Four age verification companies have launched legal action to challenge the government's decision to cancel the censorship scheme requiring age verification for access to internet porn. The companies have lodged a judicial review at the High Court
Thursday.
The Telegraph understands the companies are arguing the decision was an abuse of power as the move had been approved by parliament. They are also claiming damages, understood to be in the region of £3 million, for losses sustained developing
age verification technology.
The four companies behind the judicial review - AgeChecked Ltd, VeriMe, AVYourself and AVSecure - are arguing the secretary of state only had power to choose when the scheme came into force, not scrap it in the form
passed by Parliament.
The legal action has been backed by campaigners from the Children's Charities' Coalition for Internet Safety (CCCIS), which represents organisations including the NSPCC and Barnardo's.
The CEO of AVSecure, Stuart Lawley, a
British tech entrepreneur who made his fortune in the dotcom boom, said he had personally lost millions creating the technology. He said the company, which is behind other parental control apps such as Ageblock, had been preparing for up to 10 million
people signing up for the service on day one.
Comment: Age Verification Judicial Review endangers UK citizens' privacy
Reacting to the Judicial Review launched by Tech companies to force Age Verification for adult content to be implemented Jim Killock, Executive Director of the Open Rights Group said:
These companies are asking us
to trust them with records of millions of people's sexual preferences, with huge commercial reasons to use that data for profiling and advertising.
The adult industry has a terrible record on data security. We're being asked to
hope they don't repeat the many, many times they have lost personal data, with the result that blackmail scams and worse proliferates.
The government did the responsible thing when it admitted its plans were not ready to proceed.
Age Verification must not be pushed forward until there is compulsory privacy regulation put in place.
The companies behind the legal action are not subject to tight privacy regulations. Instead, the government can only ask for
voluntary privacy commitments.
General data protection law is not sufficient for this industry as data breaches of this nature cannot be fixed by fines. They need to be prevented by the toughest and most specific regulation
available.
GirlsDoPorn recently lost a legal case where 22 young women were awarded $12.8 million over the claim that the girls were mislead into giving consent by the company claiming that the distribution would be limited, when in fact the videos were widely
distributed.
GirlsDoPorn.com has now been taken down. Porn-industry blogger Mike South published a post on 12th January pointing out that the GirlsDoPorn.com website was finally taken down, over a week after the verdict was reached. He also noted that
the domains have not yet been officially seized by the federal government but this is expected soon.
The rise of the virtual girlfriend is changing the porn industry -- but the many downsides for performers may threaten its staying power. By Sofia Barrett-Ibarria
Webcam studios and streaming sites are capitalizing on the trend. But the payout for the cam girl isn’t always as lucrative. Since major credit card companies don’t process payments from adult entertainment sites, cam sites rely on third-party platforms
that often charge 5-10% of the model’s revenue. Also, cam sites that allow viewers to tip performers typically require a 65-75% cut of the model’s earnings, sometimes on top of other processing fees.
“Camming is growing because
it’s live,” says Rickey Ray, assistant manager of Studio 20, a 24/7 webcam studio franchise with 20 locations worldwide including Los Angeles. “You’re typing and she’s responding to you directly. There’s a real-life relationship with that person that
you’re not going to get from someone watching a video.”
Best known for her role as former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin in the porn parody, Who's Nailin' Paylin? , Lisa Ann said the scene changed from when she started in the 1990s. She told
LADBible:
Being a porn star in the 90s was very different than it is now. The girls were so valued. There weren't a lot who wanted to do this for a living, so (filmmakers) wanted to treat the ones who did so well. It
was like being on a regular movie set, they would call you the day before to ask you what you wanted to eat and they made sure you only worked with guys you wanted to work with."
At that time, porn starlets had more control
over the content and who they performed with.
Who's Nailin Paylin? sent Lisa Ann soaring to fame with her virtuoso performance. After that she became a MILF star which she liked.
She said
she left the X-rated business when it became too aggressive and extreme. But now a sports personality, she said she will always treasure her time in the porn world.
Four age verification companies have launched legal action to challenge the government's decision to cancel the censorship scheme requiring age verification for access to internet porn. The companies have lodged a judicial review at the High Court
Thursday. 
GirlsDoPorn recently lost a legal case where 22 young women were awarded $12.8 million over the claim that the girls were mislead into giving consent by the company claiming that the distribution would be limited, when in fact the videos were widely
distributed. 
Webcam studios and streaming sites are capitalizing on the trend. But the payout for the cam girl isn’t always as lucrative. Since major credit card companies don’t process payments from adult entertainment sites, cam sites rely on third-party platforms
that often charge 5-10% of the model’s revenue. Also, cam sites that allow viewers to tip performers typically require a 65-75% cut of the model’s earnings, sometimes on top of other processing fees. 
