Our partner

Consumer 6
Consumer 6
Posts: 1221
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 2:19 am
Blog: View Blog (10)
- December 2013
More Measure B (Ca.'s 'condoms in porn' law)
   Sun Dec 01, 2013 2:52 pm

+ November 2013
+ October 2013
+ June 2013
+ March 2013
Search Blogs

More Measure B (Ca.'s 'condoms in porn' law)

Permanent Linkby HesDeltanCaptain on Sun Dec 01, 2013 2:52 pm

There is yet more follow-up. Wondering if the new law would be retroactively applied (as was done when in the late 70s the US made child pornography illegal and distributors had to quit selling it lest they break the new law, and later when the true age of one infamous pornstar was discovered and all her films suddenly went from being award-winning films to child pornography) and thus existing videos featuring non-condom use might suddenly be illegal and yanked from shelves I was relieved to see a California judge has knocked the teeth out of the new law. While it remains law, the enforcement of it is now so conditioned and restrictive that it's going to be virtually impossible to actually enforce much less prosecute anyone breaking the law:



"A federal judge has determined that public health risks may trump the First Amendment when filming porn, but not the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments."

"To summarize the ruling:

* The government has a legitimate interest in reducing the spread of sexually transmitted disease. The Los Angeles County Department of Public Health has recorded thousands of cases of STDs among adult film workers. The judge determined the actual harms caused by disease transmission is likely to trump the First Amendment claims in court and thus refused an injunction to block Measure B.

* The measure allows county health officers to enter and inspect any property where he or she believes adult film production is taking place, levy fines, and seize potential evidence without a warrant. The judge points out that this rule technically allows a county health officer to demand access to any building in all of Los Angeles County and is therefore too vague. The judge blocked this part of the law. Officials can get a warrant from a judge if they suspect illegal porn filming is taking place somewhere.

* Because adult films are protected by the First Amendment, fees demanded as part of Measure B must be revenue neutral – they can only cover the cost of administrating the law and cannot be used to generate revenue. There is nothing that indicates the fees being charged for a permit to shoot porn are revenue neutral.

* Requiring a permit to film porn is a form of prior restraint – having to seek the government’s permission to engage in acts of free speech. The judge agreed that Measure B did not contain sufficient safeguards to prevent county officials from abusing this authority. The judge stated that there needs to be the possibility of judicial review in the event of denied licenses or if porn sets are shut down. The judge noted that based on the very vague wording of the measure, an official could shut down a porn set over a cameraman having a cold."

And there was much rejoicing. :)

"I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I pretended to be." - Me.
0 Comments Viewed 77498 times

Who is online

Registered users: AW10, Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Google Feedfetcher, OMNICELL