventually attempt to ban even words|shocking|

Is there a consensus as to the proposed remedy for our current predicament? previous rulings that may shed light on the matter?

Who knows...this is the goverment...there is a lot of beuracratic shit involved, so it could take forever. I think they have gone way overboard and this could be the downfall of the law in the end. Especially if Hollywood gets involved, becasue the 2257 would be thier problem as well.

Would $100s of millions of dollars do it.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr..._id=1001265009
"The 2257 provision also has ramifications beyond the artistic as a federal tax provision designed to stem runaway production is unavailable to anyone required to register a 2257. Many state incentives designed to entice filmmakers to shoot on location also contain similar language."