Quote:
Originally posted by lassiter
Maybe so. Two issues here then.
1.) Will a court , as with COPA, issue an injunction against enforcement of this new regulation pending a final decision?
(Plus, to get that injunction, someone with "legal standing" will have to spend some serious $$$ to file that privacy case - meaning a porn model with very deep pockets. How likely is that, I wonder?)
2.) Since this is merely a "regulation" and not an actual congressionally-passed law, does that change the degree of interest the courts might have in issuing an injunction? By that I mean, if the law that gave the Justice Dept. this regulatory authority in the first place is considered constitutional and valid, then I'm thinking that a regulation issued under that law may well be considered prima facie valid as well.
I sure hope we as an industry can come up with some way to fight this trend. Ashcroft & company sound like they've figured out that they can simply hyper-regulate us all out of business without even having to deal with the swamp of 1st amendment and obscenity issues. If the industry can no longer hire models because of privacy and security issues, then even the guys who are crowing now about how this will help "get rid of the unprofessional newbies" etc. are gonna be out of business too. |goodnight
|
The models privacy is a very valid point and needs to be challenged. If buying a $50 set of Jenna Jameson gets the buyer her home address and contact details this will put her in danger and I'm not sure if Ashcroft has considered this.
You need to go to the site and register these thoughts, I will so you do it as well.
As for a webmasters privacy, well that will not cut it I'm afraid, they will tell you to get the porn business out of your home IMHO.