Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
Top Banner, Site wide
Apr 20, 2014

 Choose a size
Text Size

Top Leaderboard, Site wide

First Solar Bread Oven Takes a Bow
Drought Adds to Syria’s Misery

The Divide

Truthdig Bazaar more items

Ear to the Ground

Court Victory for DIY Porn Enthusiasts

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Oct 24, 2007
Pepe Le Pew

Le rowr:  According to Wednesday’s ruling, amateurs interested in getting frisky (in a consensual and legal fashion) on camera shouldn’t need to follow the same record-keeping rules as commercial porn producers.

There’s been a slight shift in the regulation of pornography in America, thanks to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, that might appeal to those of-age-and-consenting types interested in creating racy footage of themselves without the goal of profiting (monetarily, anyhow).’s Machinist:

The court struck down 18 U.S.C. 2257, a statute that Congress enacted in 1988 as part of an anti-child-porn law. It requires producers of “sexually-explicit” material (NSFW definition here) to maintain records on the ages and identities of their filmed performers.

If you’re making a porno, that is, you’ve got to make photocopies of your stars’ IDs and then keep diligent records of these documents, which are subject to inspection at any time by the government.

That might sound like a reasonable regulation of adult material. Trouble is, as the court points out, the law does not cover only traditional producers of adult material. The text of the statute defines a “producer” of porn as anyone who makes sexually explicit material—even people who create images for themselves, without publishing or distributing them to anyone else.

Read more

More Below the Ad


Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

driving bear's avatar

By driving bear, October 25, 2007 at 2:16 pm Link to this comment

Guess what playboy does keep records and proof of age of all persons appearing in the mag. In fact every issue of playboy ( i subscribe to it ) prints who and where to contact to see the records. In fact playboy requires two forms of ID to be in the mag. So if a someone wants to submit a adult video to you tube or porn tube Id should be required

Report this

By Contrarian, October 25, 2007 at 8:52 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

No, Driving Bear, websites that distribute adult material are part of the distribution chain, not part of the production chain. Those who make the pictures/videos are the production chain.  Do you think that every 7-11 should maintain a copy of the drivers’ licenses of everyone that appears in Playboy?  Of course not, and neither should websites that post pictures/videos produced by others.

Report this

By Yakuna, October 25, 2007 at 7:37 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Internet is for porn smile Best porn2.0 Web site

Report this

By thomas billis, October 24, 2007 at 10:46 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Porn the byword of the religious right.If you could confiscate their computers it would be loaded with porn.I live in Las Vegas and whenever those conventions come in here from the midwest the adult stores have to load up.If it is all consenting adults whose business is it anyway.The Republicasns who continually run on the premise of getting government out of your faces are always the ones trying to regulate what adults do.If you do not like it do not watch it.If you do not like it on television change the channel.Please stop that ridiculous arguement we are just worried about the children.S-chip settled that.

Report this

By rowdy, October 24, 2007 at 9:03 pm Link to this comment

recently on one of my favorite porn sites,they were warning everyone of a proposed federal law, that would require all porn sites to have photo id of their users. i haven’t seen this warning lately so maybe this stupid legislation went away when craig got fucked. why the fuck should porn actors or anyone in the porn business have to show id to the government? is this to protect the precious fucking children? you know, the runaways and those abandoned by their self righteous fag hating parents,the ones that can’t accept their kids homosexuality? i lived in san francisco, long enough to know 12 and 13 year old boys who lived in the suburbs and were smart enough to come into the city and sell their young asses to anyone with $100. we have some fucked up puritanical values that transcend even the twisted sick values of the evangelical KKKristian right wing. the world is full of exhibitionist hedonists and all the kkkristian laws will never stop those who like seeing a good fuck,having a good fuck or showing themselves getting a good fuck.

Report this
driving bear's avatar

By driving bear, October 24, 2007 at 8:24 pm Link to this comment

I personally disagree with the 6th circuit on this one. In 1988 when the current law was passed the Internet did not exist. Web sites that distribute adult material are part of the production chain and therefore should require ID of persons in adult pics/videos or remove the material from their site.

Report this

sign up to get updates

Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.