Adult Industry Leaders to File Suit Against L.A. County Over Measure B

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Judge Denies Government Motion to Dismiss in 2257 Case

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Pornstars Revolt Against Condom Law

Porn stars are thus far not amused

by LA County's attempts to require the use of condoms in the films they make. And on Monday, they'll be raising their voices extra loud by holding a fundraiser at Hamburger Mary's in West Hollywood to fight Measure B, which would enforce just such a regulation.

The measure, which will go before voters in November, would also require adult films to get permits from the L.A. County Department of Public Health.

Monday's event, which starts at 8:00 p.m. and costs $20 at the door, is being organized by the No on Government Waste, No on Measure B committee of the Free Speech Coalition. According to a statementreleased by the group today, it coincides with Hamburger Mary's regularly scheduled Legendary Bingo event.

Event organizer Mara Epstein said that “The time has come again, for all industry members to work together and keep the California industry from being attacked by our opposition.”

 

Related articles

• Party With a Porn Star: Fundraiser on Monday to Fight Condom Initiative (laist.com)
• AHF Launches 'Yes on Measure B' Condoms in Porn Campaign (xbiz.com)
• 'No on Measure B' Fundraiser Adds FSC Promo for Performers (xbiz.com)
• No on Government Waste Committee to Discuss Measure B at Press Conference (xbiz.com)
• So, What Is the Los Angeles County Condom Initiative, and What Happens if It's Passed? (xbiz.com)
• 'No On Measure B' Fundraiser: Porn Stars Party To Stop Condom Mandate (VIDEO) (huffingtonpost.com)

Judge Dismisses Sex Trafficking Suit Against Backpage.com

MISSOURI—U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas C. Mummert has dismissed a lawsuit brought against Village Voice Media in Sept. 2010 by an unnamed 15-year-old girl who was a victim of sex trafficking through the company's Backpage.com online classified website when she was 14 years old. The woman who pimped the minor out on the site, Latasha Jewell McFarland, pleaded guilty to prostitution charges in December and was sentenced to five years in prison.

The victim held Backpage.com responsible as well, alleging in a four-page complaint that it “had knowledge that: explicit sexual photographs were being posted on its website; that postings on their website were advertisements for prostitution services; that minors were included in these postings for prostitution on its website; that sex trafficking of minors was prolific in the United States of America; and that the internet including their service was being used to advertise illegal sexual services, including child exploitation.” The minor sought $150,000 per alleged violation.

In his dismissal, however, Mummert found that Backpage.com, as an “interactive computer service,” is immune under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act for content posted to its site by third parties. The plaintiff made several arguments that attempted to override the immunity, but Mummert found none of them viable.

Indeed, in response to the claim that Backpage should not be immune under § 230 because it "is aware of prior cases of minors being sexually trafficked on its website and based upon the posted ads and photography, no reasonable person could review the postings in the adult categories and deny prostitution was the object of almost each and every ad,” the judge noted a 2007 First Circuit finding that it "is, by now, well established that notice of the unlawful nature of the information provided is not enough to make it the service provider's own speech."

In other words, even if a service provider knows that third parties are posting illegal content, under § 230, the service provider is under no obligation to intervene, and is in fact immunized from being held legally responsible. This immunization held in the earlier Craigslist case as well, in which a sheriff brought suit against the online classified giant for having “the single largest source for prostitution, including child exploitation, in the country.” Regardless of the allegations, § 230 immunized Craigslist, as it does Backpage.com, unless it had created the ads itself.

In conclusion, Judge Mummert wrote, “"Plaintiff artfully and eloquently attempts to phrase her allegations to avoid the reach of (the communications decency act). Those allegations, however, do not distinguish the complained-of actions of Backpage from any other website that posted content that led to an innocent person's injury. Congress has declared such websites to be immune from suits arising from such injuries. It is for Congress to change the policy that gave rise to such immunity."

The Order by Judge Mummert can be accessed here.

Facebook Slaps Facebook Of Sex With Suit

SAN FRANCISCO—Facebook filed a lawsuit April 13 against Various, GMCI Internet Operations, Traffic Cat, Friendfinder Networks and 1-100 Does, alleging trademark infringement and dilution in the promotion of "an online 'adult' networking service and affiliate program under the brand FACE BOOK OF SEX."

The complaint further claims that the "Defendants’ mark, websites and affiliate program are a deliberate and blatant attempt to imitate and trade upon the success of the Facebook brand. Association with Defendants’ pornographic websites tarnishes Facebook’s reputation and abuses the trust of Facebook users. Accordingly, Facebook brings this suit to put a stop to Defendants’ unlawful scheme."

The Facebook complaint is 23 pages in length, but with all the exhibits added the size of the file submitted Wednesday runs 200 pages, much of it documentation proving multiple U.S. registrations for the Facebook mark, but also numerous screen grabs of Face Book of Sex web pages, with performer's faces pixilated, and also two blocks of emails between Facebook domain name manager Susan Kawaguchi and Various general counsel David Bloom that begin in October 2010 and end April 12, 2011, the day before the filing of the lawsuit.

The letters show a year long inability by the respective parties to coordinate upper level meetings to discuss concerns about trademark, but were really added by Facebook to illustrate that, as the complaint states, "Defendants have tried to use the purported 'FriendFinder' mark as leverage in negotiations, asserting that Facebook must address Defendants’ concerns before they will address Facebook’s trademark claims."

Indeed, from the beginning of the submitted email correspondence on trademark, apparently broached by Kawaguchi on Oct. 29, 2010, when she followed up on an earlier call addressing Facebook's concerns about FacebookOfSex.com and other domains, Bloom replied in an Nov. 8 email saying his side also wanted to discuss Facebook's use of the Friendfinder mark, and also the fact that Facebook had issues with Various domains, PenthouseBook.com, PenthouseBook.net and MyFaceOnPenthouse.com. As early as that first exchange, though, Bloom was unambiguous about Friendfinder's position regarding its right to use Face Book of Sex.

"As to the purpose of your phone call and email," he wrote, "we respectfully disagree that the uses you described infringe upon Facebook's trademark."

That position apparently remained unchanged through to April 12, the day of the final email submitted as evidence, in which Bloom refers to a planned conference call involving FriendFinder COO Anthony Previte and a Facebook executive.

"At this point we seem to have trouble scheduling a meeting," he wrote. "Rather than have Tony on this call, I request the following: please create a short agenda of all the issues that Richard wants to discuss. To that agenda we also want to discuss Facebook's historic and continuing use of 'Friend Finder'. Once you send me your proposed agenda, I will find the correct person to handle the call, and we can schedule a time."

The lawsuit was filed the following day. In it, Facebook attempts to also address its use of "friend finder," which it uses as "a tool on its website that allows users to find friends by searching their email contact lists." The company wants the court to "declare that Facebook is making descriptive fair use of the words 'friend finder,' or in the alternative, that Various’s 'FriendFinder' Registrations are subject to cancellation on the grounds that the terms registered therein are descriptive and have not acquired secondary meaning in the marketplace.

The Facebook complaint can be accessed here.

Untitled

CANOGA PARK, Calif. — The Free Speech Coalition says it is looking into legal options available for performers affected by the PornWikileaks.com site, which has exposed volumes of personal data information on thousands of performers.

“Free Speech Coalition stands in opposition to the violations of performer privacy by PornWikileaks,” FSC Executive Director Diane Duke said Friday. “This is not an issue of free speech; it is about violating the privacy of performers. It’s about potential extortion and exposing performers to potential harassment, stalking and other criminal activities.”

Duke said that it is unclear where the data displayed on PornWikileaks originated but federal authorities are probing breaches of federal law in the accumulation of data that has been exposed on the website. The investigation, she says, centers on the illegal access of medical databases.

Attorney Reed Lee, an FSC board member who is chair of the group's Government & Legal Committee, said PornWikileaks' postings have "an obvious chilling effect on performers and exposes them to known dangers that are extremely serious."  

“Would the website operators have published the NAACP's membership list in the most difficult days of the civil rights struggle?" he asked. "Everyone involved with PornWikileaks is playing a most dangerous game. They target the performers and they target free expression itself."

The FSC disclosed Friday that attorney Corey Silverstein is representing client Paul Armstrong in a possible action against individuals using the PornWikileaks website for illegal activity.

He is seeking performers who have had their personal information posted on PornWikileaks or have been threatened by those connected to the site. 

“While I cannot discuss the specific nature of my clients' allegations and any action that is being prepared, it is important to note that this is not a simple free speech issue,” Silverstein said. “The individuals running this website are allegedly intentionally and knowingly jeopardizing the safety and privacy of adult performers all over the world while purposely defaming them in the process. 

"The website repeatedly refers to adult performers as ‘pornographic whores’ and ‘hookers’ and even talks about specific adult performers ‘degrading the whole family.’ My clients cannot comprehend why the individuals running this website would want to intentionally cause so much potential harm.”

The FSC has asked those who have been affected by PornWikileaks and their attorneys to contact FSC at PWL@freespeechcoalition.com.

 

source: x-biz.com