No shit... I own about 25 or so transexual themed DVDs, all which explicit boxcovers. (Plus, all filled with hardcore sex.:)

No black men with white women themes...

Little White Chicks... Big Black Monster Dicks series.

Does anyone care about this list anyway? It seems that nobody gives a rat's ass over it... not a shot at you nudity, but there doesn't seem to be a lot of studios adhering to this list... But I could be wrong.

---Let freedom ring with the shotgun blast! ---

[Link]

Is there a date on when the Cambria List was compiled?

DenverDon

Edited by - DenverDon on 10/10/2002 12:15:26 AM

[Link]

also around that time studios were discontinuing titles - thread on that

[Link]

We have 4 of the more conservative adult companies meeting with their lawyer because they are paranoid about what might happen because of a new administration. The lawyer comes up with a list of things to avoid in order to be 100% safe against anyone possibly coming after them. Don't forget, as well as being conservative, they are also relatively high profile companies within the industry. If an Attorney General wanted to make a big splash, these would be pretty good companies to try to make that splash with.

This list becomes makes it's way around the industry, and many companies panic a little more. Some companies (like Metro) begin recalling some of their titles. Other companies take the attitude, "We've done nothing wrong, and we are going to continue to sell out videos".

Now the list becomes public, and prosecutors begin to use the list as a checklist of acts that even the adult industry considers to be obscene. "If you don't believe that is is obscene, then why would you put it on a list of acts to avoid?"

If you look at any of the recaps of the Max Hardcore trial, you will see that the Cambria list was brought up multiple times by the prosecution.

I beleive that allowing that list to be read by anyone that stopped the list from being protected by attorney/client privilege will prove to be a major problem for the adult industry in the long run.

[Link]

Any prosecutor (or defense attorney) with half a brain would *not* use this list as "evidence" to make their case.

This list isn't even well thought out, that's plain just by looking at the purely racist inclusion of features with "black men with white women" themes.

-- Snowman

Edited by - snowman872 on 10/10/2002 11:43:21 PM

[Link]

What the list *does* do is indirectly bring attention to the unworkability of the law of obscenity in a society that champions "freedom of speech."

Leaving what's obscene up to a random group of 12 jurors in the "community" will never provide any meaningful guidance to adult porn companies. And now with the Internet, even the "community" concept is problematic.

The fact is, we don't know what's "obscene" until 12 people deem it as such *after* the fact and even then, it is completely arbitrary. Take 12 other people, have them hear the same case, and the result could be completely different.

This results in one of the huge problems with this area. An adult producer can never really be sure he/she is following the law and creating "unobscene" material. This is unlike nearly every other criminal act we can be punished for. You know or should know if you are speeding. You know or should know if you murder someone. Obviously, this situation is unfair and makes adult producers uncomfortable.

The "Cambria List" is an lame attempt to get around the uncertainties in this area of the law. But the reality is, you can't remove them. A producer could follow the list to the T and still be found obscene. In fact, the most "vanilla" of sex tapes could be found obscene. All it takes is a conservative jury who hasn't given much thought to the First Amendment.

-- Snowman

[Link]

Personally, I'm a believer in allowing consenting adults do as they please. I don't care for or against interracial sex, some of the gaping stuff, and a host of other things available on the market. Unless someone is being forced to do something, it's generally not my concern. Most of us here seem to agree on this attitude but we are porn watchers. There are many small communities that feel otherwise and that's the problem for the producers who don't want to go to jail. All it takes is for some distributor to release something in the wrong community and then everyone involved is potentially headed for court. Win, lose or draw, such matters cost time and money that could be better spent elsewhere (on both sides).

PS: and in plenty of communities, interracial sex is considered "wrong" with no concern for what the performers think-some backwater southern town would be lynching a few of our favorite performers if given the chance...

[Link]

From AVN's report:
Anderson then turned her attention to attempting to tear down the testimony of AVN publisher Paul Fishbein, who had been called as the defense's expert witness. She made an issue of Fishbein describing himself as a journalist and not a member of the adult industry, and of his belief as to the general lack of significance of the so-called Cambria list.

"The adult industry uses the Cambria list like a Bible," Anderson claimed.

The prosecutor may not have half a brain, but she certainly tried to use this list in exactly the manner in which I previously described.

Whether the list describes what is and is not obscene is irrelevant. The prosecutor went out of her way to impl;y that the list is exactly that.

[Link]

-- Snowman

[Link]

But Snow, consider that said prosecutor was in California, one of the most liberal states, and that many people-certainly most of us here in the ADT forums-don't think anything done by consenting adults should be considered obscene to begin with. Looking at it that way, the prosecutor convinced 6 people that the movie WAS >obscene, cost Max big bucks, and gets to do it all again if desired.

-------------------------------------------------------

I suppose from her perspective six people is better than none, but she's well aware it takes more than that.

I totally agree with you Houston that many people feel acts between two consenting adults should not be a crime. I myself fall into that category, but even here in California, there are going to be conservatives and folks who believe porn is contrary to their religious beliefs.

I was quite concerned that Max WOULD lose this case. There are so many offensive things in a typical Max Hardcore movie, I thought there was a good chance *something* in the movie would offend everyone on the Jury. Even if you can get over the anal sex, even if you can accept the throat gagging, even if you can overlook all the derrogatory comments and general misogomy, a lot of people might have a serious problem with the abduction of a minor theme. It's just the sort of thing that could be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

I don't agree with it. I don't think it is the way it should be and I hope it doesn't happen, but this seemed like a "winnable" case to me.

Those six jury members who refused to cave on the First Amendment are to be commended.

-- Snowman

Edited by - snowman872 on 10/12/2002 1:47:03 PM

Edited by - snowman872 on 10/12/2002 1:48:07 PM

[Link]

Too pure a view - maybe. Unpopular, apparently! At least amongst large segments of society.

[Link]