Tom Byron

Okay folks, back on the topic of the EA Indictment or I'm locking this thread.

[Link]

I'm not telling you what to do. Vote for Bush, vote for Nader, don't buy my product, do whatever you want, I could care less pal.

I just hate to see a good thread with intelligent discussions derailed by petty childish bickering.

I love ADT. It's the only board I participate in. I like that people from all over the world can discuss a variety of topics, not limited to just who has the best gaper or who did DAP or ATOGM. But, if that's all you want to talk about, and I can't voice my opinion without being maligned and disrespected, I'll simply concentrate on making my movies. Hopefully, some of you will buy them, enjoy them, and I'll stay out of jail.

That said, VOTE KERRY!!! (except JV33)

[Link]

For the record, I didn't really think in my heart of hearts that it was the smartest thing to do a rape themed movie and for Rob to go on Frontline and say some of the things he said, especially during a conservative right-wing administration. I think if you asked Rob if he had to do it all over again, I don't think he would have done some of the things he did. BUT, now that they have brought the fight to us, we should do everything we can to insure that we all are free to do business without fear of persecution. Hopefully, things will work out, not only for Extreme, but for the entire biz.

[Link]

Instead, I will join with you in support of our common cause: remove this oppressive administration in favor of a less oppressive one. It's the best we can hope for as we take baby steps to finally electing a candidate with libertarian philosophies, beholden only to the people.

Edited by - Christian Mann on 3/18/2004 5:17:40 PM

[Link]

Quaze

[Link]

If mainstream filmmakers can make everything from “Natural Born Killers” to “Passion of the Christ” why is there no room for Vivid , Extreme, Video Team, Evolution Erotica Platinum X Pictures and even our east coast baby Platinum Pictures Inc. to express our individual styles without harsh judgment of/and from the industry?

Michael Stefano did a wonderful job in “ Forced Entry”. Just as Anthony Hopkins did in “Silence of the lambs.” Although the parts are clearly very different, in both cases they played characters that were disturbed. I don’t have to personally approve of the actions of the character to appreciate the performance of the actor. And if the movie in whole or part it’s not for me I turn it off or fast forward. That’s one of the responsibilities of adulthood.

I may take heat for this, but it seems to me the people who make porn seemed to turn on Rob (and Tom Byron by association) in a way that seemed unfair. What will keep this business dynamic is different forms of expression not another sexual position. Softcore, Hardcore, and everything within the continuum should be able to be expressed. It seems that freedom of expression shouldn’t take a back seat to personal choice.

Admittedly, we are the babies of this industry and most have never even heard of us . Fans of our stuff seem to like the difference in our style. We are an ethnic video company but usually much edger and urban than Video Team. That’s great because it provides choice, not competition in the literal since.

I’m not naïve about the dangers of taunting the Feds. Nor do I think personal responsibility of the filmmaker should be abandon, however it is important to remember whose who really hate porn make little difference between “Forced Entry” and “Vivid”.

UNITED WE STAND!

Edited by - platinum6969 on 3/19/2004 10:37:38 AM

[Link]

This is what Pastor Martin Niemoller, a German anti-Nazi activist, said after WWII:

In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

Edited by - Percy Walker on 3/19/2004 4:37:05 AM

[Link]

There's an old feminist chestnut that a woman has to do her job twice as well as a man does his just to get half the credit. I believe the proscuction of pornographers is a gross violation of the 14th amendment, but that doesn't change the facts on the ground. If you're going to take on edgy material (sex, violence, politics, etc.), you do a disservice to yourself, the subject matter and your colleagues in the industry by producing video that looks like cable access garbage.

You wanna go the Community Standards route? Go ahead. You'll lose, and then you can flip a coin with the folks from GirlsPooping.com on who will bugger whom in the shower. The best defense is to produce pornography that looks like you take yourself and what you're doing seriously.

-T.C.

Edited by - TonyC on 3/19/2004 8:44:04 AM

[Link]

Secondly, it's all well and fine to talk about how things should be. I believe it is fundementally un-American for the government to offer itself as an arbitor of taste, let alone criminalize bad taste (or incompetent filmmaking) Futher more, that this distinction is applied solely to sexually explicit filmmaking is just silly.

But right or wrong, American or anti-American, silly or not, it's the way thing are; and change is not going to come from making rediculously bad videos and then shouting "community standards is a sham." One of the foundations of our federalist system is that there are variations in laws from community to community (you can't get guns at the 34th Street K-mart, but you can get them at the K-mart in my parents' home town.) Attacking Miller v California on the basis of community standards has failed repeatedly.

So what can you (one) do?

Well first off you can vote Bush out of office. Kerry may or may not ease up on porn proscecution (he has made no policy statements one way or the other) but it's hard to imagine a AG more hostile to porn than Ashcroft.

Second, make porn worth defending. Has anyone besides me notice the conspicuous absense of the ACLU in recent obscenity cases? Defending Miller or Joyce is fun; defending GirlsPooping.com is just embarrassing.

- T.C.

Edited by - TonyC on 3/19/2004 11:13:56 AM

[Link]

Community standards for a public theater is one thing (and the basis on which the Miller decision was made) but community standards should not be applicable in this case (or many others).

As I understand it, this case stems from a purchase via the internet (a virtual community) to buy clearly defined sexually graphic material to be delivered to a person’s private home. The local community in which he or she lived never entered the picture.

Communities have the a right to determine the establishments that directly effect their community. However, it is a distortion of this principal to extend that to the privacy of one’s home. The Supreme court rightly stuck down the sodomy laws based in part on the principal that consenting adults in the privacy of their home should be able to engage in consensual sexual activity even if others outside of their home “The community, or people within the community” find that activity immoral. I believe the same should apply for the movies they choose to watch.

Further, in this case the community standards could not reasonability be determined by the producer or the purchaser without literally taking the video in question and polling the neighborhood. Is this the standard by which we now should live?

Do you or I have to poll the neighborhood on our viewing choices for material which may or may not have even come from that community in order to meet community standards?

We can not be trapped into only defending material that we find defensible, because ultimately it’s not the material that we are defending. We are defending the right to make the material and have adults decide for themselves without censorship. As soon as we accept the false notion that only material “we” find defensible should be defended, we open the door for censorship.

Voting Bush out is an important start. Making more interesting porn is important too, but we can not let individual taste supersede the freedom of expression and the innate rights of privacy our consumers should have.

Again, I thank you for this dialogue.

[Link]

What the Supreme Court did do in the Texas Sodomy case was uphold the lower court ruling that the Texas Sodomy law was unconstitutional because it violated the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

I agree with everything you've written regarding "Community Standards". But I'm not the one you have to convince. More over, everything I've seen tells me that Miller v California will not be overturned on the basis of a First Ammendment challenge to the community standards test. Community Standards might be vulnerable to a Fourteenth Amendment challenge (as used in Lawrence v. Texas.)

Where Miller is most certainly vulnerable is in the third prong of the test: "whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

-T.C.

[Link]

...hey, how about Planet of the Grapes -- when you get 'em good and open you could have contests to see who can ring 'em with the most fruit. Points would be awarded based on the size, in cm or inches, of the dilated dumper.

BUT SERIOUSLY, FOLKS!

For a substantial contribution to the thread, all I can say is: I love what this country was founded for, but not what it is trying to become. We've forgotten our roots, being people who weren't afraid to kill and die for their right to be free from oppression.

However small my talents and brains, I've always felt it's my duty not to let them go to waste (boy, it sure feels that way sometimes, though -- what am I doing wasting time on ADT ) and to defend to the death other people's right to freedom, even if I don't agree with what they stand for. But don't you EVER, EVER, EVER try to force your way on me! How strongly do I feel about that?

Remind yourselves how fucking awesome this country can be:

Don't Tread on Me.

And then look around, read the news, feel the vibe...feel it? Sucks, right?

As cheesy as this is going to sound, I'm inspired by Tommy and Guy at EE (and some others, too, good Lord it ain't a popularity contest; they just came to mind) who've expressed the kind of ideals that make me proud to be an American by association.

And Rob Black to a certain extent, too. I had a friend just like him, one of the smartest guys I ever knew, but he'd wear "Watch More Porn" t-shirts to the job site. Didn't understand about Thick Face, Black Heart or Winning Through Intimidation. We had to fire him, but I love him, and now he won't speak to me. Fuck 'im. BUT ANYWAY...

If you guys end up doing any face time in a courtroom, I highly recommend those books just to get a little leg up. Quick reads.

And I'm incoherent today. No point. Nothin'. I'll let you get back to the good stuff! I'm makin' POPCORN!

Edited by - cobalt60 on 3/19/2004 3:07:48 PM

[Link]

-T.C.

[Link]

bigdick,

This is not the place for your request. If you want to ask Tom about Planet of the Gapes, start another thread, or send him an email.

Please don't derail this one.

[Link]

Back to you (feel the white hot light turn your direction): Did you ever send your letter to Hillary? Hmmph...don't talk to me about talk, then, Mr. One Hit Wonder -- besides, after a long day of slacking and posting with work in between, I have to pick up the little one from day care, make dinner, counsel on homework, catch up on email, read stories and tuck the little one in, practice guitar, work on my drawings...

So forgive me if my first adult graphic novel is moving along rather slowly .

The world is a harsh, brutal place, so I hear. "Art" is often considered a reflection of the society from which it emanates. Does bad porn shine the beacon of an enlightened people on the rest of the world as what our society stands for, as the kind of product that can be created when you have total creative freedom, or does it say "give these people some leeway and look what they do?"

Just asking.

Should some of what's acceptable in today's "mainstream porn" be scaled back a little, because of the unhealthy sexual attitudes much of it portrays? Because of the damage it does to the psyches of the men for whom it's intended? Is it making the case that given a choice between having two filet mignons or a grocery sack full of tacos, we'll take the tacos?

I know you're right, TC -- it does make a better case in favor of creative artistic freedom when the products themselves are more defensible than some lowbrow, tasteless, misogynistic crap. So ultimately, it's up to you fuckers who make it to provide something worth defending. Hey, that rather sounds like what you were saying! How about that! We agree!

As for me, you have my promise that when (not if) I make something, it will have some literary or artistic merit. Or I might just draw women drinking enema water, I haven't decided yet...

Edited by - cobalt60 on 3/19/2004 4:49:42 PM

[Link]

Lowbrow? Please! Tasteless? Tastes great! Misogynistic? I'll slap the bitch myself! But please, let's do it in a way that shows that we take a little pride in what we do. When it looks like cable access it looks like you don't really mean it.

-T.C.

[Link]

Platinum Pictures Inc. The home of Independent Pornography

[Link]

What about the possibly damaged psyches of the performers themselves ? Or is it too late in the day/thread to ask such a question ?

If the people involved are so fucked up on jungle juice and so addicted they're past caring , then what sort of consent are they able to offer ? It could be that letting people relive traumatic events in their lives in the safety ( yeh right - did we ever hear back about that girl who claimed she was raped on camera , while the tape just kept on rollin' ? ) of a porn set might not be the best idea .

I'm not saying that these are always the circumstances , but there do appear to be some pornos like this . Sure there are directors who take the time to care - about the talent and the end result - but there are plenty who don't seem inclined to . Perhaps a little weeding out wouldn't be such a bad thing , at least not for the type of porn I like . Is that what it all comes down to though ? Fight for the stuff you like , and let them take the rest .

We accept policing in every other business ( in Britain and America ) , why should porn be any different ? Are people allowed to hurt themselves on the logging buzz saw every time they feel like it , or are there some safe-guards in place ?

[Link]

Have a good weekend, you sick fucks! I'm off! Talk to ya'll Sunday or Monday -- watch those logging saws and designate a driver, mmmm-kay? WHOOP!

*POOF*

[Link]

My reading of Lawrence has focused on the fact that Texas anti-sodomy law specified homosexual sodomy, and as such was a denial of equal protection. While this is addressed in Kennedy's oppinion, I'd have to assume that if only that part of the law was addressed, it would leave the door open to a law banning all sodomy (as in Bowers)

That said, the phrase "right to privacy" cannot be found in the Lawrence decission. Rather, the phrase exercise of their liberty under the Due Process Clause is used.

-T.C.

[Link]

-T.C.

[Link]

What I remember reading was that part of the reason they overturned the sodomy laws across the country was due to the historical reasons these were on the books in the first place. Many were from the 1600's, and were used to proscecute pedophiles originally. Since we have better laws dealing with this crime nowadays, that was one reason the old sodomy laws were overturned.

I know there is also something in the decision about privacy issues, but I don't remember offhand the details.

Back to Natural Born Killers - Even though this is a violent movie, it still had to get financing from Warner Bros. studio (who I imagine had some say in the product), and the director had to cut out some of the content to go from an NC-17 rating to a R. So, even he didn't have absolutely everything his own way. When the DVD came out, Warner Bros. asked and got their name removed off the credits, they wanted to distance themselves that much from the film.

If a mainstream director wants to truly make whatever he wants, he can go the Mel Gibson route and finance his own film, to the tune of $30 million dollars. And Gibson too, due to some backlash, cut out some of the more controversial aspects of his Passion movie before its release. At least were I live, the movie has had its fans, and its detractors. The editorial section of our biggest newspaper devoted an entire page to the movie (highly unusual), with a variety of opinions printed. One Episcopal priest wrote that in her opinion, it was nothing more than a gore-fest.

When comparing mainstream films to porn films, I think people should keep in mind that whoever provides the financing (usually big movie studios) has a big say in the final product. And all these movies have to go through the MPAA to get a rating before they are released in theaters. A very different situation from the one that dictates the content of porn films.

[Link]

I was born and raised in Utah, Salt Lake City.

DenverDon

[Link]

You may not have been referring to me specifically but, In my comments earlier I was only speaking to the wide range of expression that exist in main stream films. Mot many would condemn all of movies for the violence in some. We in porn should be able to have an equally wide range.

Financing your own projects is the norm in porn (or maybe we just don’t know the right people) but much more changeling in porn is getting distribution for porn that isn’t formulaic and repetitive.

Have a great weekend.

[Link]

Every since I was a very young person I always felt I wanted to make movies that better reflected real life but I was disappointed that all of the stories I had seen stopped at the bedroom. But one day that all changed.

Many years ago, before I was supposed to watch porn; I saw a movie called “Lamour”. You were in that movie. You were this cute looking guy with an adorable smile and big dick. That movie and your performance (sexual and non-sexual) left an imprint on my brain that still remains today.

After seeing you and your fellow cast members in that movie I knew I wanted to make porn. I wanted to able to tell stories and express myself in ways that included graphic sexual expression. You followed that performance with an equally great performance in a special series called Taboo American Style.

I have yet to live up to the standards those movies set in my own directing, but I wanted to thank you for giving me a standard to aim for. I can’t imagine I would have liked porn as much through the years if you were not apart of this business. So…. THANK YOU TOM BYRON!!!

Much Luv & Renewed Success
Baby Boss
CEO
Platinum Pictures Inc.

[Link]

Then, I thought back to when I first hired Rob. I did it not because I was turned on by the style of his shooting, I never saw his stuff as anything I could get off on, but because Russ Hampshire had fired him for doing "controversial" movies. I believe in free speech and this was a way I could put my money where my mouth was so to speak, so I hired Rob more as a statement than an investment.

I never watched any of the movies in question. Based on what I've read, they're not something I'd watch. But that's not the issue for me.

I once had a guy tell me the meaning of the word dilemma is having two opposing answers to the same issue, both being valid. Here's my dilemma. I don't support what Rob chose to do. I believe he asked for this. But I can tell you from my own personal experience, that Rob is not the issue here either. If they get Rob, they will be far more energized than they already are. If these people make an issue out of a J.J. tit on T.V. does anyone really think it will stop with a conviction of Rob? These people BELIEVE in what they are trying to do! It is what makes them so dangerous. Just like the extremist Islamists believe that a woman shouldn't show her face, let alone wear a bathing suit, these people believe they are making the world a better place by keeping themselves, ( and us), protected from whatever they see as immoral. They also sympathize, or outright support the taking of lives as a viable method of correcting the ills of society. This is what we are ALL up against. It won't stop with porn. Can you imagine the number of people that would like to ban the show, " QUEER EYE FOR THE STRAIGHT GUY"?
How about Spike TV? Howard Stern? The list goes on ad infinitum.

While I don't agree with the reckless behavior that brought this situation on,, this IS porn. We DO go to jail. They want us ALL out of business.

So the question for me is simple. Do we bend over like the networks are currently doing with the FCC? Or, do we continue on the front lines fighting for everyones right to read, and view what they choose to as consenting adults?
What can I do?
I will vote to out this administration, and I will financially support this case
Tommy, my suggestion is that someone start a legal defense fund, and that you post the information here.
Patrick

[Link]

It's really encouraging that a lot more people in the biz are coming to the realization that Extreme's case does have far-reaching effects, not only on the adult business, but on the slippery slope of censorship in general.

I do wish, however, that more performers would become more involved in protecting the rights that a lot of them seem to take for granted. I really don't think some of them know what's at stake.

For instance, I was on a set recently and a very popular performer (who I won't name) mentioned that she was going to vote for Bush. I asked why and she said, "I dunno, I just like him, Kerry looks like Lurch from the Addams Family hahaha" as if the Presidential race was some kind of personality pageant like American Idol or Survivor.

But then I realized, she was a toddler when the business experienced its last right-wing assault back in the eighties. She probably thinks, as others do, that if multiple obscenity prosecutions do occur it won't affect her life and she'll still be able to her nasty scenes, make thousands of dollars, and continue to live blissfully unaware of what's going on in the world. After all, the companies are the ones getting in trouble, it doesn't have anything to do with me. Right?

WRONG!!!

As someone who has been in this business for 22 years, let me tell you, talent will be among the FIRST to feel the negative effects should the government come down on the industry. If multiple obscenity prosecutions occur, and company owners are forced to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on legal fees, do you really think you're going to continue to demand such high fees and that you're all going to be able to work at the rate that you do now, making thousands every month? A lot of companies won't have the money or the desire to take on the government and will go out of business. That means there will be less work to go around, and a lot more competition for the dwindling jobs that do exist. Your rates will go down if you want to be able to continue working, and you'll have to work two or three times harder to make the same money you did before.

I speak from experience. In the early-mid eighties, I was the new, hot property in the biz, and I was able to command high rates and was able to get them because everyone was making money. Video was bringing adult fare into more homes, business was booming, and there seemed to be no end in sight .

However, when the Republican hammer came down in the late eighties and early nineties, my rate dropped to about an eighth of what it was. I had to take it to pay the rent. Plus, all the big productions that I was so proud to be a part of seemed to dry up too. The term "one-day wonder" became the standard. Imagine spending 20 hours on a set and taking home a small fraction of what you had been able to earn a couple of years ago.

Not to mention getting harrassed by the FBI, followed by the Vice department, and pursued by every aspect of law enforcement to try to get you to roll over on the industry. If you resist, expect the IRS and the Justice Department to crawl up your ass and inspect every facet of your life with a fine tooth comb.

It can happen. It has happened and it will happen if this administration's war on porn is allowed to continue. Again, I speak from experience.

We all have something to lose in this fight. Whether you're talent, an owner, someone who works in the warehouse, a fan or just someone who wants to be able to enjoy his life as an adult , you need to be aware.

You may not think you have a voice, but you do. That voice is your vote. It's the only language politicians understand.

Edited by - Tom Byron on 3/21/2004 8:28:49 PM

[Link]

Someone like Kerry needn't worry about getting the votes of conservatives, since they're not going to vote for him anyway. Ergo, he won't feel the pressure to name an ultra-conservative to be Attorney General, and he won't feel so much political pressure to pursue further porn proscecutions.

That's why it's important to vote for Kerry.

Besides, except for true conservatives like Ashcroft or true liberals like Ted Kennedy, who really knows what any of these politicians really think. Most of them stay close to the center of issues 90-99% of the time, and most want to avoid any controversies.

[Link]

Vote Libertarian.

Edited by - Plaid_Retina on 3/21/2004 11:21:00 PM

[Link]

(FYI for anyone confused by the names at the end of my post. Both Lisa "me" and my Boss "Baby Boss" use this account because she hasn't registered yet, so until she does each of us will sign our post)

Lisa

[Link]

Before Democratic Sen Bob Graham pulled out of the Presidential race, he was asked in an interview what would be his first act as President if he won. Without hesitation, he said he would remove Ashcroft from his post, not because of porn proscecutions, but because of his record on civil rights.

The recent crackdown on indecency on the TV and radio is somewhat different from the porn proscecutions. The federal goverment grants licenses, via the FCC, to stations to broadcast content for free. The stations do have some standards that they have to meet; the licenses are not a "do whatever you want" card. These same standards do not apply to pay channels, like Playboy or HBO, since you the viewer can choose not to pay for them (there have been court cases about this, ruling in favor of channels like Playboy).

Myself, I've seen nudity on network and basic cable TV channels, especially PBS when they broadcast foreign films that can contain brief softcore sex scenes. There was also some brief nudity on the USA channel's broadcast of the movie Helen of Troy. What made these cases OK is that they gave the rating before the start of the program that these contained sexual content. The problem with the Super Bowl Halftime show with Janet Jackson is that people just aren't expecting nudity in the middle of a football game, and no warning was given for it - though if they had posted the warning, think of all the men who would have stayed tuned to watch it!

[Link]

The only winning move for porn is to send this administration packing.

Edited by - Tom Byron on 4/2/2004 9:15:40 PM

[Link]