US Sex Sells News

U.S. Senators Ben Sasse and Jeff Merkley have introduced a bipartisan bill calling for extensive new censorship rules for adult websites.

Dubbed the Stop Internet Sexual Explotation Act , the bill was prompted, according to an announcement from Sasse's office, by reports of how videos and photos are uploaded to websites like Pornhub without the consent of individuals who appear in them. In particular the bill seems triggered by charges filed against Pornhub parent company MindGeek alleging that the company knowingly hosted and profited from the non-consensual videos over which website GirlsDoPorn.

Among the censorship measures the new bill seeks to enact are:

• Require any user uploading a video to the platform to verify their identiry
• Require any user uploading a video to the platform also upload a signed consent form from every individual appearing in the video
• Creating a private right of action against an uploader who uploads a pornographic image without the consent of an individual featured in the image
• Requiring platforms hosting pornography to include a notice or banner on the website instructing how an individual can request removal of a video if an individual has not consented to it being uploaded on the platform
• Prohibiting video downloads from these platforms, to be in place within three months of enactment of the legislation
• Requiring platforms hosting pornography to offer a 24-hour hotline staffed by the platform, for individuals who contact the hotline to request removal of a video that has been distributed without their consent
• Requiring removal of flagged videos within two hours of such a request
• Requiring platforms to use software to block a video from being re-uploaded after its removal, which must be in place within six months of enactment of the legislations
• Directing the Federal Trade Commission to enforce violations of these requirements
• Creating a database of individuals who have indicated they do not consent, which must be checked before new content can be uploaded to platforms
• Instructing the Department of Justice to promulgate rules on where this database should be housed, and determine how to connect victims with services, to include couseling and casework
• Establishing that failure to comply with this requirement will result in a civil penalty to the platform, with proceeds going towards victim services

Britain's Channel 4 gave viewers an inside look at the U.K. adult industry in October when it aired the four-episode drama series Adult Material . Now, American fans will get to see the porn-themed series for themselves, when the series debuts on the HBO Max streaming service December 11.

The series stars British actress Hayley Squires as Jolene Dollar, a fictional, aging porn performer who struggles to balance a career in the adult industry with the responsibilities of motherhood to her three children. Veteran actor Rupert Everett co-stars as a porn producer who oversees Jolene Dollar's scenes.

UK critics responded enthusiastically to the show, with one saying that Adult Material, raises big questions about sex, consent and power -- and will have you both laughing and crying.

Adult Material has also been sold to Australia's SBS Viceland where the first episode was broadcast on 1st December.

Some porn websites are beginning to comply with a nonsense new Utah law requiring warning labels be attached to adult-oriented materials.

At least three major tube sites, Pornhub, XTube and RedTube, have begun attaching the opt-in notification for visitors, which states that Utah believes pornographic materials can be harmful if viewed by minors.

This trigger warning is a response to Utah state law sponsored by Utah House Representative Brady Brammer earlier this year. The bill started life as intending to restrict porn in the state but was watered down until it ended up as a trivial warning requirement.

Moralist campaigners in the US have been pushing for computers and smart phones to be pre-loaded before sale with unspecified porn blocking software that can only be removed once users pay an unblocking fee.

But the campaigners haven't really done much to specify how this idea could be implemented in practice. Now the proposal introduced by representative Susan Pulsipher has run into a wall of dissent in the Utah legislature at an interim committee hearing, and the idea was rejected without a vote.

Pulsipher said the goal of her effort was to create another wall of defense to help protect children from the damaging impact of pornography and empower parents and legal guardians to limit a minor's exposure to such online harmful material.

But committee members balked at Pulsipher's approach, noting that it would be extremely difficult to identify which entity in the consumer electronics supply chain should be held liable for ensuring that software was activated.

Senator Curt Bramble, R-Provo, pointed out that Pulsipher's proposal failed to identify whether the responsible party was the manufacturer, the company that distributed the product, or the store or reseller that sold the product to the consumer.

Pulsipher said she appreciated the opportunity to field the concerns of committee members and promised to work on revising the bill in time for further consideration in the next interim session. But Senate Majority Whip Dan Hemmert said he was unlikely to end up a supporter of the effort, regardless of what changes Pulsipher came back with.

Utah was one of the first states to pass legilsation promoting a modern day morality message that porn harms public healthl. The state went on to pass a somewhat watered down bill requiring porn producers to add a warning to any porn films sold in the state.

Now Pornhub has responded to the new legislation by pre-fixing a warning to its porn films, at least for those reading from Utah. The websites also requires a tick box consent that a reader is over 18.

US strip clubs are taking steps to allow customers back inside. Though in some cases, the strip clubs will be forced to reopen without strippers.

The Lucky Devil Lounge, a strip club in Portland, Oregon, has been operating since April as a drive-through restaurant with dancers wearing facial masks and gloves, performing for customers who remain in cars, under a tent in the club's parking lot.

The Den, a strip club in Cheyenne, Wyoming, opened its doors on May 15 with a masks on, clothes off party-style event.

In Superior, Wisconsin, the Centerfolds Cabaret strip club limits on the number of patrons who may enter the club at any one time, in an attempt to maintain social distancing standards.

MyFreeCams

In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, sex workers who have gone online to make a living are discovering the market is saturated with performers, whilst at the same time many subscribers are canceling their subscriptions due to their own financial concerns.

According to Newsweek reporter Ewan Palmer's article , established online performers are losing customers or receiving less money from fans who are experiencing their own financial struggles as the economy continues to spiral downward. As many go online to make ends meet, those without an existing online profile are finding a glut of performers and difficulty trying to break in.

In addition, American sex workers are barred from the government's effort to help small businesses whose incomes were severely impacted by the pandemic. The Small Business Association's Economic Injury Disaster Program prohibits anyone who presents live performances of a prurient sexual nature or derives their income from the sale of products or services, or the presentation of any depictions or displays, of a prurient sexual nature from receiving benefits.

The Free Speech Coalition is trade group representing, amongst others, US porn producers. The group has just published its interpretation of Utah's recently passed anti pornography law that requires a warning label on products distributed in the state of Utah. The group writes:

In March, the State of Utah passed a law requiring anyone distributing obscene material in Utah to affix a warning label -- and, in the case of streaming video, a five-second pre-roll -- warning potential viewers of the dangers associated with showing such content to minors. Failure to do so can result in a $2500 fine (plus court costs and legal fees).

The law has caused a fair amount of confusion, both within the state and among adult producers. While we can not provide legal advice or specific guidance about any business' potential liability under the law, we hope we can provide some context for understanding the new law.

Some of the confusion comes from the previous versions of the bill. When the original bill was introduced in early February, the proposed law applied not just to obscene content, but to any representation of sexual activity. Thanks to the work of ACLU and objections raised by FSC, the law has now been significantly narrowed. Currently, the requirement to label content only applies to legally obscene material.

What Is Obscene?

While the word obscene is often used casually to describe any explicit material, for more than 50 years it's been a fairly narrow legal category.

Unfortunately, there is no clear definition for obscenity under US law204in order for a work to be declared obscene, a prosecutor must bring an obscenity case and secure an obscenity conviction. It is a very high standard to prove obscenity. There have been relatively few obscenity prosecutions in the last two decades, and even then for fairly extreme material.

Given this, it's unclear how the law can or will be applied to individual distributors or website owners. In theory, until a work is deemed obscene by a court, it would not be subject to the labeling requirements of this law. However, could the Attorney General bring a case regardless?204and assume most adult companies would rather pay a $2500 fine than fight a lengthy and costly First Amendment case, even if they would likely prevail? We don't yet know.

What Are The Requirements?

You should read the text of the bill for yourself here. In addition to the warning, you're required to insert code so that prosecutors can easily detect if you are using the warning.

Is This Constitutional?

FSC believes the warning is compelled speech'204essentially, the government forcing you to express a specific message204 omething the First Amendment protects against. However, until someone challenges the law in court, and wins, it remains the law.

Does It Apply to Companies Outside of Utah

Yes. Anyone with material publicly available on the web (or otherwise accessible to citizens of Utah) is subject to this law. You need not market or otherwise sell anything specifically to Utahns in order to be subject to it. (A previous lawsuit over a similar labeling law successfully challenged this point, but it does not automatically extend to this law.)

How Should My Business Proceed?

As with many new laws, your degree of compliance will depend on your tolerance for risk. Will the law actually be enforced, or was it merely a political stand? Is it constitutional? We can't answer those questions yet. Nor can we answer if the content hosted on your site is likely considered obscene in a court of law. For these questions, we can only recommend you speak with an attorney well-versed in First Amendment law.

A bill that requires porn producers to put a warning label on their products has gone into law without the governor's signature.

State governor Gary Herbert allowed House Bill 243 to take effect but opted not to sign it himself.

The bill was significantly watered down from its original version. It first required a label on every pornographic video and publication declaring it was harmful to minors. By the time the bill passed the Utah State Legislature, it was modified to only cover what is obscene.

That sets a different legal standard and requires someone to take an adult site, studio or publication to court to have something defined as legally obscene.

US porn producers are unlikely to add warning labels to their products and will challenge the constitutionality of the law if challenged,

Adult studio Evil Angel announced that the company is temporarily suspending production, effective Monday, March 16.

Evil Angel founder John Stagliano stated, The spread of the COVID-19 virus is unknown at this point. Evil Angel is stopping production as of Monday morning, pending testing being available to performers. One thing the industry does well is testing. The company stated that its paramount consideration is the safety of performers and crew members.

A toned down version of a Utah bill requiring nonsense warning labels on pornography emerged from the Senate on Friday, one vote away from heading to the governor's desk.

Under the modified legislation, an adult content website would have to display a now shortened , one-sentence statement: Exposing minors to obscene material could damage or negatively impact them. Alternatively, the website could embed in its metadata the searchable text, utahobscenitywarning.

Those who violate the mandate could face fines of up to $2,500 per infraction. But pornography distributors wouldn't face repercussions for the occasional slip-up -- as long as they could prove they'd complied with the warning label mandate at least 75% of the time over the past six months.

The original bill did not include the metadata allowance and required a much lengthier denunciation of pornography that warned the material could impair brain and emotional development and cause low self-esteem and relationship problems if shown to minors.

The Legislation was passed 20 - 6 ans now heads to the House, which will consider the changes made in the Senate.

Update: Bill passed

10th March 2020. See article from xbiz.com

The bill has now passed both the Utah House and Senate.

The Free Speech Coalition (FSC), a US adult trade group, has released a statement regarding Utah HB243, which would require all adult content in the state to include a warning label:

The Utah legislature is attempting to pass a new law, HB243, that would require all obscene material distributed in the state to come with a five-second warning label stating that such material may damage or negatively impact minors. Anyone who does not comply can be sued by the Attorney General of Utah, for a penalty of $2500 per violation.

Despite changes to the bill, HB243 remains a land mine of First Amendment issues. Affixing a state-mandated warning to an adult film, which enjoys First Amendment protections, is fundamentally different from doing the same to a food product, which does not.

The bill's author, Rep. Brady Brammer, says that the labelling law will only apply to obscene content. However, there is no established legal definition for obscenity 204 each case would have to be worked out through a lengthy and expensive legal process. However, the chilling effect on legal speech would be substantial.

HB243 is remarkably similar to a 2005 Utah labeling bill, HB260, which was struck down in 2012 after a costly seven-year court battle. In the ensuing case, Florence v. Shetloff, a federal judge ruled that Utah could prosecute a person in communication with a specific minor, but could not prosecute generally accessible websites. We don't know why the State of Utah would want to waste precious time and taxpayer dollars fighting an already-decided battle.

FSC supports the limiting of adult content to adults. That's why we've worked closely with adult content filters to register adult content, and why adult sites carry the Restricted to Adults Label, which allows them to be easily blocked. If Rep. Brammer wants to limit access of adult content by minors, consumer filters are a much more effective solution 204 and one that doesn't trample First Amendment protections.