Think Porn

final

cmdykes — Mon, 01 May 2006 04:00:55 +0000

The porn industry as a whole is a very confusing, and in depth industry. It is also filled with many different, but precise loopholes. There are many ways to make money within the industry, but not all are easy. In conclusion this class has taught me the ins and outs of the industry and I am greatfull for that.

suggestions for porn class

cmdykes — Sat, 29 Apr 2006 00:47:23 +0000

The Internet Porn and Society class at UB has shown me many new points to the porn industry that I would never have picked up from just being a porn consumer. For example the fact that all new forms of technology have been used for porn through the history of the world. Like the printing press was used for porn, the camera was made into a porn device, and everything else has also been used for it. I have also learned that porn is a big deal within the courts of the US, and that it is a never-ending topic for them. The minute that they settle one case, there is another one knocking at their door. The most surprising thing though was that porn stars don't make as much money as I originally thought, and I don't see why they would really like to do it, there are so many porn stars these days that the chances of becoming big are one in a million. For the next online class on this topic, I think that there should be some changes. There are a few things that I think could be changed within this class though. For one I think that there should be a few more assignments within the semester, so that the grading isn’t based almost entirely on the blogging. I mean my first grading period was not so good, but it was because I really didn't know what I was doing within the blogs. I read the syllabus, but at first I was still quite confused on how to do it, and what was considered a good blog. The next thing that I think you could change for this class is that instead of just one final exam, I think that you should have 3 different exams, one for each grading period. This will help to filter out the people who are not serious about the class and may make it easier on the instructor.

copyrights, patents and trademarks

cmdykes — Sat, 29 Apr 2006 00:46:17 +0000

I know that trough the ages there have been may case involving porn companies, and people that were trying to distribute the copyrighted goods in order to make money. But why do people still try to do it? The property is not theirs and they should know that they couldn’t distribute it. The best example of this would have to be the case of Sam Palipo who was from California. This man was warned 3 times before The Playboy Company decided to take this man to court, and they only did it to protect the copyright. Any ways the man was found to be guilty of infringement and had to pay $3.3 million, I still think that the number was a little high, but that's what he get for this crime. What I am trying to say is that there is not other form of protecting your goods, and people should follow the law, not just try to make some quick cash. Another case that I want to bring up within the blog while I am speaking on the issue of copyrights, patents and trademarks is the Sony Playstation case. This case has been resolved, and it has been all over the Internet. This case is over the Sony Dual Shock controllers, which were introduced in 1998. A company came out of the abyss to challenge Sony that they already had the patent on the item, and that Sony had stole the idea from them to make it their own. Anyway the results from the case were that Sony had to remove all of their dual shock controllers from the shelves, place a recall on all of the items, and they also had to remove a significant amount of games from the shelves due to the dual shock being of use in the game. Sony will also have to give the company somewhere in the area of 30 million a year for some amount of time. Now with the bad luck for Sony the Playstation 3 may not even come out by next Christmas, which is the release date for it. You these laws aren’t only to protect the larger companies from these infringements, but it is also in effect to help the smaller companies keep what is rightfully theirs.

Mr Lucas Questions again

cmdykes — Fri, 21 Apr 2006 16:58:31 +0000

1) Where is your favorite place to do live sex shows?2) Depending on the crowd, have you ever been nervous going on stage?3) Has there ever been anyone that you just refused to work with on a shoot?

Questions for Mr. Lucas

cmdykes — Fri, 21 Apr 2006 16:57:57 +0000

Some other porn blogs

cmdykes — Fri, 21 Apr 2006 16:54:27 +0000

While looking for some other porn blogs outside of this class I cam across a few, But the one I liked the most was the Raven Riley blogs. This is a porn star that actually talks to her website members, and kind of teases them. She even at one point said that she was selling her old car because she has bought a new one, and whoever buys her old car from her will get an inaugural test ride from her. Wow that is hot and so is she. I guess that is the way to promote your self. I think she may have just got me as a customer!

This girl takes the reader through her daily life, what she’s doing, and when she is doing it. She doesn’t exactly say where she is doing it though, to protect her from stalkers. Believe me if she did, she would have plenty of them to deal with. Its not like she brought up any arguments about topics, but it was just like her daily diary, which is the reason I will look up another blog, and quote on it.

The next porn blog that I came across was sir Rodney’s porn blog, but it was just a bunch of interviews with many different porn stars, which gave an interesting interpretation about the people who do porn and why they do it. In one entry he was asking a question to a porn star, and it was “Why do you do porn?” The answer to thins question was “ because I am a wild one” She went on to say that the reason for her being a porn star was because she was a sex addict, and she figures why not do what she loves. We all know the truth behind that answer, I wonder if she has a high school education or not. I would have to say “NO”Overall I have realized that there are many different types of people within the porn industry and even just people who love to look at porn. They incorporate many different techniques to get their name out, and they are doing a great job. This has opened my eyes to see what they are really like, and their opinions on different topics

Please don’t do it like tv

cmdykes — Fri, 14 Apr 2006 21:31:51 +0000

The thing that caught my attention within the lecture number 28 was the CDA, and how it was passed to regulate the internet like television and radio broadcasting. This is the outrageous; did they really think that it would be possible to regulate the internet just like television? Marty Rem a young man that published 16 articles, as well as “The Pornographers Handbook” before he was a graduate student, did some research about the amount of porn on the internet. This study, as well as time magazine directly caused the creation of the CDA, and this problem.

Now I know that Marty Rem was probably a smart man, but at the time that he published this article, he was still an undergrad student. I don’t understand why the editor of Time Magazine would take the work from an undergrad, and make such a big deal of it. I think they should have done a little more research about the field, and looked at some other research done by an expert. The person who wrote this article in Time caused something to happen that never should have.

The other thing that should have never happened was the creation of the CDA. With the other study, done before the decision to create the CDA was made. The findings from that study were that the traffic from online porn contributed to only 1% of the total online traffic on the internet. This isn’t even close to the numbers on amount of shoppers, researchers, and students. The only reason they make a big deal about it is because it is porn, and this study proves that the porn should not be regulated within the same constraints as television or radio.

congressional hearing thoughts

cmdykes — Thu, 13 Apr 2006 16:03:34 +0000

There was a congressional hearing that aired on C-SPAN, that had to deal with the subject of porn. The major point that was brought up within the hearing was the fact that it is tough to control the production and distribution of porn these days, with the use of the Internet. Another point that was brought up was the point made on child porn, which I will touch within this blog.

The discussion about porn and the Internet was led by Sen. Blancke Lincoln, and her argument that we need to keep it out of the hands of children within this country. She included some interesting facts on this issue, like the average age that children first see porn is the age 11, and the biggest consumers of porn are teens from the ages 13 to 17. Senator Lincols stated that the issue should be on the parents, and they should monitor what the children get into online. She also says that parents need to make the children aware of what’s out there and that it is not allowed for them to watch it. Another thing that got me thinking was the point brought up about Main Street. “She said Main Street just isn’t the same as it was when she was growing up”, we all know that the times are changing, but was her childhood the same as the children in the 1920’s. The answer is no. Twenty years from now the whole world is going to be different, and we have to grow with the times, just like the porn industry is doing.

I don't think that it is up to the parents to do all the work with the internet the way it is today, which is why the FBI, and Mr. Burress have started the Adult Based Obscenity Squad which is stationed in Washington D.C. This squad has 250 agents in effect to help stop the child porn industry, and make the Internet porn industry safer for children, and all people. The question of “Do you need more funds” was brought up to Mr. Burress, and the answer was simple “No” they have the funds, and they are making progress. For example in 1997 there were only 352 case of child porn that were in effect, but now in 2004 there are 1,486 cases in the works for prosecution.

This world today is way different from the world 50 years ago or even the world 10 years ago. The use of the Internet has changed the way people are able to obtain and even distribute porn. Now on to what I think should be done. The Adult Based Obscenity Squad should keep doing what they are doing, and stay focused on the child porn industry, and like one senator said let the parents inform the children, not to visit the porn sites. I also think that the ads on television ads like “Say no to drugs” should branch off and start the “say no to porn” campaign, and get the problem out into the open like another senator mentioned within the hearing. These are most of the problems addressed within the hearing, and I hope that they can keep up with the times to control the porn situation in the world today.

cases: in home privacy

cmdykes — Fri, 07 Apr 2006 18:39:53 +0000

The thing that I don’t agree with on the subject of obscenity is the fact that there are state laws on the subject, and for example I’m using the Home dish satellite and the Amateur Action dial and download, which was also called the U.S. V Thomas. Isn’t this all in the privacy of their own homes. I always thought that there was a law that protected companies for this exact thing, but I guess I must have been confused on that topic. In the case of these two companies, they were both tried for obscenity, but not in the states that they were producing the porn. The case that blows my mind is the Amateur Action case.

All they were doing was giving the people a chance to download the pictures if the wanted to, and they even had a police officer come in to examine that the porn was fine to produce. It’s kind of like me asking an officer for directions. If they told me to go down a one way street to get to my destination, I would. Then again if they pulled me over for it I would argue it for sure. I know that the obscenity law is different from state to state, but wouldn’t that mean that almost everything is illegal somewhere? The court decided that they were guilty on all counts for the first trial. Thomas went to the appeals court to fight this decision, but he was told the exact same thing; the fact that he need to find out which jurisdictions were more conservative than his own, and to tailor it to their jurisdiction. I still can’t believe that the company hired an officer to check the work and still got in trouble, but I guess that what the obscenity act was made to do.

extreme associates

cmdykes — Fri, 07 Apr 2006 18:19:31 +0000

While thinking about the obscenity topic I decided to do some research on this subject. I find it hard to believe that the last set of laws on this subject were revised in 1973, this is the Miller test. This was done before we even thought of using the internet for porn. At this time we didn’t have DVD’s, VCR’s, or even digital television, I just don’t understand how this law has been in effect since 1973. With the changing times and the intervention of the arising technologies I find it astonishing. I did find an article published in 2003 by CNN that suggests that the Supreme Court will have to make a change soon.

The company that is in this case is Extreme Associates, and they were indicted by the
U.S. attorney’s office for selling adult films that depicted rapes and murders over the internet. Now I don’t agree with what is in the movies, but if someone wants to watch them, go ahead and do it. They weren’t necessarily trying to change the laws within the states or the nation. But what they did was say “If something is downloaded directly into a person’s home, does the community still have the right to decide what its local members are allowed to see?”

This brings up a great point, and I believe that people should be able to watch what they want as long as it is in their own home, and nobody else comes across it. I’m not exactly sure how this case ended up or if there has been a verdict on it yet, but I hope to find out and see what came from this case.