A Public Service To The Industry From Attorney Marc Randazza

While everyone doesn’t see eye to eye with me on things related to the industry, and Mr Randazza is no exception he has always been a supporter of MikeSouth.com, and I appreciate that, as well as his spirit of co-operation.  When he sent this to me, i went to read it and yes my eyes kind of glazed over, but from a legal standpoint this is VERY good and VERY informative for the industry which is why I have included the link here.  Its is a long  article but it is extraordinarily well sourced and written making it very valuable,

In this article, I write about how “morality” has been used to deny intellectual property rights worldwide.  The adult entertainment industry should take note, because its ability to protect both its copyrights and its trademarks, world wide, are discussed in this article.  If you run an adult entertainment business or frankly, any business that could find itself targeted by moralizers, you should download the article and keep it in your library.

SSRN-id2716892

Thank You Mr Randazza, both for your support and your contribution.

I would also like to add that he penned a very good article in the current issue of AVN about how Donald trump is likely the candidate that would be the LEAST threatening to the adult industry and why.  i think the article was spot on.  In the past it has always been thought that the Democrats were our friends but I have long held that simply isn’t true and that they would turn on us in an instant if there was one iota of benefit for them to do so, and if you don’t think Hillary is ten times more likely then you are delusional….

It is rare that I link to AVN because it is so rare that AVN has anything of substantive value making a link worthy, this time is an exception.

Read it here

9 Replies to “A Public Service To The Industry From Attorney Marc Randazza”

  1. Karmafan

    Didn’t one of the Euro countries courts (I think Germany or Denmark) block a lawsuit on the grounds that porn has no intellectual property and because of that cannot sue for piracy or stealing of their property?

  2. LurkingReader

    Only about halfway through but can’t help being glad classical & opera music wasn’t held to morality standards on how it might make one feel or think 😉

  3. Karmafan

    Here is that news article:

    Copyright troll Malibu Media has suffered a setback with their plans to extract cash settlements from file-sharers in Germany. After trying to get the ball rolling with some of their X-Art movies, the U.S.-based company was handed a surprise ruling by the District Court of Munich. The Court declared that due to their “primitive depiction of sexual activities”, Malibu’s adult movies do not deserve protection under Germany’s Copyright Act.

    So-called copyright-trolling in the file-sharing space was an activity pioneered in Germany around eight years ago.

    Ever since, many hundreds of thousands of Internet users there have been plagued by threats from rightsholders of almost every kind of media, with many settling for amounts up to 1,200 euros a shot.

    As we know, these pay-up-or-else schemes also spread to the UK and then to the United States, proving particularly popular with porn companies out to prop up their failing business models. One such outfit, Malibu Media, has filed dozens of lawsuits in the United States and recently made efforts to export their project back to Germany. It didn’t go well.

    Last year, Malibu issued complaints in Germany that Internet subscribers had illegally shared eight of their X-Art movies including “Flexible Beauty” and “Young passion”. As a result the company wanted to obtain the identities of Internet subscribers behind the IP addresses it held on file in order to extract settlements from them.

    However, as outlined in a recently published ruling by the District Court of Munich, the complaints proved problematic.

    Firstly, Malibu claimed to be the creator of the movies but the District Court said that the company’s name was nowhere to be found on the videos in question, only references to the X-Art brand. As a result Malibu were unable to convince the Court that they held the rights.

    Next there was the issue of distribution. Although Malibu claimed that the movies had been released worldwide, it failed to demonstrate that they had either been released locally on DVD or via an online platform. On that basis the District Court found that the works had never been released in Germany and were therefore ineligible for protection under the Copyright Act.

    Finally, the District Court said that the actual content of the videos raised issues under Germany’s Copyright Act. The Court noted that the videos showed “only sexual processes in a primitive way” and are therefore classified as “pure pornography.” As such, the productions are not a “personal intellectual creation” and are not entitled to protection under Germany’s Copyright Act.

    The District Court’s ruling is definitely a setback for Malibu in Germany but it should be noted they have been extremely persistent in the United States following earlier problems. They’ll probably be back after some fine-tunes, there’s simply too much money at stake to give up now.

  4. Ivy

    @Mike I can see your point, and I honestly have had similar feelings regarding Trump, but with things unfolding in the news as they have been…my feeling is that Trump will sell out anyone. His moral compass is very questionable, (although we could say that about every candidate to be fair). I do agree that a Trump presidency would be good for porn, very very good. But at what cost to the nation? Look at how he shapes the narrative (with business ties) when he doesn’t like what is being written about him.

    http://gawker.com/even-breitbarts-corporate-spokesman-wons-stand-behind-t-1764376558

  5. MikeSouth

    Ivy don’t mistake my afreement to mean I would vote for Trump, I will vote Libertarian as I always do…but I am not altogether unhappy about Trumps exposure of the Republican party for being the scumbags they are,…hopefully someone will do likewise to the democrats and maybe we really can start over…or go back to Toris and Whigs or something

  6. Ivy

    @Mike Yah I was kinda hoping you felt that way. I wanted to make a comment for others who are following this, and leaning towards voting for Trump. By all means, a person can vote for whoever. Article is food for thought, hopefully, for those that want it.

  7. rawalex

    It’s a very good article, but one that doesn’t add up in the US.

    Basically, in the US porn is protected free speech – unless of course you break the law. Otherwise, it’s protected speech, and as such, copyright always applies. Denying copyright to protected speech would be a massive first amendment violation and the screaming would not stop until SCOTUS slapped the idiots down.

    Now, in countries that don’t have the same “appreciation” for unlimited free speech, there is potential that things don’t always add up. However, a lack of copyright does not deny ownership rights, and while it would be a harder legal battle, one could argue that owned property (the video created) was not sold or given to the person, and must have been obtained via illegal means. Even without copyright, normal ownership rules may apply. However, it’s likely that any rights would only apply to the creator themselves, everyone else (like the company they sold it to) might be SOL.

Leave a Reply