E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSA major adult filmmaker sued to block a new Los Angeles County law requiring porn actors to wear condoms, calling it a threat to free expression.
Vivid Entertainment contends that Measure B, passed by county voters last fall, violates the First Amendment right to free speech and expression and is unnecessary because the adult industry already has safeguards, such as regular blood testing of actors, to prevent the spread of AIDS and other venereal diseases.
The suit, filed Thursday in federal court, also contends that the law is vague, burdensome and ineffective and is pre-empted by California laws and regulations. It asks the court to block the measure's enforcement and to rule it unconstitutional.
County counsel declined comment Friday, saying they had just begun a review of the case.
The measure requires adult film producers to apply for a permit from the county Department of Public Health to shoot sex scenes. Permit fees will finance periodic inspections of film sets to enforce compliance.
However, public health authorities have not announced specific enforcement measures for the law.
The AIDS Healthcare Foundation, which sponsored the initiative, said the measure will help safeguard the public, as well as porn workers, from sexually transmitted infections.
Adult film actors rallied to oppose the law before its November passage.
"The idea of allowing a government employee to come and examine our genitalia while we're on set is atrocious," sex film star Amber Lynn told the Los Angeles Daily News at the time.
Industry critics also said that fans don't want to see actors using condoms. They contend that if the law is enforced, the 200 or so companies that now produce adult films in Los Angeles, primarily in the San Fernando Valley, will simply move elsewhere, taking with them as many as 10,000 jobs.
"Overturning this law is something I feel very passionate about. I believe the industry's current testing system works well," Steven Hirsch, Vivid's founder and co-chairman, said in a statement. "Since 2004 over 300,000 explicit scenes have been filmed with zero HIV transmission. The new law makes no sense and it imposes a government licensing regime on making films that are protected by the Constitution."
The law also will have "have vast unintended consequences which may undermine industry efforts to protect the health of our actors and actresses," Hirsch said.
Califa Productions, which produces adult films for Vivid, and actors who uses the stage names Kayden Kross and Logan Pierce, joined the suit, which names the county, its district attorney and public health director.
The Associated Press
Leave a Comment:
The entire porn industry should be regulated. In addition to condoms (which is a very good idea), they should also make a law that states that all internet porn sites have a beginning of xxx that way we could prosecute those who purposely try to entice children to the sites. And look at it this way, it'll give the pervs an easy way to find their sites.
I have found myself being automatically redirected to a porn site when I clicked on a link I thought was supposed to take me somewhere else. Auto-redirect seems to be a tricky practice some of those sites use to lure in unsuspecting people. It makes me mad when that happens.
Gregorvich....hypocrite!
You're demented sir. You should go live with your twin, Obama.
I am not a hypocrite! Where did that come from?
Is spreading AIDS or STD diseases a business liability case? Then the LA condom law actually protects the porn business, right? So, if a strip club owner allow for unhealthy sex in the business place with dancers like "tsk tsk no touching", then er um the LA law does not protect those non-porn businesses right? Is that business discrimination to protect porn businesses but not other human sexual nature businesses like a nude bar or a adult movie theater?
Question: does this employer offer health insurance that will provide care if and when the employees becomes positive for Syphilis, GC, Clamidya, and/or HIV?. Many tests can be negative because the amount of virus / bacteria in blood isn't enough for the test. So what compensation, care guarantee is provided without protection with sexual encounters? Just providing monitoring isn't enough- negative HIV and 6 months later positive. Will they pay for the RX that is necessary and will they provide disability for the care needed? Hell-o California LOVES to take care of people. is there something there that provides for those employees or do they sign a "DO NOT SUE" agreement?
Healthcare is trying to respond to prevention not putting a bandaid on after the fact. Forget the constitutional right to LaLa there is significant issues here with health care provided for the employees.
Too bad about their sexual psyche issues. sad that it pays so well. take that $ and make it do real good with feeding and clothing Americans.
"Permit fees" just as any new taxes and fees, will finance unions pensions plans, which need more and more and more money from taxpayers.
This law is incredibly stupid. The government elling people how to have sex? REALLY? And furthermore, it's PORN!!!!! It's product, a marketed product of fantasy. I know of NO man who fantasizes about sex WITH A CONDOM ON.
Just a comment to GROUCHY -- just because you can get a majority of voters on a vote like this, you can not take away constitution guaranteed rights of a group of people
Their bodies their choice. Liberal L.A. cannot have it both ways. If it's your right to choose what happens in the womb then it's your right to choose what goes in your vagina/anus or on your penis. What's next casual sex registration and permits?
Agree in principle, but in the context of public health the actors are not limiting their sexual activity to just those in the industry. Your freedom goes only as far as you.
sjacobs123
Your casual sex partners are not limiting their sexual activity and they usually do not disclose they just had sex with the prostitute on the corner. At least with a porn star you have the chance of knowing they use it the way they use it.
How would you know if they are a porn star?
If they want to ban something, ban the spitting.
what a waste of money!! no one care what happens to porn actors.
Who wants to sit around and watch other people get it on anyway? I'd rather be getting it on with a hot chick myself.
Welcome to the Porn Industry: Jewish men taking advantage of misguided, good looking Christian girls. All in the name of . . . . . . think hard . . . . take a guess. . . . MONEY!!!!
I wonder what qualifications the inspectors would have to have. What type of training etc.
amber lynn isnt very bright. millions of porn viewers examine her genitals every second of every dia via porn videos. funny how she would complain about another person examining her's.
It doesn’t matter if you’re “pro porn” or not, I don’t see how this law is “Constitution” and I don’t see how this is a “public health” issue. This is about doing anything possible to “control” an industry that “hypocrites”
find “degusting.” The Americans has always been hypocrites when it comes to sex and nowhere are they more hypocritical than when it comes to porn. If the industry was so out of control and dangerous, no one would act in it. I love sex but not at the risk of my life…and I believe the porn actors are just has rational has I am. STD transmission isn't coming from the porn industry...last time I checked, you can't get a STD by watching people f@#k.
Len, are you really that dumb?
They should have to buy the video just like everyone else.
Let's see... a person can spend all day, everyday, pretty much do whatever they want with their private parts and anus... then go out into the general public and pretty much do whatever they want as well... what is the objection to condoms???
If porn actors are made to wear condoms, then they would have to pass a law requiring everyone to use condoms. You can't make a distinction between a porn actor and everyone else.
Fact is, some porn actors might have even fewer partners than many others in the general society.
I used to work at a used condom factory, it was my job to shake the f---k out of them
I'll bet you enjoyed your job so much you didn't care whether you were paid...
What size condom does Harry Reems require? Do they even come in a size to fit him?
I film most of my porn at home. Well, it's mostly just still shots by myself. Actually, come to think of it it's with my clothes on. And I don't really use a camera or anything. I just kind of stand around and look ordinary. But I assure you there's a naked person in there someplace.
Bill Clinton will be called as a witness to describe the problems with using condoms. Pelosi and Boxer were considered for the witness list but no one is sure if they know what a condom is. Harry Reid will bring all of his Nevada prostitutes to testify and support Clinton's testimony. The San Francisco media will not even cover the new law or the lawsuits. If the homosexuals find out that they are killing each other with HIV/AIDS because they don't use condoms, the city would lose its reputation as the center for disease acquisition. The issue is really quite simple. If the state wants to protect people against sexually transmitted diseases, the first law must prohibit homosexual sex. Gay males will get HIV/AIDS at about a 40% rate. The Porn Stars are probably not the big problem. In fact, the data says that homosexual sex is more of a disease transmitter than porn movie creation. California has been identified by the WSJ as the most mid-managed state. Fiscally, they are bankrupt. Morally, they are bankrupt. Intelligence no longer exists in the elected ranks. The lawmakers don't seem to know that gay sex is 100 times more disease causing than porn movie creation.
Same folks that say that the porn folks need to wear condoms don't hesitate going bareback with someone they just met in a bar. Porn folks have been testing for years.
I'm really hoping that they aren't looking at this as a public awareness campaign - let's teach the people to wear condoms by watching porn.
As always - the government needs to stay the hell out of the bedroom.
Purpose of government - to do for the individual what they cannot do for themselves - for example - provide a national defense. An individual can decide whether they need a condom or not - hence - this is NOT a place for government and is a waste of tax money.
Hell, who cares about condoms.
I just wish a wouldn't cry while masturbating.
Think about how impossible it would be to ban pornography......
If it was filmed outside of the US yet shown all over the world on the internet, the US would have to use Chinese styles of censorship..... Censorship that would violate the first amendment.
You can't put that genie back into the bottle!
It's funny that some of you actually believe that viewers don't care if the actors are wearing condoms. You're just flat out wrong. Some of you don't recall, but back in the 1990's there was a period where in almost all the porn movies coming out the actors wore condoms. Not only did the viewers hate them, but sales dropped over 40% in a year. The studios KNOW that the public hates the condoms. Period. Realize: 90% of of porn dollars come from men. Most men hate the very sight of a condom. It made sense that condom porn would not sell well. The studios, by the year 2000 , had gone back to the old way of not using condoms. Now, they are horrified at the very thought of going through this nonsense again. The whole thing makes no sense, since the porn actors are tested monthly, and more often than any segment of the population. This measure barely passed, and most voters didn't really think it out long before voting. It was a mistake, and I think the courts will overturn it.