ACLJ has filed an amicus on behalf of itself and 23 Republican pols

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), the legal group established by evangelist Pat Robertson as an "answer" to the American Civil Liberties Union, has filed an amicus brief on behalf of itself and 23 Republican congressional representatives opposing the Free Speech Coalition's lawsuit to declare the federal record-keeping and labeling law unconstitutional. Included among the amici are such outspoken critics of the adult industry as Mike Pence and Joe Pitts, both of whom appeared at 2005's "Victims of Pornography Summit" held in the Congress' Rayburn House Office Building, as well as such die-hard conservatives as Dan Burton, Randy Forbes, Phil Gingrey, Louie Gohmert, Steve King and Todd Tiahrt.

The ACLJ's 18-page brief—authored by ACLJ chief counsel Jay Alan Sekulow and Laura B. Hernandez, whose office address is Robertson's Regent University, as well as Lancaster, Pa.-based attorney James B. Clymer—takes as its main theme the claim that "the age verification requirements of 18 U.S.C. §§2257 and 2257A pose no threat to Plaintiffs' First Amendment rights." The brief draws heavily from two earlier 2257 decisions, American Library Assn. v. Reno, the original 2257 suit decided by the District of Columbia Circuit in 1994, and the more recent en banc Sixth Circuit ruling in Connection Distributing v. Holder, which overturned a Sixth Circuit panel's finding that 2257 was constitutionally overbroad. (All of that panel's judges filed strong dissents to the en banc panel's ruling.)

The ACLJ brief begins by claiming that 2257 and 2257A are "pointedly tailored to eradicate the exploitation of minors in the pornography industry," although in fact nothing in either law would prevent a minor with an authentic-looking photo ID from performing in adult movies.

"The Supreme Court has stressed that the 'narrowly tailored' requirement does not require the state to choose the least-restrictive means or even the most appropriate means of achieving its objective," the brief claims. "Rather, the state must merely avoid choosing means that 'burden substantially more speech than necessary to further the government’s legitimate interests.'" [Emphasis in original; citations removed here and below]

Indeed, the ACLJ claims that 2257 and 2257A don't burden any speech at all.

"The age verification and record-keeping provisions of sections 2257 and 2257A merely require plaintiffs to verify that they are not using minors to produce sexually explicit materials," Sekulow and his associates write. "Plaintiffs concede that the use of minors in sexually explicit materials constitutes child pornography. Thus, the only 'speech' that sections 2257 and 2257A impact is child pornography."

The amici claim is at best disingenuous, if it doesn't betray outright ignorance of adult industry practices. The records required to be kept by the adult industry, as well as indexed and made ready for inspection, are all of adult performers, and if there have been any underage performers found in the records of the 26 companies the FBI has inspected over the past three years, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has yet to identify even one.

Yet despite the fact that no minors have been found through 2257 record inspections, and despite the fact that adult producers are not required by 2257 or 2257A to be expert enough to distinguish a real adult photo ID from a good forgery, the ACLJ passes off the multimillion-dollar expense of keeping and indexing the records as "no more constitutionally significant than numerous other age verification and record-keeping requirements imposed under federal law ... governing employer/employee relations."

Notably, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, in its amicus brief in support of FSC's lawsuit, calculates that using a third-party record-keeper to maintain one single 2257 record for the seven years required under the law would cost $1186.80—and there are literally hundreds of thousands if not millions of such records required to be kept.

The ACLJ compares 2257's record-keeping requirements as not significantly different than those imposed on any other business which keeps records to comply to employment, immigration or tax laws, but leaving aside the question of whether adult performers are employees or independent contractors, the difference between 2257 records and those kept by employers in other businesses—even businesses subject to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, which ACLJ references—is that unlike mainstream employers, the failure of an adult producer to abide by 2257 regulations exposes that person to five years in federal prison and tens of thousands of dollars in fines for each violation.

The ACLJ also claims that the 2257 lawsuit plaintiffs are foreclosed from relief under the First and Fourth Amendments because the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in California Bankers Ass'n. v. Schultz upheld a federal law requiring identificatiion and record-keeping requirements "where such information was necessary to avert criminal activity." Trouble is, making an adult movie isn't a "criminal activity"; it's a form of constitutionally protected speech creation—and the ACLJ's claim that 2257 records, like those required to be kept by bankers, have "a high degree of usefulness in criminal, tax, or regulatory investigations or proceedings" is just nonsense: The 2257 and 2257A laws don't even require the kept records to be authentic! And that's beside the fact that all adult producers realize that if they were to use an underage performer in one of their productions, they could be prosecuted under the child pornography laws, and that all copies of the production would have to be recalled and destroyed at great expense to the producer.

Simply put, the ACLJ brief is a crock, and U.S. District Judge Michael Baylson, who is presiding over FSC's lawsuit, should simply ignore it.

New law would force artists to pay for the classification of images involving nude children

SYDNEY—Australia is said to have been settled by convicts from England, which might explain why it seems hell-bent upon treating its people as if they are criminals first and citizens second. A Western democracy apparently in name only, the Down Under continent has now turned a despotic corner in its war against sex, and is planning on forcing artists who create images of nude children to pay a fee of $500 per image to have them classified by the government as genuine art and not child pornography.

The removal of the so-called “artistic purpose defense” is one part of across-the-board changes to child pornography laws announced Monday by Attorney-General John Hatzistergos that were spurred nearly two years ago by the case of artist Bill Henson, whose photo exhibit featuring images of naked children sparked intense debate throughout the country. Despite being later approved by the classification board, the case highlighted the need for more clarity with respect to images of child sexual abuse.

"The new definition will encompass what is termed child abuse material," said Hatzistergos. "That means it covers depictions that reasonable persons would, in all the circumstances, regard offensive."

Those depictions, he said, would include "where the person is a child who is a victim [of] cruelty, physical abuse, the child is engaged or is apparently engaged in a sexual pose or sexual activity." It also will apply when the child is in the presence of someone engaging in any of these activities or "where the private parts of the person [who] appears to be a child are shown."

According to Tamara Winikoff, executive director of the National Association for Visual Arts, artists are helping develop ''protective protocols so that art experts are consulted and can advise on whether the material had been produced by a genuine artist.”

''While the removal of artistic merit may seem to make artists more vulnerable to constraints on their freedom of expression, police and the ODPP need to establish the material in question is such that a reasonable person would find it offensive in all the circumstances,'' she said.

Not everyone is pleased with the proposed new restrictions. The Sydney Morning Herald cites the case of artist Polixeni Papapetrou, whose photograph of her 6-year-old daughter on the cover of Art Monthly created a storm of controversy last year.

''I think they're barking up the wrong tree,” she told the paper. “I really think they should be going after those people who exploit children. I don't know of any artists who exploit children and if they do they should not be protected by any legal defense.”

According to the Herald, the “artistic purpose defense” has been attempted only once, by a child pornographer—unsuccessfully.

Staying true to its origins, however, the Australian government has not allowed that niggling fact to prevent it from taking a decisive lead in the World Censorship Olympics.

OpenNet Initiative tested Bing in Jordan, Algeria, Syria and the United Arab Emirates

MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif.—Bing is following in Google’s footsteps in more ways than one. A new report by the OpenNet Initiative (ONI) reveals that the Microsoft search engine is filtering search results in the Middle East. What’s more, ONI says Bing is censoring results more heavily than the countries themselves. Considering that the regimes in question are some of the most restrictive in the world, that’s saying a lot.

“We manually tested the search engine using a set of 100 Arabic keywords and a set of 60 English keywords that would yield results in various content categories, including sex, nudity, dating and escort services, LGBT content, violence and terrorism, politically sensitive content, minority and religious rights, and women’s rights,” ONI reported. “The Arabic keywords tested included classical Arabic terms and various alternatives from different Arabic dialects.”

Testing was conducted between Jan. 2-15, 2010, in four Arab countries chosen for their different levels of Internet censorship. They included the United Arab Emirates (substantial political filtering and pervasive social filtering), Syria (pervasive political filtering and selective social filtering), Algeria (no evidence of filtering), and Jordan (selective political filtering and no evidence of social filtering).

In-country testing resulted in the following:

* Bing filters out Arabic keywords that may return sexually explicit content. Examples of the Arabic keywords found filtered include Arabic terms for “sex,” “porn,” “intercourse,” “breast” and “nude.”

* Bing filters out Arabic keywords that could yield web sites containing LGBT content. Arabic keywords found filtered include terms for words such as “gay,” “lesbian” and “homosexuality.”

* Bing filters out keywords in various sex-related categories. Examples include Arabic terms for “prostitution,” “whore” and “sadism.”

* Bing filters out English keywords that could yield sexually explicit Web sites. The keywords include “porn,” “sex,” “fuck,” “penis” (but not “vagina”), “sodomy,” “homo,” “sexual,” “sexy,” “clitoris” and “anal.”

* Bing filters out English keywords such as “gay,” “lesbian,” “homosexual” and “queer” when searching for images; however, using these words to search for web sites is permitted.

* Attempts to use any of the filtered keywords generates a message in Arabic or English (depending on the interface used) that reads, “Your country or region requires a strict Bing SafeSearch setting, which filters out results that might return adult content.”

“Microsoft’s declared aim from this type of censorship is to filter out ‘results that might return adult content,’” the ONI report states. “However, filtering at the keyword level results in overblocking, as banning the use of certain keywords to search for web sites, not just images, prevents users from accessing—based on Microsoft’s definition of objectionable content—legitimate content such as sex education and encyclopedic information about homosexuality.”

The report also found that Bing censors results more aggressively than some of the countries themselves.

“It is interesting that Microsoft’s implementation of this type of wholesale social content censorship for the entire ‘Arabian countries’ region is in fact not being practiced by many of the Arab government censors themselves,” the report noted. “That is, although political filtering is widespread in the MENA region, social filtering, including keyword filtering, is not practiced by all countries in MENA. ONI 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 testing and research found no evidence of social content filtering (e.g., sex, nudity, and homosexuality) at the national level in countries such as Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Libya.”

The report did find, however, that IP-geolocation restrictions were not being applied, meaning that “if a user physically located in an Arab country chooses to use an uncensored version of Bing tailored to another country (e.g., USA or UK), he/she will not experience any keyword filtering even if he/she uses a keywords filtered by Bing for ‘Arabian countries.’”

Ironically, Google, which has been battling, and conceding to, internet censors in China for years, does not engage in the same type of filtering in Arabic-speaking countries. It also is unclear, the report concludes, whether Bing is “acting at the behest of local officials, interpreting local law, seeking to preempt future regulation or attempting to position the company as a good corporate citizen.”

The complete report is available here.

Raul Cristian to direct first sex scene on March 19

LOS ANGELES—Let the Pussy Show begin.

Raul Cristian, the AVN award-winning producer/director, and his company Cruel Media on March 19 will launch an innovative new site called LiveGonzo.com, which features the top shooters and stars in adult entertainment performing real-time, interactive sex scenes.

No cuts, no editing, just raw, hardcore sex.

The concept of LiveGonzo.com is “to take the porn fan where he has never gone before.” According to Cristian, one of the inspirations for LiveGonzo.com is to provide the fans with original content that they will not find on the tube sites.

“Here everything is live in that moment and you will not see anywhere else,” he said. “That was my purpose to try to compete with all those sites and get the attention of the people who spend so much time on the tube sites. This is something very unique.”

Cristian will personally direct the first LiveGonzo.com shoot that features Eva Angelina taking on David Perry and Steve Holmes at 2 p.m. PST on March 19. All three stars are AVN award-winning performers.

Aside from the live element, another attractive draw of LiveGonzo.com is the profile and reputation of the directors and talent that Cruel Media intends to showcase. Among the directors Cristian has already confirmed to shoot are John Stagliano, Manuel Ferrara, Jake Malone, Jonni Darkko, Jay Sin, Chris Streams, Andrew Youngman and Clara G. Cristian said his site will give fans their first opportunity to really see how these and other well-established directors work. The special “chat” option will give fans a chance to feel as they are part of the production, offering real-time feedback and advice to the director.

Cristian has been working on the grand launch for several months, assembling the right team of people, using the technology and gauging the interest of directors, performers and the public. Now he is eager to show it to the world.

“The feeling is that I am very excited about this but it’s a mix. I’m a little bit worried too... let me tell you the truth. Because in this business right now on the internet there is nothing for sure,” Cristian told AVN. “I really know I invent a business model that is brand new because nobody did this for sure, having partners direct and partners star and offering the content to many websites. That’s what is original about LiveGonzo.

“We didn’t invent streaming for internet and we didn’t invent the affiliate model but what we did invent is the business model to put the fan the closest to the main directors. And every day I get a reply that everybody wants to try.”

Cristian told AVN that the services of LiveGonzo.com can be integrated into any site “which seeks to establish a distance between itself and what we know today as the normal porn watching experience.”

He is teaming with sites by offering them a choice to use the CruelBucks.com billing system or their own system. LiveGonzo.com is also collaborating with producers and porn stars by offering them the opportunity to make money while they are shooting their own projects. If the producer or star is located in the LiveGonzo broadcasting area (Los Angeles), Cruel Media can facilitate a live broadcast on all their partner sites, provide a free location, technical support and offer a percentage of the net income generated. If a producer is located outside of LA, LiveGonzo.com has some alternative solutions.

Several prominent sites have already agreed to integrate with LiveGonzo.com, which delivers custom designs for all their partners. The confirmed sites include EvilAngel.com, Buttman.com, RoccoSiffredi.com, PeterNorth.com, FreeOnes.com, DevilsFilm.com, Clara-G.com, AssTitans.com and the PerfectGonzo.com network which includes 10 sites.

Cristian’s production company is a three-time winner of the AVN award for Best Internal Release. This year his Cruel Media/Jules Jordan production All Internal 9 earned the honor. And he added Best Director-Foreign Non-Feature to his resume in January for the Cruel Media/Evil Angel release Ass Traffic 6.

He tested the market and technology for the LiveGonzo.com service by broadcasting several live shoots on Clara-G.com and AssTitans.com in late 2009. Those scenes are now part of the LiveGonzo database. 

“I did very aggressive marketing and market testing for this, first to all customers and all the people who were on chats on our previous scenes. They were thrilled and told us it was such a good experience and a new experience. All the people who were online really love it and the producers think it is something new and they can be really close to the fan. It’s very difficult to shoot live but it can be very fun,” Cristian explained.

He added, “And the producer finally gets an offer where they can be a partner and get a cut.”

The confirmed LiveGonzo.com shooting schedule also includes Jay Sin directing a scene on March 21; Youngman shooting Sandy and Chayse Evans on March 22; and Cristian calling shots for Tori Black’s encounter with Erik Everhard and David Perry on April 6.

Cristian said he is also broadcasting LiveGonzo.com from Japan, where is he is working with the producer Baba.

“Baba is the name of the most successful producer over there,” Cristian said. “He will broadcast from Tokyo. We already sent him the specs for the computer, so definitely he is in. So we will broadcast from Tokyo and as soon we set up their system.”

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The National Sleep Foundation (NSF), a nonprofit that works to improve public health and safety by studying sleep and sleep disorders, has conducted a survey to assess the differing sleep habits among ethnic groups. In the process, they found that about a quarter of all people who are married or living with someone are so sleep-deprived that it is interfering with their sex lives.

Among married people or couples living together, all ethnic groups report being too tired for sex frequently (21-26 percent of the time).

"As the leading voice of sleep health, we are committed to better understanding people's sleep needs," says David Cloud, CEO of the National Sleep Foundation. "By exploring ethnic and family sleep practices we have gained new insight into why we sleep the way we do."

While not speculated upon in the survey, fallout from the rise in sex deprivation due to lack of sleep could include more time spent watching porn. Could it not also be that some partners blame the porn when it could just be a less time-consuming and energy-draining way to take care of business? In other words, maybe porn actually would serve a very useful purpose in situations like this, as long as any partner who is left out of the equation doesn't take it as personally.

SAN FRANCISCO—Pornstud, a Falcon Studios directors’ cut released Monday, takes the sensibilities and basic storyline from the mainstream flick Boogie Nights, adds hardcore gay sex and dumps viewers into the middle of the 1970s.

The DVD features never-before-released, controversial footage directed by Al Parker and John Rutherford. Classic scenes include pairings in the john, in the bed of a pickup truck and inside a sex club. The performers— Bo, brothers Joe and Tony Markum, Big John, Tom Cline, Big Ben, Ken Orsini, Kyle Becker and Mike Branson—sport equipment in the 11-13-inches range.

“Pornstud is definitely retro porn,” said Pulse Distribution Vice President of Sales Janet Tamborelli. “There are black guys with afros, blond surfer boys and a shower scene. They just don’t make porn like this anymore. Plus, these guys are really hung, and it’s definitely not just camera angles.

“This DVD has a lot going for it, and I’m sure it will be a must-have for porn collectors and guys curious about how porn looked like in the ’70s,” she added.

For more information about Pornstud and other Falcon titles, visit FalconStudios.com. For wholesale information, visit PulseDistribution.com.

Adjustable harness crafted from leather

LOS ANGELES—The highly anticipated Adjustable Strap On Dildo Harness from Kinklab is now ready for distribution, giving women a comfortable new way to bring pleasure to their partner.

The sexy and sophisticated harness features a flattering low-rise design that fits around the hips, not the waist, with genuine garment leather straps that are strong yet soft against bare skin.

The wholesale price of the harness is $32.98 (UPC 844915090905, Item KL904) and MSRP is $65.95. Distributor pricing is offered on 12-piece case quantities; contact Layla Ross at (213) 484-3882 or write to info@kinklab.com for more information.

The Adjustable Strap On Dildo Harness will be available worldwide through quality adult distributors carrying this and other items in the Kinklab beginner bondage line. BDSM giant Stockroom Inc. created the Kinklab brand with the needs of both novice players and mainstream adult distributors and retailers in mind. Kinklab specializes in high-quality yet reasonably-priced products, tastefully packaged for the discerning, sexually adventurous adult.

Even more experienced strap-on users may not be aware that the difference between harnesses that adjust with buckles and those that adjust with D-rings is more than just aesthetic.

“There’s a functional distinction between buckles and D-rings when it comes to strap-on harnesses,” said Stockroom Brand Manager and Product Educator Ann-Marie Holman. “The more securely the harness can stay in place without twisting or pulling away from the body, the more confident the wearer feels, and the more directly the motion of her body translates to the motion of the dildo – which feels more exciting and more natural to the partner on the receiving end.”

Buckles, Holman explained, also hold straps firmly so that they stay exactly as placed. But D-rings – through which the straps slide to make adjustments—allow the wearer to adjust the fit far more quickly than buckles can.

“Since the most secure fit and placement of the harness depends on the position of the wearer’s body, the D-rings let a woman easily readjust and rearrange her harness as she and her partner switch positions, without interrupting the action,” Holman said.

Another advantage of the D-ring model for retailers is that one size more truly fits all – the size range on this new harness, 33.5-50 inches (85-127 cm), spans a slightly larger range of hip sizes than the Regular and Full Curves sizes of the current Kinklab harness with buckles taken together. 

Holman added, “The leather straps of the new model are doubled and stitched for strength, so you can be as energetic as you like. Another advantage is that the rear straps leave cheeks bare so you can be fully available to your partner.” 

The three O-rings of the harness are made of synthetic nitrile rubber that is safe for most people with allergies to natural latex.  The O-ring sizes [1.5 inches (3.8 cm), 1.75 inches (4.4 cm), and 2 inches (5 cm)] are designed to fit strap-on compatible dildos from most manufacturers. The O-rings snap out with small tabs, making it easy to switch out different-size attachments.

For more information, visit Kinklab.com.

‘The Daily Princetonian’ editorial board denounces the screening, saying porn is ‘not designed to communicate, persuade or express’

PRINCETON, N.J.—A simmering campus controversy is dogging the decision by Princeton University’s student government body (USG) to grant $1,500 to a student group called Let’s Talk Sex (LeTS), which plans to schedule an event during the current semester that includes the screening of clips from pornographic films followed by a discussion with a porn industry director or actor.

The money was granted during a USG meeting Feb. 21. By March 2, students opposed to the screening had organized an online petition, which has since garnered 236 signatures. According to a March 6 article in The Daily Princetonian, “A sizable number of the signatories, however, are Princeton alumni or individuals not affiliated with the University.” The article says that Anscombe Society President Shivani Radhakrishnan, who also is a member of The Daily Princetonian editorial board, started the petition.

“Pornography portrays women as objects of sexual desire and normalizes this objectification,” said Radhakrishnan. “In addition to these social costs, there are health costs [like] addiction.”

LeTS president Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux said the screening, which was approved by a majority vote of the USG Senate, will take place. “We’re still in the planning stages, and we will release more information about the exact nature of the event when we know what the date will be,” she said.

According to USG president Michael Yaroshefsky, there was nothing unusual about the LeTS event request or the approval process that followed.

“A disbursement of over $1,000, it must also be approved by a majority vote of the USG Senate,” he said. "Before coming before the Senate, this funding was vetted by the Projects Board and found to be eligible for funding.”

Monday, however, The Daily Princetonian editorial board published an editorial that argued against using USG funds to screen porn clips, even if there is a discussion afterwards. Radhakrishnan recused herself from voting on the editorial.

The complete text follows:

The majority correctly argues that the University is a place for intellectual inquiry. To that end, it should foster speech that is intended to be a part of intellectual and artistic expression. Several issues arise, however, in airing pornography as part of any presentation meant to foster discussion. In terms of its pertinence to the presentation, pornography is not designed to communicate, persuade or express—it is intended to cause sexual arousal. As such, the screening of the pornography, while providing a visual aid to the speaker, is not necessary for the sake of the talk. It serves merely as a presentational tool. But such utility must be weighed against the larger concern that arises from the screening.

Many of the opponents of pornography find not only its production and existence but also the act of watching pornographic images to be deeply problematic and immoral. Whether or not such convictions and beliefs arise from moral inclination, the screening of pornography prevents many opponents from attending the event. They literally cannot watch the pornography, even in the context of the lecture, for that act of viewing pornographic images is itself immoral.

The addition of pornography to this lecture thus actually undermines its central goal—to foster dialogue. No matter the potential artistic merit or presentational benefit provided by airing pornography, this screening all but prevents its opponents from attending. It undermines both the University and Let’s Talk Sex’s goal of encouraging dialogue, and for that reason, it should be prevented.

Cases related to child pornography showed the largest increase

TOKYO—Japan’s national police agency has reported a marked increase in the amount of cyber-crime committed in 2009. With crime up almost 6 percent over 2008, police said they took some sort of official action, including arrests, in 6,690 cases during the year. The numbers are the highest on record since data was first collected in 2000.

The largest number of cases was for child pornography, which nearly doubled to 507, police said. Cases concerning the illegal access of bank websites and other database breaches jumped to 2,534 cases, surging by more than 45 percent and setting another record.

Cases of copyright infringements also rose by more than 30 percent, to 188 cases, but online auctions fraud, which had presented a serious problem, fell by 54 percent to 522 cases after major sites such as Rakuten and Yahoo improved their settlement systems. They now prevent sellers from being paid before goods are delivered.

Problem vids would contain ‘sexually explicit image or performance that objectifies or exploits its subjects by eroticizing domination, degradation, or violence’

ST.PAUL, MINN—Minnesota Sen. Tarryl Clark (D-St. Cloud) has introduced a bill to prevent state employees from spending state funds at hotels or meeting rooms in the state that offer guests adult videos that are deemed too violent. The language of the legislation, which was introduced in February, is somewhat vague on what constitutes restricted content, however.

“State employees, constitutional officers, and members of the legislature may not use public funds to pay for the cost of lodging, training, meeting, or any other use of a facility that makes pornographic images or performances available to its patrons,” reads S.F. No. 2861. “This section does not apply when a compliant facility is not reasonably available and a written explanation of that circumstance is maintained with the record of payment. For the purposes of this section, ‘pornographic image or performance’ means a sexually explicit image or performance that objectifies or exploits its subjects by eroticizing domination, degradation, or violence.”

The state’s Department of Administration would maintain a directory of approved facilities to help employees plan travel. If passed, the law would go into effect July 1, 2010.

The bill does not determine exactly how films will be categorized, or by whom, or whether funds will be set aside to hire people to screen each adult video available in hotels throughout the state. (AVN can help with that!) Because one woman’s degradation is another’s turn-on, it also seems as if the law would need to take into account the subjective nature of sexuality if it has any chance of success.

Of course, if domination is off the table, the law could result in a severe spike in divorces, since most married couples require erotic domination on the side to stay married. But the senator works in politics and should know this better than anyone.

It also remains to be seen whether the hotels on the sanctioned list even want to be included on it, especially if their competitors not on the list—you know, the ones with the good porn—are suddenly filled to capacity.

Amicus brief speaks of the ease of tech sex

PHILADELPHIA—In the modern age of digital cameras, cell phones and the internet, sometimes it's easy to lose sight of how far sexual content has come, and how ubiquitous it's become, since Congress passed its first version of 18 U.S.C. §2257, the federal recordkeeping and labeling law, in the late 1980s.

Fortunately, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) remembers.

"At some point in the past, the kind of sexual content that Section 2257 regulates may not have been typically created by the average American," the introduction to EFF's amicus brief in support of Free Speech Coalition's anti-2257 lawsuit states. "But times have changed, with respect to both social mores and technical abilities.  Digital cameras and videocameras and the Internet have combined to make it easy and inexpensive for people to take photos and videos of themselves while nude or in sexual situations and to share those images with others ina wide variety of ways."

As the brief's authors—EFF's Matthew Zimmerman and prominent Philadelphia atorneys Carl A. Solano and Edward J. Sholinsky—point out, nearly two-thirds of Americans now own digital cameras, more than a third own video cameras, and nearly three-fifths use their cell phones to take and share digital pictures—any of which can be used to create sexual content. What's more, about three-quarters of all Americans can now access the internet, and about a third of them haved posted content online.

And what that means, according to the EFF brief, is that the "millions of adults [who] exchange or share personally-produced sexually-explicit depictions" are now subject to all the onerous requirements of the 2257 regulations, including a vast but incalcuable number who "merely take sexual photos or videos of themselves in the privacy of their own homes."

And what that means is, "Section 2257’s record-keeping, labeling, and inspection requirements infringe the rights of individuals to participate in anonymous expression, a problem of expanding scope as more and more individuals utilize what are increasingly ubiquitous communications technologies," the EFF attorneys charge.

The brief goes on to summarize some of the legal and social precedent involving protections for anonymous speech, noting, "Courts have long recognized protection under the First Amendment for the right to engage in anonymous communication—to communicate, listen, and/or associate anonymously—as fundamental to a free society. The U.S. Supreme Court has consistently upheld the right to speak anonymously in a variety of contexts, noting that '[a]nonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority ... [that] exemplifies the purpose [of the First Amendment] to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation ... at the hand of an intolerant society.' ... Adult sexual communications, if not obscene, enjoy First Amendment protection for all the reasons that animate the right to anonymity."

The EFF brief argues that, if for no other reason, the "wide [and growing] swath of individuals" creating sexual content, who would therefore be subject to the more onerous requirements of 2257—such as being available for records inspections for at least 20 hours per week, and revealing the content creator's name and home address for the world to see—the courts should take as "considerable cause to scrutinize the First Amendment impact of this law."

In fact, it is this concern for privacy/anonymity that EFF believes should place the onus on the government to demonstrate that 2257 "furthers a substantial governmental interest while being reasonably tailored to advance that interest" and that the statute protects rather than chills sexual speech.

"The Government asserts that the chilling effect of this regulation is minimal as the statutory scheme 'would only allow the Government—not the public at large—to view identifying information about performers.' This argument ignores the doctrinal underpinnings of the right to speak anonymously," the EFF brief rightly notes. "It also offers no comfort to the growing number of individuals who fall under the scope of these requirements. Neither Section 2257 nor its accompanying regulations impose confidentiality limitations on law enforcement."

That fact has long been of concern to adult performers, who usually ply their craft behind pseudonyms, but is perhaps even more important to the mass of citizens who may wish to contact other individuals and couples for sexual liaisons, but whose attempts to pictorially show their prospective partners what they'll be getting is not the type of disclosure they'd like to see made widely and identifiably available either to their neighbors or to government investigators.

And since the alleged purpose of 2257 is to prevent minors from appearing in sexually explicit content, and since the vast majority of explicit content produced in this country features adults rather than children, the EFF raises the important issue of physical as well as social privacy.

"Section 2257 and its associated regulations further run afoul of the First and Fourth Amendments," the EFF argues, "because they authorize the Government to conduct warrantless searches of the home without probable cause and outside of any valid exception to the warrant requirement. ... The Government denies the problem by asserting that every producer of sexually explicit material is a business subject to warrantless inspection. This response stands the Fourth Amendment and its protection of the home on its head. ... The Government cannot, by regulation or legislation, convert Plaintiffs’ homes into businesses to be inspected at the discretion of law enforcement." [Citations removed here and below]

"The Fourth Amendment’s protections cannot be circumvented by sending government agents into the home without warrants for 'limited' inspections of records," the brief continues. "No home would be safe from such record-keeping/inspection schemes. That 'the regulations require the inspector to notify a producer of "the limited nature of the records inspection," and inform the producer of "the records that he or she wishes to inspect,"' and that 'an inspector could conduct such an inspection in the entryway or waiting area of a producer's business,' is meaningless: once in the home, law enforcement will inevitably be privy to many details of household life. ... Indeed, the Government has made plain that inspectors are supposed to collect these intimate details: the '2257 Program Inspection Procedures' posted on the FBI's website indicate that 'as part of the inspection procedure, investigators photograph the exterior of the premises and the interior area of the premises where the records are stored and the area of the premises where the records are examined.'"

The EFF also attacks the government's contention that 2257 inspections are permissible under the Fourth Amendment because they're "administrative" and part and parcel of proper industrial regulation.

"Of particular concern to amicus is the Government's improper invocation of the administrative search doctrine," the brief notes. "Under the doctrine, certain searches of 'closely-regulated industries' are permissible without a warrant when the following conditions are met: (1) a substantial government interest informs the regulatory scheme under which the search is made; (2) the search is necessary to further the regulatory scheme; and (3) the statute’s inspection program is a 'constitutionally adequate substitute for a warrant.'... Section 2257's search regime does not fall under the administrative search exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement.  The obligations and authorized intrusions imposed by Section 2257 target expressive activity. The number of individuals participating in that expressive activity grows everyday, influenced by changes in both technology and social values. Thus the regulations do not map closely (or even remotely) on a 'closely-regulated' industry—or an industry of any kind. They affect ordinary adult Americans with digital cameras and Internet connections.  Burdening their legal expression with these regulations is inconsistent with the doctrinal underpinnings behind the administrative search doctrine and runs afoul of the protections of the Fourth Amendment."

The brief also shoots down the government's contention that because the 2257 requirements are well known to the adult entertainment industry, everyone affected by the law has been put on notice that any explicit (or even simulated) sexual material that it produces will be subject to records inspections.

"Here again, the Government relies on the fiction that these regulations target an 'industry'," EFF argues. "In fact, the regulations target the common First Amendment activity of producing and distributing sexually explicit images—an activity that, today, many individuals lawfully enjoy both in the privacy of their homes and on the Internet, and without any idea that they could belong to any closely regulated 'industry.'"

Finally, the EFF brief takes the government to task for claiming that 2257's authorization for its warrantless searches (and potential seizures) should be upheld until some citizen's privacy has actually been violated, and then the law should be subject to an "as-applied" challenge—a philosophy the amicus brief roundly rejects.

"Here, of course, the regulations plainly authorize official invasion of homes and businesses precisely because they are engaged in protected speech—without judicial supervision, without probable cause, and without exigent circumstances," the EFF argues. "Where, as here, the search invades the home, targets expression, and is not subject to judicial oversight via the warrant requirement, the resulting search violates the First, as well as the Fourth, Amendment... Similar dangers are presented by the record-keeping/warrantless-inspection scheme here, which targets the production and distribution of sexually explicit images. First, while individuals wishing to publish sexually explicit images need not apply for a license to speak, the possibility of warrantless inspections of their homes has clearly caused many of the Plaintiffs to self-censor. This threat requires no inspection at all: it is inherent in the very possibility of warrantless inspections. Second, the regulations here give the Government standardless discretion to conduct warrantless searches of the home aimed at protected expression."

In other words, allowing government inspectors free rein of a person's home simply because they have produced sexually explicit materials, the vast majority of which, it has already been established, are made only by adult with adult "performers," without any definite knowledge on the inspectors' part that children have been involved in the production, clearly violates the individual's Fourth Amendment privacy protections.

In sum, then, the EFF attorneys have wisely concentrated their amicus on the fact that, with the amount of image-producing gadgetry available to the average American in the modern world, 2257 will authorize an ever-increasing level of violation of Americans' privacy rights on the specious assumption that any citizen with a camcorder, webcam or cell phone is recording kids having sex—and as any thinking American understands, that's horseshit ... and constitutionally infirm.

ANTHONY, N.M.—In the U.S. government's war on adult, surely, by now, Paul Little, better known as 'Max Hardcore,' must have earned the title of "First Prisoner." His sentence, even with the small reduction he's bound to get after the 11th Circuit threw out one of the financial criteria Judge Susan C. Bucklew used to increase his sentence under the federal sentencing guidelines, is still far longer than that of any adult industry defendant of the last 20 years.

Recently, Little was moved from the Metropolitan Detention Center in downtown Los Angeles to the La Tuna Federal Prison Camp in a small town on the border of Texas and New Mexico, and it's from there that Little sent the following open letter to the adult industry:

"Dear Friends,

"I hope that you are all doing well when you read this delinquent dispatch, and none of your news is negative. I'm pleased to report that despite my recent legal lashing, I remain in good spirits here at the La Tuna Federal Labor Camp in southern New Mexico—the 'Land of Enchantment.' And while it's never nice to be away from home for so long, at least they are teaching us some valuable skills, such as installing cramped cages into the beds of Border Patrol pick-ups to haul illegal immigrants ... at the rate of $5.25 A MONTH!

"I was distressed to discover, however, that in spite of the epic efforts of my ace attorney H. Louis 'Lou' Sirkin—who was armed with an absolutely awesome appeal he had personally prepared—the jaded justices of the 11th Circuit found fault with his inspired interpretation of the Constitution, and affirmed my conviction of making immoral motion pictures which were too tawdry for the poor people of Tampa, Fla., to tolerate.

"It should be stated here for those who haven't heard that no one from the Tampa area had protested my productions, and that none of these more explicit 'European Version' Videos were promoted for purchase anywhere in America. They were instead ordered by an 'undercover operative' working for the U.S. Justice Department from an international distributor without my knowledge, consent or control. But who's counting?

"Pardon me for a moment, as I have to give up my bottom bunk right now to a former pistol-packing border bandit who claims to have a bad back, the result, no doubt, of carrying all that cannabis he got caught smuggling in from Mexico. My new 'celly' has just arrived to start serving a 19-month sentence (with no fine) for his second conviction of the same crime as part of a plea agreement which was negotiated by a public defender whom he never met in person. Consequently, I now have to move up to the undesirable upper bunk. (I am NOT making this up.)

"As I was saying, I am truly troubled by this disturbing development, of course, as I had hoped that the appellate justices would have exercised a more enlightened understanding in upholding the rights of adult Americans to watch others fornicate on film, even if it is unsavory to some in the more conservative enclaves of the country.

"Equally unsettling is that a jury of my purported peers would be unable to understand the importance of intercourse as a fundamental human function, then sentence me to prison for 46 MONTHS along with a fine of nearly ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS! All because my movies had 'offended' them and somehow violated their mysterious 'community standards,' which are nowhere written down. They don't tolerate that kind of flagrant flouting of the law down in Central Florida, no, sir!

"I should have realized my case was doomed from the get-go, but I failed to see the sign posted on the courtroom door which read: 'FEDERAL REGULATIONS PROHIBIT CRIMINAL DEFENDANTS FROM ACTUALLY WINNING THEIR CASES—ESPECIALLY IF YOU ARE A FILTHY PORNOGRAPHER.' Unfortunately, I had been distracted when my illustrious attorney Lou told me that NOW would be a good time to take out a second mortgage on my home. (Okay; I made some of that up.)

"As a result of this unfortunate oversight, I will now have to serve out the remainder of my sentence, and not be eligible for release until the end of this year—assuming there are no further legal levies placed upon my person.

"In the interim, I'll continue to keep my head held up high, secure in the knowledge that I am NOT a criminal, but the victim of a good old-fashioned mugging. And while it may sound disingenuous to declare, I've always felt that if you never shake up the status quo, then you're not really living life anyway.

"Now if you'll please excuse me, I have to go out and run around the rec yard, so that when I am finally freed from this idiotic incarceration, I'll be fit and ready to be reacquainted with my girlfriend Layla, who is anxiously awaiting my overdue arrival, along with my dutiful dog Sparky.

"That's all for now, but not forever. It just seems that way sometimes. I'm sure we'll have another exciting year observing the bizarre behavior of the radical right and the crazy criminal justice system in their ongoing assaults on our civil liberties. Until the next time, I remain behind bars, for a safer and more secure America.

"If anyone has any questions or comments and would like to contact me, my address is:

"Paul F. Little  #44902-112

"La Tuna FCI

"Post Office Box 3000

"Anthony, NM 88021-9897

"Thank you,

"Paul F. Little AKA Max Hardcore"

Convention scheduled for July 16-18

CHATSWORTH, Calif.—Exxxtacy 2010, which will debut July 16-18 in Chicago, has named AVN the exclusive media sponsor of the event.

Other companies signed to participate are Adam & Eve, MyFreeCams, HotMovies and Misty's XXX Girls. The major show sponsor is Clips4Sale.com. Several prominent adult stars are scheduled to attend the show at the Donald E. Stephens Convention Center.

This year will be the first time since the early 1980s the adult industry will hold a convention in Chicago. Exxxtacy 2010 is produced by Taboo Productions Inc, and presented by Clips4Sale.

Vivid production earns Adult Industry Showcase award

NEW YORK—Tristan Taormino's Rough Sex from Vivid Entertainment was recognized with the Adult Industry Showcase Award at the seventh annual CineKink Film Festival held last month in New York City.

Excerpts from Rough Sex were screened in a showcase of adult industry films titled "Bring It!" Other clips included were from films by Carlos Batts, Madison Young, Courtney Trouble and Dominic Ford.

"I was honored to be included in this showcase with such other terrific filmmakers and now I'm thrilled to get this award as it was determined by audience ballot. It's the type of recognition that directors dream about," said Taormino.

“Rough Sex was also nominated for a 2010 AVN award and named as one of XCritic.com’s 10 Top Adult DVDs of 2009.

CineKink NYC presented a specially curated program of films and videos that celebrate and explore a wide diversity of sexuality. Billing itself as "the kinky film festival," the event ran from Feb. 16-21.  It was presented by CineKink, an organization dedicated to the recognition and encouragement of sex positive and kink friendly depictions in film and television. Works presented at the festival ranged from documentary to drama, comedy to experimental, mildly spicy to quite explicit and everything in between.

Men favor these two stars for virtual sex experience in February

CHARLOTTE, N.C.—RealTouch, the high-tech male pleasure system from leading adult video on demand (VOD) company AEBN, says actresses Jenna Haze and Sasha Grey lead the Top 10 list of women its users most enjoy having virtual sex with in February.

RealTouch (realtouch.com) is the scientifically advanced device that enables men to watch encoded adult movie clips on their computer screens and enjoy virtually the same sensual experiences the male actors do while having sex with the adult actresses.

The selections made by RealTouch owners during the month of February 2010 have now been tabulated and winners are: Jenna Haze, Sasha Grey, Ashlynn Brooke, Bree Olson, Lisa Ann, Alexis Texas, Tori Black, Jenna Jameson, Lexi Belle and Faye Reagan.

The most frequently downloaded movies for Jenna Haze and Sasha Grey were their scenes from Zero Tolerance’s POV Centerfolds series.
 
“This is clearly a snapshot of which girls were most appealing in February. We expect to see some changes in March. Both Joslyn James (alleged ex-Tiger Woods paramour) and Tanner Mayes seem awfully close to breaking through into the top ten at this point,” said Scott Rinaldo, RealTouch product Mmanager.
 
RealTouch was developed by a NASA engineer and uses haptic technology to synchronize the device in real time with the action in the video the user is watching, delivering all the warmth, moistness and relative motion of an authentic sexual encounter. The system’s piracy proof entertainment is a complement to AEBN, which streams more than a million hours of online adult video each month.
 
“We offer hundreds of movies from over 120 studios, and more than 500 female stars to choose from. Our consumers always have options, but we think their selection of who turns them on and who they want to personally experience is enormously interesting,” said Rinaldo.

Sex In The Shower items driving success

HUNTINGTON BEACH, Calif.—In spite of the struggling economy, Sportsheets International posted record sales in February.

Sportsheets recognized several factors in achieving the highest sales month in its 15-year history, including a positive quality-to-value ratio, strong brand awareness and the continued success of its latest brand, Sex In The Shower.

“It is quite the testament to our high-quality, domestically manufactured Sportsheets products that even in these tough economic times consumers looked beyond the so-called low price leaders and chose the value of quality and innovation,” said Sportsheets President Tom Stewart.

Since the January release of six new items in the hotter-than-ever Sex In The Shower range, weekly sellouts of Dual Suction Handles, Vibrating Foam Sea Sponges, 100ml Silicone Lubricant and Vibrating Massage Soap have been reported by retailers across the country.

“It is exhilarating to see the continual and ever-increasing demand for Sex In The Shower products” said Todd Carter, Sportsheets’ marketing director. “One-third of this range yields results that rival the Sportsheets Under the Bed Restraint System and I Like It Doggie Style Strap.”

For more information, visit Sportsheets.com or SexInTheShower.net.

A new Kinsey Institute study reveals a lack of consensus when it comes to defining what it is to “have sex”

BLOOMINGTON, Ind.—On Jan. 17, 1998, during a White House press conference with his wife at his side, President Clinton famously uttered the line that continues to haunt him to this day: “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.”

Exactly seven months later, Clinton would eat those words in grand jury testimony, when he finally admitted that he had had an "improper physical relationship" with Lewinsky. But the semantic damage had been done. America was talking about what it means to “have sex,” and was the definition fluid, so to speak. Could someone define it themselves and conveniently decide that a blow job was not sex, that oral sex of any kind, or anal sex, is not really sex, or was there an established meaning that no one could willy-nilly get around? It turns out the answer then, as now, remains the same.

In 1999, the Kinsey Institute in a study came to the conclusion that no consensus exists about what it means to “have sex.” Eleven years later, the Kinsey Institute at the University of Indiana announced that it has conducted a second, more thorough, study that also came to the same conclusion as the first. 

“The new study, published in the international health journal Sexual Health in February, examined whether more information helped clarify matters—study participants were asked about specific sexual behaviors and such qualifiers as whether orgasm was reached—and researchers also wanted to involve a more representative audience, not just college students,” read a press release issued Thursday by the institute.

“Is oral sex considered sex? It wasn't to around 30 percent of the study participants,” it continues. “How about anal sex? For around 20 percent of the participants, no. A surprising number of older men did not consider penile-vaginal intercourse to be sex. More than idle gossip, the answers to questions about sex can inform—or misinform—research, medical advice and health education efforts.”

Conducted in conjunction with the Rural Center for AIDS/STD Prevention (RCAP) in IU's School of Health, Physical Education and Recreation, the recent study asked more specific questions than the previous one, in the hope that querying participants about specific behaviors would clarify the matter. Instead of using just college students, as the 1999 study had, the new one used a more representative sample of people, hoping that that, too, would result in something conclusive. It did not.

"Throwing the net wider, with a more representative sample, only made it more confusing and complicated," said Brandon Hill, research associate at the Kinsey Institute. "People were even less consistent across the board."

Surveyed over the phone, participants, mostly heterosexual, were asked, "Would you say you 'had sex' with someone if the most intimate behavior you engaged in was ...," followed by 14 behaviorally specific items.

Some of the study's findings are:

* Responses did not differ significantly overall for men and women. The study involved 204 men and 282 women.

* 95 percent of respondents would consider penile-vaginal intercourse (PVI) having had sex, but this rate drops to 89 percent if there is no ejaculation.

* 81 percent considered penile-anal intercourse having had sex, with the rate dropping to 77 percent for men in the youngest age group (18-29), 50 percent for men in the oldest age group (65 and up) and 67 percent for women in the oldest age group.

* 71 percent and 73 percent considered oral contact with a partner's genitals (OG), either performing or receiving, as having had sex.

* Men in the youngest and oldest age groups were less likely to answer "yes" compared with the middle two age groups for when they performed OG.

* Significantly fewer men in the oldest age group answered "yes" for PVI (77 percent).

According to William L. Yarber, RCAP senior director and co-author of the study, the study’s findings reaffirm the need to be specific about behaviors when talking about sex.

"There's a vagueness of what sex is in our culture and media," Yarber said. "If people don't consider certain behaviors sex, they might not think sexual health messages about risk pertain to them. The AIDS epidemic has forced us to be much more specific about behaviors, as far as identifying specific behaviors that put people at risk instead of just sex in general. But there's still room for improvement."

Brief notes that individual privacy is impacted as much as commercial speech

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The American Civil Liberties Union, long an ally of the adult industry as far as First Amendment issues are concerned, has filed an amicus ("friend of the court") brief in Free Speech Coalition's bid to overturn 18 U.S.C. §§2257 and 2257A, the federal recordkeeping and labeling laws.

"The purpose of this brief," writes the ACLU's Mary Catherine Roper, with prominent Philadelphia area attorneys Fred T. Magaziner and Kristina C. Evans, "is to expose how the Statute affects the lives of the millions of adult Americans who create or enjoy sexual images as part of intimacy, in communicating with others, to celebrate beauty, or for a host of other reasons. The burdens that the Statute places on these expressions are not narrowly tailored to prevent child pornography."

The ACLU brief focuses mainly on the impermissible overbreadth of the statutes and the regulations developed to implement them.

"The Statute directly burdens adult sexual expression that is indisputably lawful," the brief's authors argue. "The Statute burdens both commercial expression and, of particular importance to the ACLU, non-commercial expression. The Statute infringes the rights of both those who wish to take pictures or make videos of actual or simulated adult sexual conduct and those who wish to look at such pictures and videos. The Statute unlawfully burdens expressions that are created or viewed for sexual enjoyment as well as expressions created for purposes of art, education or therapy. The Statute not only burdens lawful expression but also inhibits the right of adults to engage in the intimate conduct itself," which point the authors clarify in a footnote: "For instance, to the extent that the act of photographing or videotaping intimate conduct is a part of the sexual conduct itself, the Statute actively chills such intimate acts."[Emphasis in original]

Webcam women and POV shooters, take note!

The brief then lists a number of lawful situations—e.g., distributing religious tracts anonymously, displaying "Fuck the draft" on clothing, holding unsurveilled private conversations—where citizens have the right "to be left alone by the government," even though, as the authors recognize, "[t]he Attorney General and a majority of Congress (and for that matter, many Courts) may be offended by visual depictions of genitals, or of adults engaging in actual or simulated sex."

Personal privacy, free from government oversight, is a paramount point in the ACLU's argument.

"Even though Congress might disapprove of those who take pictures of their partners' genitalia," the authors observe, "Congress cannot require them to keep photo IDs on file for government inspection, any more than Congress can require those who demonstrate for disfavored causes to register with the government."

The subtext of that argument is enticing, since it links the creation of sexually explicit content with political advocacy—and as anyone who's followed government's frequent attempts to squelch sexual speech at the federal, state and local levels knows, censorship in 21st century America almost invariably begins with religious and conservative political interest groups pressing for legal and/or judicial action as part of their larger political agendas.

The authors also make an interesting point about 2257A which is generally overlooked by the adult industry, which is that the 2257A regulations only protect commercially distributed simulated sex products, or works featuring "lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area," from direct government oversight (through use of letters filed by mainstream production companies with the Attorney General). All others who create works involving simulated sex or lascivious exhibitions—for example, amateur photographers or swingers—are required to follow the same onerous recordkeeping and labeling requirements of 2257 as they would if they were creating hardcore content.

Even worse, the ACLU brief points out that all sexually oriented images that are "produced in whole or in part with materials which have been mailed or shipped in interstate or foreign commerce" are also subject to 2257 and 2257A recordkeeping, and "[s]ince every camera and camcorder has been shipped in interstate or foreign commerce, the Statute thus applies to all privately made photos and videos, even if they are never distributed to anyone."

Before discussing the statute, the ACLU brief makes clear that it is the law itself, rather than the Justice Department's lengthy preamble to it—which takes up roughly four-fifths of the law's Federal Register posting—that must be assumed to be controlling, and that whatever caveats or exemptions are contained in the preamble should play no part in the Court's examination of the law. Or as the brief puts it, "The Government cannot stave off a challenge to an overbroad statute, however, by issuing regulations that purport to narrow its scope ... the Statute must be determined on the basis of what the Statute actually says, not what the DOJ might wish it said." The brief then goes on to point out several instances where the preamble makes claims that are inconsistent with statutory language.

One distinction between the preamble and the statute which the ACLU finds particularly important is the preamble's claim that 2257 and 2257A apply only to "pornography intended for sale or trade." The ACLU references users of social networking sites such as Craigslist, who post explicit photos of themselves with their ads, may run afoul of 2257, as might contributors of actual or simulated sexual videos to YouTube and other tube sites.

"While it is commendable that the DOJ has apparently never prosecuted a husband and wife who created a sex video for their own pleasure," the authors observe, "or a sex researcher who filmed couples making love, or—so far—an individual who posted an explicit photo or video on a web journal that she shares with her friends, 'the mere fact that an agency does not currently intend to apply a statute in an unconstitutional manner cannot have the effect of an explicit limiting construction.'... The statute sweeps within its scope millions of people whose conduct is completely unrelated to any concerns about the sexual exploitation of children—both people who for sexual enjoyment want to make or look at videos of actual or simulated sex or pictures of naked people, and people who for purposes unrelated to sexual enjoyment wish to make or look at such pictures."

But as the ACLU brief points out, it's not only the producers of sexual content who suffer from 2257; it's also those who want to view or "use" that content who are affected.

Quoting from the Third Circuit decision in the ACLU's own case against the Child Online Protection Act (COPA), the brief notes, "A statute that effectively suppresses a large amount of speech that adults have a constitutional right to receive and to address to one another... is unacceptable if less restrictive alternatives would be at least as effective in achieving the legitimate purpose that the statute was enacted to serve." [Emphasis in original]

The brief then goes on to point out a number of instances where ordinary citizens might fall afoul of the 2257 and 2257A regulations, such as couples filming themselves, people who post photos on social networking sites, photos produced with a non-sexual purpose such as for journalism, education, therapy or art, and later notes that since all of those actions may be swept up in a 2257 or 2257A prosecution, the statute intrudes on the "private intimate conduct of millions of ordinary Americans."

"The Statute does exactly what the courts have held the government cannot do—intrude into the bedrooms of ordinary Americans," the brief's authors say. "The Statute makes it a felony to fail to comply with the recordkeeping and labeling requirements, even if the 'producer' is a husband videotaping himself and his spouse in their own bedroom."

Finally, the brief also points out that 2257 and 2257A adversely impact all Americans' rights to speak anonymously by forcing them not only to keep identification records, but to label their works, thus disclosing the name and address of the works' producer.

"A couple who might otherwise wish to hire plaintiff Michael Barone to take pictures of their love-making, for example, may well not feel free to do so if Barone is required to keep their photo IDs on file and available for government inspection," the brief notes.

In summary, the ACLU amicus brief is an excellent supplement to the original complaint filed by Free Speech Coalition and 17 other plaintiffs—and it won't be the last. Check back here for AVN's analysis of a similar amicus brief from the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

CHATSWORTH, Calif.—Madness Pictures presents Into the Mouth of Asians, a four-disc oral-themed collection of scenes shot by the late AVN Award-winning director David Aaron Clark. The scenes, shot from 2004 to 2007, include footage from all four volumes of Clark's blowjob series, Asian Mouth Club.

Female performers such as Loni, Evelyn Lin, Sabrine Maui, Nautica Thorn, Tia Tanaka and Lacey Tom are featured in Into the Mouth of Asians, which will hit store shelves on March 11.

"DAC was an amazing director, whose quirky, artistic style of shooting and love for Asian women built a cult following," Madness Pictures owner Andre Madness said.

"His AVN Award for Best Director – Feature brought him the attention he always deserved, but we'll never see another one of his movies," Madness added. "The scenes in Into the Mouth of Asians—with his conversations with the girls and his original approach to the gonzo genre—is a snapshot of the things I remember best about DAC."

Clark died of a pulmonary embolism at the age of 49 last November, shortly after he was nominated as Best Director by AVN for his ambitious work on the feature Pure. In January Clark became the first person to receive a posthumous honor in an AVN Awards ceremony.

Madness Pictures will continue the Asian Mouth Club series, under the direction of Mo, with the release of its fifth volume next month. Distributors can email Hank at madnesspictures@msn.com or call (310) 451-7748.

NORTHRIDGE, Calif.—Metro Interactive has tapped well-established gonzo helmsman Van Styles to create titles for a new imprint dubbed Hipnotic.

"He blew us away with his intense new ideas and his future vision of gonzo," said Metro special projects manager Alexandra Taylor. "Van is expected to take the gonzo genre to another level and we wanted his energy and fresh ideas here with us at Metro."

Styles has directed extensively for major studios Hustler Video, Vouyer Media and others, and will inaugurate the Hipnotic line with Naughty Newbies, a pro-am endeavor that went into production this week.

Another project Styles has planned for the new label is Redneck Girls, showcasing "the hottest down and dirty, back-road southern girls."

"Gritty, raw and real sex mixed with new and fresh talent," Styles offered, "that's my outlook on making a great flick that all can enjoy."

For more information, visit www.metrointeractive.com.

Crossover event raised 25,000 virtual dollars, branded studio to more than 5M members

VANCOUVER—Thursday night’s premiere of the Digital Playground Lounge, the adult studio’s 3D virtual world built by Utherverse Digital, attracted 800 new members to watch the premiere of No Love Lost and meet contract star Raven Alexis.

According to an announcement sent out Friday, the event also raised more than 25,000 Rays, the world’s virtual currency, with some members upgrading to VIP status for extra time with Alexis and the once-in-a-lifetime chance to have one-on-one sex sessions. Some VIP members forked over double to spend 10 minutes alone with the starlet.

"This event was a huge success and we at Utherverse are pleased to be pioneering a brand-new way for companies to premiere films, promote performers and market their brands to more than 5 million consumers in the virtual space," Utherverse Digital CEO Brian Shuster said. "Digital Playground is only the beginning—we have interest from several adult studios and companies looking for similar 3D virtual events. Stay tuned!" 

Alexis mingled with every guest before and after the premiere, answering questions and interacting with her fans. Digital Playground not only introduced its newest contract star and her latest feature release to consumers around the world but also made 75 percent lifetime revenue for every upgraded user.

"I had such an amazing time during the premiere of my movie, No Love Lost,” Alexis said. "So many fans and players came out to see me! We partied for hours, and I did a lot of one-on-one cam sessions with fans! This world is so amazing, and I'm so excited to continue being a member and hopefully do more projects with Utherverse!"

Using Utherverse’s simple software, studios and companies like Digital Playground can create virtual worlds where fans around the globe can talk, hang out and even touch their favorite porn stars and products using customized avatars.

“Having a virtual world like this puts a company on the forefront of new technology,” Shuster added. “This kind of 3D interaction makes for a one-of-a-kind fan experience, which leads to lifetime member loyalty—and there’s nothing more valuable online than member retention.”

For more information about the VWW, visit http://www.thevww.com.

To download the Digital Playground Lounge, visit http://www.utherverse.com/vww/digitalplayground.

First in a series of sexy interactive shows that include the popuar Screaming O Contest

LOS ANGELES—The Screaming O has teamed up with A! Entertainment emcee Tony Batman and showgirl Schevelle to produce interactive stage shows featuring exotic entertainment and the infamous Screaming O contest.

From college campuses to worldwide expo centers, Screaming O events have been a hit, and each event has been customized to fit the location. Now, The Screaming O is reaching out to venues across the country with an offer to provide their customers with an official branded event.

“The Screaming O contests have garnered a lot of attention in the last few years and are a great way to get attendees loosened up and in the mood for fun,” The Screaming O partner Keith Caggiano said. “Now we’ve made it possible for adult clubs, stores and even college sex-ed events to bring the energy and excitement directly to their doors.”

Screaming O giveaways and contests have been crowd pleasers at major adult venues in Los Angeles, Miami, New York, Denver, Toronto, Las Vegas and even Australia. The contest recently has made its way around bars, nightclubs, gentlemen’s clubs, college events and spring break hangouts, and even was featured on the Oxygen channel's top-rated The Bad Girls Club.

Hosts Tony Batman and Schevelle not only keep the energy at a high pitch during the shows but also handle pre-show marketing and promotions, to get everyone in the know months in advance. Packages include ad slicks, press releases, props and printed promo materials, as well as contestant gifts, prizes and swag to keep customers coming back for more.

“When a club or store hosts the Screaming O show, they get a unique, sexy event that puts the business at the forefront of progression within the industry,” Batman said.

Déjà Vu is the first strip club to offer this event, scheduled March 5 and 6 at 9:30 p.m. The club is located at 6805 Adama Drive in Tampa, Fla. For more information, call (813) 664-8784.

“I am excited about this event because this happens to be an all-nude club, so I can get totally naked, which is something I never pass up a chance to do,” Schevelle said. An award-winning feature entertainer and showgirl, Schevelle is a two-time nominee for Entertainer of the Year by Exotic Dancer Magazine. Tony Batman is the award-winning emcee of the adult industry’s A! Entertainment News and veteran emcee for the Hustler/Déjà Vu club chain.

The Screaming O has received many accolades for its high-quality production standards, innovative design and honorable business practices. The Screaming O’s flagship product, the Screaming O Vibrating Ring, was named “Best Product of 2008” by Women's Health magazine. Additionally, the Big O vibrating erection band was named “Top Pick” by renowned sex educator Dr. Sue Johanson, host of the Oxygen network's popular Talk Sex With Sue. For more information about The Screaming O, visit TheScreamingO.com.

CHATSWORTH, Calif.—The window for pre-nominating people, movies, studios and websites for the 2010 GAYVN Awards will close at 12:01 a.m. Monday, March 8. No further pre-nominations will be accepted beyond that point.

Industry members who would like to make pre-nom suggestions to the GAYVN Awards staff may email prenom@gayvn.com for a username, password and link to the submissions page.

In order to be considered for a 2010 award, a production must have been released between Jan. 1 and Dec. 31, 2009. Newcomers, studio marketing campaigns and web-based promotions and marketing efforts must have debuted during the calendar year 2009.

This year marks the 12th annual presentation of the awards, which honor outstanding achievement in the gay adult entertainment industry.

“Awards make a difference not only to companies, but also to consumers,” said Darren Roberts, chief executive officer of GAYVN parent company AVN Media Network. “Consumers are much more likely to pay to watch the original award-winner instead of watching it in bits and pieces on a tube site.”

DVD and web categories are included in this year’s lineup. The Trailblazer award will be presented for the second time. Channel 1 Releasing co-founder and GAYVN Hall of Fame director Chi Chi LaRue received the first-ever Trailblazer award during 2009’s ceremony.

DVD categories:
Best Actor
Best All-Sex Video
Best Alternative Release (includes all fetish, ethnic and niche-oriented titles)
Best Cumshot
Best Director
Best Duo Sex Scene
Best Group Sex Scene
Best HD Feature
Best Marketing – Company Image
Best Newcomer
Best Picture
Best Renting Title of the Year
Best Selling Title of the Year
Best Solo Performance
Best Supporting Actor
Best Videography
Best Web-to-DVD Release
Performer of the Year
Studio of the Year
Hall of Fame
Trailblazer

Web categories:
Best Affiliate Program
Best Blog/Gossip Site
Best Genre Site (solo, amateur, twink, bear, ethnic, fetish/leather, etc.)
Best Live Webcam/Webshow
Best Mega Site
Best Porn Star Site
Best Retail/VOD Site
Best Web-Based Marketing/Promotion Effort (single title, studio, performer, event, cause, etc.)
Web Performer of the Year
Website of the Year

Nominated websites will need to provide judges with access to their password-protected areas, if such exist. Studios are asked to provide two copies of each title they would like the GAYVN Awards judges to consider. DVDs should be shipped to arrive no later than 5 p.m. PT March 12. Address all deliveries to:
GAYVN Awards
9400 Penfield Avenue
Chatsworth, CA 91311

Questions about the site or the awards process may be directed to prenom@gayvn.com.

‘Wifey’ shirts feature star with custom motorcycle

SEATTLE—T.I.T.S (Two In The Shirt) is excited to announce its second T-shirt collaboration with the sexy Tera Patrick as she shows off her vision of what a real wifey is.

This concept features Patrick downing a bottle of Moet with nothing on but an apron as she poses in front of her custom motorcycle built by XXX Kustoms. This is the follow-up to the first collaboration, “Luxury Model,” which featured Patrick posing in front her very own Bentley coupe.

What makes this collaboration unique is that Patrick wanted to show what her vision of a true wifey is.

“Usually this typically comes from a male’s perspective so to have someone like Tera wanting to show her idea of a perfect wifey was a great idea,” said Marek Grubel, owner and founder of T.I.T.S.

“Being a wifey is hard-ass work! The trick is learning how to polish the ride, not let my tits fall out of the apron, and no matter what never drop the bottle!” said Tera Patrick.

The “Tera Wifey” is part of the Spring 1 collection and is available now for men and women on ShopTITS.com. Also available is an exclusive iPhone skin that features the same wifey-inspired pose.

“The wifey is the absolute quintessential modern sexy statement. Having Tera on the shirt makes it the first-ever celebrity sex symbol wifey,” said Evan Seinfeld of Teravision. “Take T.I.T.S.’ best-selling shirt and add some XXX star power, and the world is poised to wear a whole lot of Tera Patrick shirts.”

WEST HOLLYWOOD, Calif.—Dean Coxx has turned pro. Formerly an amateur who performed only on his own pro-am gay adult website, Coxx will make his DVD debut in Jet Set Men’s Jersey Score. The title is set to hit store shelves in March.

Meanwhile, back on the web, Coxx snagged a special guest romp from video and on-stage performer John Magnum. The latter has appeared in titles from Falcon Studios, Jake Cruise Media and Cocksure Men. In a scene posted March 1 at ClubDean.com, Coxx and Magnum shave each other before engaging in hardcore action that includes muscle worship, sucking, rimming, 69-ing and toy play.

The guys had so much fun during the shoot, Magnum is expected to return to Coxx’s website for a second visit in March, and he said he plans to bring fellow gay adult DVD denizen Josh Griffin along with him.

For more about the Coxx-Magnum scene, visit ClubDean.com. For more about Coxx’s DVD debut in Jersey Score, visit JetSetMen.com.

Sez Mitchell: "We don't decide who uses condoms and who doesn't."

VAN NUYS, Calif.—Approximately 15 employees and supporters of AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) picketed the offices of Adult Industry Medical Healthcare Foundation (AIM) this morning, chanting slogans such as, "AIM screws adult actors/Money is a major factor/Withholding info from the county/While collecting quite a bounty," "Shame on AIM" and "Porn clinic is a gimmick," while carrying signs reading, "AIM=death" and "AIM protects porn dollar$"—and AIM founder Dr. Sharon Mitchell has had enough of it.

"Why are they not picketing adult production companies?" Mitchell asked. "What does this have to do with AIM? We love to see people use condoms! By all means, but why the heck is AIM taking the blame for people's personal choices and providing a good service that's been helpful? Why are we the target? I don't know what that has to do with us."

"There were more than a handful of civilian people today that were terrified to come in because these knuckleheads were parading around in their underwear with fake nipples and leaves painted on them, screaming horrible things about their healthcare provider," she continued. "They were afraid to come in. How many people didn't come in today because they were out there? We had one gentleman who had to be escorted in by the police, who was so shaken, he had to be counseled to calm down. These people freaked out and upset folks, and if they're so concerned about the confidentiality of patients, then why are they parading around with cameras, frightening folks and why are they picking on AIM? We are being of service like anyone else."

But apparently, it was exactly that provision of services that AHF claims is the problem.

HOLLYWOOD, Calif.—The X-Rated Critics Organization (XRCO) announced its nominations today for the 26th annual XRCO Awards ceremony, taking place April 29 at The Highlands nightclub overlooking Hollywood Blvd.

The XRCO, founded in 1984, is composed of top industry reviewers from print and internet, and recognizes the best and brightest each year in adult cinema. This year's show, hosted by Nikki Benz, Lisa Ann and Sean Michaels, will be dedicated to the memory of three industry legends lost over the past year: Jamie Gillis, Juliet "Aunt Peg" Anderson and Erica Boyer.

Admittance to the XRCO Awards is free for industry members and based upon recognition at the door, or via RSVP to AprStorm@aol.com. RSVPs should be submitted no later than April 12.

The 2010 XRCO Awards nominees are:

BEST RELEASE

Deviance – skinworXXX/Adam & Eve Pictures
Educating Alli – Wicked Pictures
Flight Attendants – X-Play/Adam & Eve Pictures
Teachers – Digital Playground
Throat: A Cautionary Tale – Vivid

BEST EPIC

2040 – Wicked Pictures
Nurses – Digital Playground
Operation: Tropical Stormy – Wicked Pictures
The 8th Day – Adam & Eve Pictures
Pure – David Aaron Clark/Evil Angel

BEST DIRECTOR (features)

Brad Armstrong
David Aaron Clark
Lee Roy Meyers
Will Ryder
Ren Savant

BEST DIRECTOR (non-features)

Belladonna
Robby D.
William H.
Jules Jordan
Mason

BEST COMEDY or PARODY

LA Pink: A XXX Parody – BurningAngel/Vouyer Media
Not Married With Children XXX – X-Play/LFP Video
Not the Cosbys XXX – X-Play/LFP Video
The Sex Files: A Dark XXX Parody – Revolution X/Digital Sin
TMSleaze – 3rd Degree Films

BEST GONZO MOVIE

Big Wet Asses 15 – Elegant Angel Productions
Evalutionary – skinworXXX/Elegant Angel Productions
Slutty & Sluttier 10 – Manuel Ferrara Productions/Evil Angel
South Beach Cruisin’ 3 – Josh Stone/Justin Slayer International
Tori Black Is Pretty Filthy – Elegant Angel Productions

BEST GONZO SERIES

Couples Seduce Teens – Pink Visual Productions
I Fucked My Bosses Daughter – Evasive Angles Entertainment
First Time Auditions – Reality Kings/Pulse
Seasoned Players – Tom Byron Productions/Evolution Distribution
Titty Sweat – Vince Voyeur Unleashed/Jules Jordan Video

BEST GIRL/GIRL SERIES

Girlvana – Zero Tolerance Entertainment
Predator – Wicked Pictures
Strap-On Sally – Pleasure Productions/Evolution Distribution
Violation of… – JM Productions
Women Seeking Women – Girlfriends Films

BEST POV MOVIE

POV Jugg Fuckers 4 – Darkko Productions/Evil Angel
POV Pervert 11 – Mike John Productions/Jules Jordan Video
Pole Position 9 – Mercenary Pictures
Pound the Round 3 – Digital Sin
Schoolgirl POV 6 – New Sensations

BEST ETHNIC SERIES

Big Black Wet Asses – Elegant Angel Productions
Cockasian – Digital Playground
Deep in Latin Cheeks – Alexander DeVoe Productions/Jules Jordan
Naughty Little Asians – Third World Media
Run for the Border – Kelly Madison/Juicy Entertainment

NEW STARLET

Angelina Armani
Gracie Glam
Kagney Linn Karter
Tanner Mayes
Riley Steele

NEW STUD

Bill Bailey
Dane Cross
Ralph Long
Brian Street Team
Aaron Wilcox

UNSUNG SIREN

Andi Anderson
Marie Luv
RayVeness
Missy Stone
Misty Stone

UNSUNG SWORDSMAN

Jordan Ash
Jack Lawrence
Danny Mountain
Sascha
Eric Swiss

FEMALE PERFORMER OF THE YEAR

Tori Black
Jenna Haze
Kristina Rose
Bobbi Starr
Alexis Texas

MALE PERFORMER OF THE YEAR

James Deen
Erik Everhard
Rocco Reed
Anthony Rosano
Evan Stone

SINGLE PERFORMANCE – ACTRESS

Asa Akira – Pure – David Aaron Clark/Evil Angel
Sasha Grey – Deep Throat: A Cautionary Tale – Vivid
Kimberly Kane – The Sex Files: A Dark XXX Comedy – Revolution X/Digital Sin
Kayden Kross – The 8th Day – Adam & Eve Pictures
Misty Stone – Not the Cosbys XXX – X-Play/LFP Video

SINGLE PERFORMANCE – ACTOR

James Deen – Scrubs: A XXX Parody – New Sensations
Marcus London – 2040 – Wicked Pictures
Anthony Rosano – The Sex Files: A Dark XXX Parody – Revolution X/Digital Sin
Keni Styles – Pure – David Aaron Clark/Evil Angel
Eric Swiss – Not Married With Children XXX – X-Play/LFP Video

CREAM DREAM

Lexi Belle
Tara Lynn Fox
Tanner Mayes
Amia Miley
Isis Taylor

SUPERSLUT

Belladonna
Tori Black
Dana DeArmond
Kristina Rose
Bobbi Starr

ORGASMIC ORALIST

Hunter Bryce
Sasha Grey
Jenna Haze
Nika Noir
Bobbi Starr

ORGASMIC ANALIST

Joanna Angel
Eva Angelina
Jenna Haze
Kristina Rose
Bobbi Starr

MILF OF THE YEAR

Julie Ann
Lisa Ann
Francesca Lé
Raylene
RayVeness

BEST CUMBACK

Eva Angelina
Debi Diamond
Dyanna Lauren
Raylene
Avy Scott

MOST OUTRAGEOUS DVD XTRAS

2040 – Wicked Pictures
Not the Cosbys XXX – X-Play/LFP Video
Operation: Tropical Stormy – Wicked Pictures
Teachers – Digital Playground
The 8th Day – Adam & Eve Pictures

MAINSTREAM ADULT MEDIA FAVORITE

Lisa Ann
Stormy Daniels
Penny Flame
Sasha Grey
Tera Patrick

HALL OF FAME

Sunset Thomas
Inari Vachs
Nikki Charm
Jada Fire
Evan Stone
Erik Everhard
Phil Harvey – Adam & Eve Pictures – Special Award 1st Amendment
Mike Ranger – Film Pioneers
Whispered Lies – LBO - Movie

'Bad' customers can get off the list by paying $99 and up; there's also an affiliate program attached

SANTA MONICA, Calif.—A new service called BadCustomer.com keeps a database of people who request credit card chargebacks on services or products they have bought and want to return. The list is made available to retailers. The idea is that retailers will decline transactions from people who are on the list. If a consumer is blacklisted and wants to get off, the fee for doing so is $99 for the first chargeback and up to $1,000 for repeat "offenders."

Launched late last year, BadCustomer.com also has an affiliate program that pays out 20 percent of the removal fee for customers blocked from affiliate companies.

"Sign up businesses that want to use the BadCustomer.com database to reduce their chargebacks and report their customers who issue chargebacks against them," reads the pitch.

Not surprisingly, the company takes a dim view of chargebacks. On its Business Center Introduction page, it lays out the problem for merchants.

"Imagine your [sic] standing at the cash register of a business you built with your own hands. A customer walks up and purchases several items. You ring them up, give him the total, and he pays for them. Now imagine that as he turns to leave, he reaches into your open cash drawer, takes out the money he just paid to you, and then smiles and waves as he walks out of the store with both your products AND your money. You'd never let that happen, right?

"The unbelievable thing is that this is happening at millions of businesses around the world, right this very moment. It's a form of consumer fraud called 'chargebacks' and if left unchecked, it can destroy a business faster than shoplifters ever could. Because of its hidden charges and negative ramifications, a chargeback should be the last resort of a customer who has exhausted all other courses of action. Instead, it is fast becoming the first resort of consumers who simply change their mind. Or worse yet: purposeful fraud to obtain goods and services without paying for them."

Besides discouraging customers from charging back at all, the blacklist is intended to "train" them to resolve problems directly with the merchant. The message to consumers is twofold: BadCustomer.com brings them together with merchants to work things out while simultaneously protecting them from their own bad behavior.

"Bad Customer is devoted to forming alliances between businesses and customers for the mutual benefit of both," reads the Causes of Blacklisting page. "BadCustomer.com also helps protect your buying power, by helping you avoid the repercussions that result from the misuse of billing disputes through your Bank and Credit Cards.

"Most billing disputes arise from simple misunderstandings. You may have failed to notice important billing information, or a member of your family may have ordered a product without your knowledge—the possibilities are endless. However, most billing disputes have one thing in common: they can be easily settled in a few minutes simply by contacting the merchant or business that issued the billing statement."

According to the only post on the BadCustomer.com blog, dated Nov. 3, 2009, the service was started by a "highly successful Internet marketing company to reduce chargebacks." It also claims that it is authorized to collect and sell information about the creditworthiness of individuals.

"If you're a business owner, it's helpful to know that BadCustomer is considered to be a Consumer Reporting Agency (CRA). That means we fall under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), which is overseen by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). (Wow, that's a lot of acronyms!) That means privacy and security of consumer data is REALLY important to us! So we have done everything possible to ensure the safety of consumer data, including data encryption, secure connections, following PCI Compliance Data Storage guidelines, and all of the other industry best practices that we know you expect to see to feel confident about entrusting your chargeback data with BadCustomer.

"If you're a consumer, we want you to know that we're looking out for you as well. For example, if you feel you've been unfairly added to the Badcustomer chargeback list, let us know and we'll help you get removed—for free. Even more important, if you have a dispute with someone you recently purchased a product from and just can't seem to get that refund you believe you're entitled to, then use our Dispute Mediation form and we'll contact the merchant and help you get a refund. That's free too!"

The site claims to have 7,756,120 records currently on file, and there is a link from the homepage to a form to fill out to find out if you are on the list.

To its credit (no pun intended), the company has allowed some comments on the blog page that question its business model.

"I appreciate what you are doing but as a merchant am uneasy that you are playing both sides of the fence - telling us merchants that you will protect us from chargebacks by putting these bad customers in a database, and at the same time offering to help consumers get a refund," wrote jojokinkaid. "Those are completely opposing standpoints."

"How about a list of Bad Companies that rip off customers," wrote Sudhir.

AVN.com was curious whether BadCustomer.com works with merchants in the adult internet industry, which has a extensive and profound relationship with chargebacks. A call to the BadCustomer.com offices seeking comment has not yet been returned.