Common Sense

Apparently, federal indictments were handed down against JM Productions and its principal head, Jeff Stewart, and retail/Internet distributor Five Star Video. The charge includes seven counts of trafficking of obscene material through the mail and over the Web.

Specifically, the indictment, which was handed down on May 23, charges that the Five Star Video defendants “knowingly used an interactive computer service and other facilities and means of interstate and foreign commerce to sell and distribute, to a location in Northern Virginia, obscene DVDs … in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1465 [”Transportation of obscene matters for sale or distribution”] and (2)(a),” which allows the government to target the principals of a business. The transportation allegedly took place on Feb. 6 and 10 of this year.

The indictment also charges that those same defendants “knowingly used the United States mails to mail and deliver to a location in Northern Virginia, a DVD containing obscene matter,” while another set of counts charges that those same defendants “knowingly used an express company or other common carrier for carriage in interstate commerce and delivery to a location outside of the State of Arizona, of a package which contained DVDs that are obscene.”

So far, AVN has only been able to obtain information as to the first seven counts of the indictment, which consists of a total of 18 counts. Counts 8 through 14 also relate to transportation of obscene material using a common carrier, while Counts 15 through 17 charge some or all of the defendants with “Engaging in a Business of Selling or Transferring Obscene Material.”

The final count, Count 18, invokes 18 U.S.C. §1467, the Criminal Forfeiture statute, which states in part, “(a)  Property Subject to Criminal Forfeiture.—A person who is convicted of an offense involving obscene material under this chapter shall forfeit to the United States such person’s interest in — (1) any obscene material produced, transported, mailed, shipped, or received in violation of this chapter; (2) any property, real or personal, constituting or traceable to gross profits or other proceeds obtained from such offense; and (3) any property, real or personal, used or intended to be used to commit or to promote the commission of such offense, if the court in its discretion so determines, taking into consideration the nature, scope, and proportionality of the use of the property in the offense.”

So, I definitely shouldn’t ship my homemade porn to that guy in Northern Virginia. Alright, good to know.

The indictments specifically mention Gag Factor 15, Gag Factor 18, American Bukkake 13 and Filthy Things 6. I only know that one of my favorite people, Ashley Blue, is in that first one. She’s the star of another JM series, Girlvert.

If JM goes out of business, then where will I get my lesbian bukkake movies and what will happen to Ms. Blue? Doesn’t the government think of these things before handing out indictments willy nilly?

This is exactly why we need some kind of national definition of what is or is not obscene. The “community standards” benchmark set by the Supreme Court just doesn’t cut it in a realistic business world. These people have a product which apparently has a demand, but they can’t ship it to those people because this place in Virginia or that place in Maine has said Playboy is too obscene. It doesn’t make sense.

Here is a really good laissez faire standard: As long as it is consenting adults and doesn’t involve animals and an undue amount of power tools, it is kosher. Your community doesn’t even have to allow it to be sold in stores in your area. The people who really want it will have no trouble buying the DVD or streaming video of it on the Internet. If you don’t want to see it or know about it, you don’t have to; and the people who do can.

In other hot legal news, my friend and fellow blogger Luke Ford is being sued! Danni.com CEO Layne Thrasher wasn’t happy with a post from Luke about his business tactics so he has chosen a legal route. Among other things, he claims that pictures of him are copyrighted and so are business plan documents published by Luke. Do we really have to go over the Fair Use Exemption of copyright law again?

Thrasher is also claiming libel for statements made about him through an anonymous source. If you are quoting a source, I don’t see how that can be libelous on Luke’s part. That’s just called reporting.

I, too, sometimes worry about junk lawsuits for things I have written. That’s why I have an attorney, Space Monkey. Of course, Space Monkey is completely ignorant of the law and has no license to practice law, so I have a friend who is a lawyer who is prepared to defend me against libel/slander charges. Plus, I am so poor I live with my parents. I don’t even legally own the clothes I’m wearing right now I’m so poor. Suing me would be an exercise in futility. Thousands in legal fees to get the $96.83 in my checking account; it would be better to just let me say whatever I want.