To hear the L.A. media talk about it, porn production in L.A. county is way down. They base this on the number of shooting permits issued by the county going way down. While the number of permits issued may be going down the number of shoots really hasn’t. The truth is many companies, including Digital Playground (from a source within DP) no longer bother with pulling permits to shoot.
I am told a few companies will fire anyone who even tweets about a shoot or its location beforehand, and in some cases after.
According to one source “We aren’t shooting as much as we were say five years ago, but we aren’t shooting any less than we have for the last couple of years, we are just more clandestine about it.”
119 Responses
Digital Playground No Longer Pulling Permits for Shoots In L.A. County http://t.co/O2SHZd9zwn
This just goes to show that porn does not want to be taken seriously as a legitimate industry. Refusing to get shoot permits and trying to fly under the radar to avoid detection is what drug dealers and Ethiopian street vendors do.
Imagine that ! ! The cost of doing business in California is geared to pay for the bear on the flag to eat caviar. Gotta luv our GOLDEN State—-SB
I can’t speak about DP from any first-hand knowledge but anyone who believes porn production has not dwindled SIGNIFICANTLY in LA County, and that it only seems that way because productions have become more secretive, well, that’s called denial and I ain’t talking about a river in Egypt.
Metroflex gym in Long Beach is a new porn shooting location for within LA county. A lot of porn companies are shooting adult condomless shoots after 10 pm until 5 am and on weekends there. Its outside of LA city limits and its cheap to pay the 2 owners off to set up productions there too.
First the porn industry says we care about the health of the talent. then they threaten to go underground, stop testing, and put performers at even more risk if the rules are enforced. So which is it porn industry, you cant have it both ways(like alot of the male talent)
I’m pretty sure I understood at least most of this, and it sounds bad for COMPANIES. As talent, can I be held liable for participating in a noncondom scene? I figure it will not matter to the powers that be that I either shoot without condoms, or I do not shoot, but can I get in trouble for it?
Jay no as talent your employer is responsible for you abiding by workplace safety rules it isnt on you
I think if they wanted to be taken seriously, they would have cooperated a long time ago…
The best is that now you have producers and performers saying “But, they haven’t even tried to work with us to come to some sort of compromise.”: How long has this shit been going on?
The real world complies with laws and regulations and THEN discusses compromises with officials… the porn industry seems too arrogant to figure that out though… or, just too desperate or both???
What do any of you mean by “taken seriously”? Do you mean be in line with the government? Most war profiteering companies are taken very seriously and are totally in line and supported by the government. Are they in ANY way morally superior to the companies in porn. I would personally rank them far lower on a moral level. Please define “taken seriously”. If it means not targeted as “negative” by the government than, yes, porn is not “taken seriously”. Many times being in step with regulation and the government is good and necessary, but let’s be clear that being deemed “acceptable” at the highest levels does not equal “good” in any real sense.
“The real world complies with laws and regulations and THEN discusses compromises with officials… the porn industry seems too arrogant to figure that out though… or, just too desperate or both???”
WHAT the what?? Did you not watch the financial institutions make all their own rules? Tons of companies and people are far above the law. To act like porn is not singled out or that the field is level is silly. Porn is considered immoral at least publicly by many people. It becomes more in the crosshairs because of this.
Yes, I know, the porn industry is just getting bullied and are the world’s ultimate victims.. Poor guys. I’m sorry.
I can assure you the mainstream stunt industry isn’t sitting around bitching and whining about how discriminated against they are because they have to use fake blood and breakable glass. If there is something that may violate OSHA standards there are meetings with OSHA officials to determine the safest course of action or if one is available… you know, like what adults do instead of threatening to go underground if they don’t get their way like fucking 5 year-olds.
Arrogant, stupid or desperate: pick any one you want…
What??? “fake blood and breakable glass”? So bleeding yourself and going through glass is comparable to choosing not to wear condoms? What are you talking about?
You said “The real world complies with laws and regulations”. This is simply untrue. Many companies and people are powerful enough to not. My point is porn is what you focus on and find fault with. I find fault with Haliburton and Triple Canopy. You know death>unprotected sex. You don’t have to act like porn is a victim. Just don’t act like they are different or worse than most. THEY AREN’T.
Can you explain why certain immoral institutions are rewarded and accepted and some are not? Is the porn industry less moral than the financial industry? Why act like porn is doing something out of the ordinary?
I’m very much struggling with how silly your analogy is. The “stunt industry” not being on point could easily involve an immediate death or severe injury. Not wearing a condom does not inflict this. Everything has levels of severity and consequence. Just because both things are rules broken do not make them equal or equivalent. They are not. Even abiding by these rules stunt people die on the job. Please list porn actors who have died on set from not using a condom. If you can, maybe they would seem slightly equal.
My analogy is not that silly at all… your comprehension of the facts and how you see normal industries operate is certainly lacking..
I’m not being sarcastic here… how old are you/what are your work experiences? Just generally…
I’m asking purely to determine the best and easiest way to respond to you..
I’m not labeling the porn industry as a victim… YOU ARE!!!!! How do you not understand this?
From your above comment I think I’m getting a better understanding of where you’re coming from… the problem is you have it completely backwards…
OSHA isn’t regulating porn because they thinks it’s bad or immoral. That has NOTHING to do with it… it’s about safety… that’s it.
Ummm, because they are?? What other industry on earth would allow people to handle shit, piss, vomit, cum, blood and everything else with no protection or even safety measures in place? Fucking absurd.
If our rules and regulations weren’t in place then you would see entire stunt crews die on almost every movie…. so, some people have to die in order to get protection? That makes no fucking sense? So, contracting syphilis, HIV or even Hep. C (which could kill you the fastest) is ok with you as long as no one drops dead on the set?
Maybe I was wrong? Maybe the industry isn’t arrogant… just stupid? Who knows anymore?
Oh, and I would argue that bleeding and going through glass is a piece of fucking cake compared to living with HIV.
Really? People die doing stuntwork. You can live a long and relatively healthy life with HIV. One can cause instant death the other has treatment. How is there an argument there?
Wait, so the industry that complies with regulation, but still has death is better than the one that skirts rules and has someone get an STD? This is ludicrous thinking. Complying or not complying with rules does not determine how safe/unsafe something is. In one instance you comply and still have a chance of death. In the other they don’t comply and have a chance of an STD.
“If our rules and regulations weren’t in place then you would see entire stunt crews die on almost every movie…. so, some people have to die in order to get protection?”
This part makes no sense. Are you saying someone is going to die in porn? How? People die doing the stuntwork even when it is regulated.
“So, contracting syphilis, HIV or even Hep. C (which could kill you the fastest) is ok with you as long as no one drops dead on the set?”
Well… this is the basis of the whole argument. It isn’t “ok” per say. I am just as “ok” with it happening in porn as I am if it happens in real life. Which is to say I don’t want it to happen, but if 2 adults consent to a sexual behavior that leads to an STD, I am “ok” with that enough to let them have choice. Doesn’t mean I want it to happen.
“Maybe I was wrong? Maybe the industry isn’t arrogant… just stupid? Who knows anymore?”
It’s always nice when the person you debate implies you are “stupid” or throws in mean comments. Anyway, if you think my argument is stupid, that is fine. My argument however has nothing to do with the “industry”. Judge them on what they say, me on what I say. They at times might be similar, but are not connected.
Are you saying that porn is more immoral than any industry that is in the open? If so that is a clear extremist anti-porn view. We live in a world where private companies can engage in KILLING people with no repercussions and be paid by the government to do it and you are worried about “shit, piss, vomit, cum”. You can be worried about porn, but again everything has levels of severity. Porn is not even close to as immoral or as unleashed as plenty of other industries doing far worse things than handling bodily fluids. You are in some weird anti-porn bubble if you can’t see that porn is not on some new plane of unethical behavior. Wow.
“What other industry on earth would allow people to handle shit, piss, vomit, cum, blood and everything else with no protection or even safety measures in place?”
Janitorial industry. Also, I’m sorry, but testing is a safety measure. When you employ a policy that is specific to your industry and that normal people doing the same activities don’t have to abide by. That is a safety measure. You obviously don’t think it affective, but that doesn’t change what it is.
“OSHA isn’t regulating porn because they thinks it’s bad or immoral. That has NOTHING to do with it… it’s about safety… that’s it.”
First, how could you know OSHA’s private motivations. I agree with you, but how you are so certain of their motives I don’t know. I wasn’t talking about OSHA. I was referring to why it is easier for people in power to say “Look at how bad porn is” than “Look how bad war/greed in financial institutions/guns”. It is because porn is considered more widely immoral, even though it isn’t.
“My analogy is not that silly at all… your comprehension of the facts and how you see normal industries operate is certainly lacking..
I’m not being sarcastic here… how old are you/what are your work experiences? Just generally…
I’m asking purely to determine the best and easiest way to respond to you..
I’m not labeling the porn industry as a victim… YOU ARE!!!!! How do you not understand this?”
Again, death is worse than an STD, that is why I thought the analogy was silly. An industry where death is possible, requires more precautions than one where STD is possible.
I shouldn’t have to and won’t inform you about my age or work. I don’t ask that of you. This is a message board, not a official debate. I get to voice an opinion without providing credentials. The “easiest way to respond” is like a decent person. Address the comment, try to be kind. Shouldn’t be too hard, I just disagree with you, but I’m not an alien species. Even “don’t respond” is an option if you are having trouble. Lastly, I didn’t say you were labeling porn a victim, I said you shouldn’t just don’t act like they are the worst. I think that’s almost exactly what I said.
“Lip service” isn’t just blowjobs in porn, also applies to the “self regulated” & “testing works” party lines 🙂
@eric2690
When it comes to OSHA..I agree that porn has been stigmatized…by itself! twenty five years after the freeman decision you have a well known production company threatening folks for revealing its actions which isn’t to say there aren’t other egomaniacal bosses in other industries just to say that because war guns greed and institutional corruption happen elsewhere isn’t a green light for porn to do the same. As far as financial institutions don’t kid yourself that they aren’t connected with porn and making lots of money off porn with tiered transaction charges being much higher for porn.
As for OSHA motivations….I can state that I have actually read the minutes from the past five years when it comes to porn…porn is the obstructionist in ways that other industries would never even consider.
FYI the we are a decentralized industry is most commonly cited as justification for ignoring and avoiding cooperation with OSHA to determine industry appropriate safety guidelines.
Uhh, what in my quote above has anything to even do with you? I was addressing my thoughts on the industry, not you.. Are you in the industry? I don’t even know how you came up with me somehow calling you stupid?? I don’t even see a connection there?
@eric2690
How does one negate the other?
Even with the most stringent safety regulations some people will die doing certain jobs. Accidents and stupid will still happen no matter how good the protocols are, how does this negate having protocols and/or guidelines to begin with?
It is pretty automatic that an occupational death begins an investigation regardless of the industry with many companies proving that they had no culpability for the accident or stupid that resulted in the catastrophic injury or death and they receive no fines.
@eric
Where are you getting that OSHA is treating porn as immoral? It is impossible to compare finance with papercuts, stress, fatigue, lifting injuries etc to an industry that handles OPIM everyday at the office.
@eric
Are you trying to say that unless someone dies on the job site that they are safe?
Isn’t the point of occupational safety to keep employees working and available to support themselves in their chosen field? If someone gets HIV their career in porn has traditionally been eliminated with the added kick of mass media publication of their private medical conditions exacerbated with microscopic public speculation about how or where they did something offset that invited risk.
Here’s an analogy….how many construction guys do you know who have submitted WC claims for injuries even a year after they reported an on the job incident? Many repetitious injuries are so routine that it’s like the flu running through an office where folks have tell tale wrist braces prior to approval for carpel tunnel surgery. Now you have a history of literally hundreds of porn performers who may have contracted HIV or HEPC during the course of their job…yes I include the escorting facilitated by agents and producers…one and only one performer has ever received workmans comp. That case absolutely clear cut was fought for ten years because the money behind the production fought to avoid potential future liabilities and to avoid additional fines for not having WC insurance in place at the time of the incident.
So tell me how OSHA or WC picks on porn when their goal is create the safest possible work environment. Just because they look at an industry and even come to focus on it doesn’t give that industry the right of crying persecution.
I don’t hear porn crying about the higher risk fees their financial institutions charge them as persecution…I do hear them crying about the REALITY that a history of charged back transactions for their product has resulted in financial institutions charging more to cover additional risk.
I didn’t say one negated the other. I have to keep repeating, there are levels or tiers to how dangerous something is or how stringently it should be regulated. An industry that say has a chance of death should have more stringent regulations than an industry that has a chance of an STD. Once again you may not believe it is good enough, but testing is a “protocol/guideline”.
What makes you think this comment is about OSHA. I was addressing Lacey’s previous comment that seemed to suggest SHE not OSHA thinks porn is the most immoral thing or so beyond anything else. This comment was not about OSHA. Also, if the widespread opinion is porn=bad, why would it not permeate OSHA as well?
@Mike
Are you aware of anyone who has spoken with a (defense) attorney with respect to “shared content” or other non traditional production environments where copyrightable content is created…to determine who the employer is? OSHA has focused on traditional adult film environments without reference to location with “producer” (point of accountability) defined as the fiscal stakeholder.
The OPIM they handle is the same stuff any consenting adults are allowed to do in the real world. I was more comparing it to everything/anything, just pointing out that porn is not on some different plane of immorality or impropriety.
Well, we were having a conversation and the rest of your comment seemed addressed as a reply to me. The last part I quoted seemed like a shot. I certainly wasn’t direct, but that is how I read it. Glad to be wrong. But when a whole comment is directed as a reply to me and then the last sentence is just speaking to this entity “the industry” it’s an odd writing technique. So, the connection was there I think.
Listen, it’s 2am. I’ve been working on taxes all fucking day… I don’t have time at the moment to write a thesis on why I think your logic is flawed here… I told you I wasn’t being sarcastic and I meant it… I wasn’t asking for your sake, I was asking for my own so I could just get an idea of where you’re coming from in order to give you the most logical explanations in the shortest amount of time…
I see your points, but I still think you’re way off base here… I’m just not sure why you keep talking about death or STD’s as if those are the only problems on earth that get regulated?
Do you honestly think doctors wear gloves just so they don’t die? Seriously? So, garbage men are required to wear gloves so they don’t die? And, the ONLY reason stunt performers are regulated is so that they don’t die? Wtf?
It’s not a death vs. STD debate here… It’s an infection/STD/STI/death/disease/colds/the flu and every other medical condition on earth debate… It’s as if your argument is “well, they’re only going to get HIV. It’s not like they’re going to die.” Do you realize how stupid that sounds? Rules and regulations aren’t put in place just to prevent people from dying. It’s to regulate protection for workers. Could you imagine an HIV epidemic and everyone sitting around going “Well, at least they’re not going to die.”
People freak the fuck out over getting a cold and bringing it into the workplace and you think HIV is perfectly acceptable to infect someone with because they probably won’t die?
Some guy just got 10 years in federal prison for knowingly infecting a partner with HIV. It seems the government takes HIV a little more seriously than you do?
Also, I don’t quite understand why you keep comparing the porn industry to financial institutions and war? Where is that even coming from? Wars are kinda necessary. And, financial institutions are some of the most regulated on the entire planet…
I don’t get it? I’m trying. I really am, but it defies logic. We’re not talking about 2 people on a date in their personal life… we’re talking about an industry comprised of workers who deserve the same amount of protection as the rest of the civilized world. How is that so hard to understand?
Stunt performers aren’t regulated just so they won’t die… they’re regulated to avoid broken bones, burns, cuts, head trauma, high speed impacts, etc. etc. etc. There are medics required to be present on set to assist in any medical condition whether it’s a cut on your finger or an asthma attack. If there is scene near a body of water there will be an entire “water safety” team just to ensure no one gets hurt in the water or no one falls into the water. There are green screens so that 15 performers aren’t hanging off the side of a mountain somewhere in Asia.
Everyone on earth is free to do whatever they want, but there are always consequences that go along with that…. In the workplace, they regulate certain things to help keep the worker safe and, more importantly, everyone else as well including the community…
You stating that “they might get HIV, but it’s manageable” is about as logical as saying “stunt performers might lose an eye, but they still have another one so what’s the big deal?”
I can personally attest to the fact that many stunt performers do some crazy shit off-set… jumping from buildings, base jumping off high rises, training with real weapons, etc., but that shit would NEVER happen on set. It’s too much of a liability and everything changes when you get “hired” to work at any job. THAT is what the porn industry doesn’t seem to understand from my point of view….
The persecution agenda isn’t winning any arguments. I got the idea from your comments alone.
Porn does have to deal with many unfair morality judgements. Some are even dangerous IG medical docs who would judge HOW a patient contracted an STD requiring treatment vs offering education and encouragement to facilitate early symptom recognition for non-tested conditions. Post porn workplaces that allow hostile work environments and even encourage it by blaming the former performer for their previous employment choices to justify the offenders creating the hostility.
When it comes to OSHA and WC policies to meet the 1992 BloodBorne Pathogens it would seem porn has actually enjoyed an extended reprieve very few other industries could ever hope to experience.
“Are you trying to say that unless someone dies on the job site that they are safe?
Isn’t the point of occupational safety to keep employees working and available to support themselves in their chosen field? If someone gets HIV their career in porn has traditionally been eliminated with the added kick of mass media publication of their private medical conditions exacerbated with microscopic public speculation about how or where they did something offset that invited risk.”
Ok, let me try again. I’m not saying someone has to die. Safety is not an on/off switch. It isn’t unsafe vs. safe, it is a scale of “how safe”. Also, the comparisons and talking about keeping the workers viable doesn’t totally align in my mind. The average length of a porn career is miniscule. The amount of people who make it a career is such a small percentage, the analogies need a bit of tweaking. I’ve never made any argument against performer compensation. I have argued against government mandated condoms.
It was one of those “I digress” moments…. haha
I don’t understand what you aren’t getting. I WASN”T TALKING ABOUT OSHA. I was talking about general opinion in society. I don’t know enough about OSHA to know their moral judgements.
I’m just wondering… are you opposed to government mandated gloves for any other health profession? Doctor, dentist, nurses, food workers at a hospital, etc.
“Listen, it’s 2am. I’ve been working on taxes all fucking day… I don’t have time at the moment to write a thesis on why I think your logic is flawed here”. Please don’t misquote people. When you use quotation marks representing something I said use that copy and paste because you misquoted the heck out of me. Ick.
Despite the attitude and painting my ideas with the most broad and hilariously disingenuous portrayal of my beliefs, you managed to write that thesis. Next time you “don’t have time”, just don’t respond. We disagree and you clearly don’t understand my position at all. Don’t feel obligated to respond.
I don’t think anyone has said anything about porn being immoral except you? We’re discussing workplace safety and you’re discussing how porn is being victimized for being immoral. Workplace safety has nothing to do with the morality of the industry. Meaning: No one is “picking” on the industry… it wouldn’t matter if it was porn, healthcare or the automotive industry…regulations apply to all of them.
Death vs. STD sprang from your weird analogy to stunt people. It was my response to you, not something I pulled. Yo try to represent me as being cool with people getting HIV, which is entirely untrue. Also, throwing the case of someone giving HIV to people on purpose in the middle of this was entirely off topic and not similar to porn at all.
“And, financial institutions are some of the most regulated on the entire planet…”
There may be some measure in which this is true, but gosh it sounds silly. You are stinking about someone being given CHOICE to have a small CHANCE of getting an STD, but this is your quote on financial institutions?
They were sop regulated that they crashed the world economy and 2 years later got themselves record profits with minimal repercussions to their businesses. Yep, checks out.
“Wars are kinda necessary.” Wasn’t really talking about the act of war. Also, very many are unnecessary (Iraq/Afghanistan). I was talking about immorality of many of the corporations that profit from war. This sprung from you seeming to want to make the case that porn was on some upper tier of immorality and impropriety.
@Lacey
The point about what a stunt person MAY choose to risk offset but wouldn’t even dream of considering onset probably highlights the opposing between stunts and porn best.
When they are being paid to do a job..they are doing the job with all the necessary regulated and non-regulated employer liability reduction protocols in place with the expectation of implementation. Learning and loving to climb icy mountains without a safety line is a personal choice that may get you dead or a thrill of life but not on someone else’s dime.
The idea that because you are paid to perform a risky job so you should create a safety line by being safe in your personal life goes far beyond “moral clauses”, “no disclosure” or even future no competes included in many human resource pkgs as handy outs or tools to ditch a problem employee. It’s one of those things that make no sense…we want you to limit your most personal private intimate life..even with your spouse so we can feel safer when we pay/film you performing with this reduced threat (safety line) we hope you bring to the office regardless of what the worker next to you does. Btw we will fight any and all government regulation/compliance/enforcement as violating our first amendment rights of creative expression. 🙂
Hmm. okay. It seemed you were making a bit of a moral argument. Again “regulations apply to all of them”, level of regulation is the argument. If you don’t have healthcare or they can kick you off: death rate is much higher. If cars don’t have belts or are made with weak material: death rate higher. If you choose to not wear a condom in porn: higher chance of STD vs. with condom. Big difference in the effect of lack of regulation. It is about the amount of regulation, Not reg. vs no reg.
Not particularly, but I can’t think of any scenario where both sides of any of those equations would consent to it. The doctor, dentist and nurse wouldn’t consent. The food worker may like not wearing gloves, but the food recipients wouldn’t consent. I would need consent on both sides for it to seem even similar to the idea of condoms in porn.
As far as I know, employees are not fined by OSHA for violating workplace safety rules. OSHA sets workplace safety standards that employers are required to follow.
If OSHA has set a regulation, a porn production company has a duty to comply with the regulation – that duty extends to supervising independent producers/directors that are producing content under contract for that company – at that time, the producer/director is an extension of the company. If a scene is not in compliance, OSHA could go after the production company that contracted for the scene and it could go after the independent producer/director who created the scene in unsafe work conditions. The producer/director can’t say: Well, I only did it because the production company told me to. An employer or contracting company can’t require a contractor to violate the law in order to win business or cut costs.
OSHA doesn’t fine employees. But in the real world, companies discipline employees – including unpaid leaves of absence and termination – all the time for violating workplace safety regulations, such as not wearing earplugs or protective eyewear on the factory floor, because it puts the employer at risk of a fine. So, a production company or a producer/director could fire any talent that refused to work with a condom in a scene.
All the back and forth about OSHA’s motivations and morality is lots of fun to read, and you’re all pretty passionate about this. But, it is completely irrelevant. OSHA has determined that condoms are a workplace safety issue. If business doesn’t like that regulation, it can appeal in court. That’s what Treasure Island did. Treasure Island lost. By the way, that’s what Vivid did with regard to the LA County law, and lost as well. Right now, porn is 0 for 2.
If Treasure Island – or the industry in general – feels that the decision was wrong, it can appeal to the next court up the chain – just like Vivid has appealed the court decision that went against it. But to appeal and prevail, Treasure Island or porn has to prove two things. Motivation and morality are not among the two. First, it has to prove that the regulation is onerous and unenforceable. Now, its clearly no more onerous or unenforceable to require a porn actor to put on a condom before sex than it is to require an auto worker to wear protective eyewear and ear plugs on the line. The cost of compliance is minimal – even the 50-man anal gang bang could’ve covered the cost of condoms for that scene for a couple hundred bucks at most. There is no loss of productivity as a result of wearing a condom – its not like OSHA reducing the amount of weight an employee is allowed to pick up and carry from 50 lbs to 25 lbs which means I need twice as many employees to get the job done. One guy with a condom can do the same job as one guy without a condom. Given how many guys masturbate in order to come at the end of a scene, porn can’t even argue that it would lengthen the time it takes to shoot a scene. They pull out, they take off the condom, they masturbate to ejaculation. More or less, that’s what they do now.
Next, porn has to prove that the original judge was wrong on the law. In that sense, porn could, in theory, go back to the First Amendment argument and argue that freedom of expression trumps workplace safety. Porn lost that argument in the first round of its appeal of the LA County regulation, but you never know. I still contend that the First Amendment does not give you a right to expose workers to disease and injury. So far, two courts have agreed with that proposition.
But, that’s the way the appeals process works. Onerous, unenforceable, and wrong under the law. Motivation and morality aren’t part of the appeal.
@eric
Your point that porn is not on a different plane is exactly the point…there is nothing to exempt them from the ordinary red tape any business must cope with to put a buck on the bottom line. The tape or forms may be different but they aren’t any more exempt than the floor washer at a hotel who must put out the caution when wet sign as part of their job.
I think what you have here is very similar to building a deck on your house yourself. technically you should comply with OSHA and permitting and such but in most cases nobody is going after you (except maybe the county on the permit) because theres nothing in it for them to do so.
@BT
My question is specific to “shared content” scenes that don’t fall neatly into the “producer” (point of accountability) defined in the OSHA OPIM draft. They seem to be applying those definitions in advance of policy adoption. This isn’t uncommon when OSHA has sought industry input.
Obviously if you are contracted by TIm, Vivid, Brazzers etc you would be exempt from OSHA enforcement fines/penalties in the event of a complaint. It is less clear where the accountability falls for two individuals sharing content with both benefiting via websites with posted content. This was one of the arguments used by porn lawyers to avoid updating the “employee/employer language” OSHA policy with the hope that they could take advantage of the outdated conflicting policy terminology for fine mitigation.
Not sure, to be honest. If its shared content in the sense that Jane Doe and John Doe both have a website and need content. They decide to have sex with one another and then both use the content. If they are the “producers,” meaning they didn’t hire a producer to produce the scene for them, they’d probably share joint responsibility. You can’t have a situation where both point the finger at the other individual and say: It wasn’t my responsibility, that individual was in charge. But, I don’t know.
@BT
This is definitely where the individuals rights may trump industry entity duties. The questions raised have lots to do with now that there are producer definitions to apply and rulings how or when do they affect whom? Do they come into play with a contract? How formal does the contract have to be with verbal contracts valid. Will shared content creators face intent issues? IG regardless of intent when “images” are created the requirement for 2257 must be met for distribution.
With the prevalence of alternative revenue streams like sharing content used by performers to make ends meet and questions like Jay presented it got the wheels turning. 🙂
My guess is that OSHA would rather focus its efforts on the big guns of the industry. At the same time, if all the production companies go into “shared content” mode to avoid compliance, then regulators will shift gears as well. Who knows.
My only thought regarding this is if performers are doing content trades, wouldn’t they have to have 2257 forms proving performers are of legal age?
So, they either get criminally prosecuted for possibly working with minors or they get fined by OSHA for not following regulations…
If 2 people meet at a bar, have sex, tape it and then put it on internet, are they required to have 2257 forms? Probably not, because no financial compensation has taken place….
I guess it all depends on the financial transactions… content trades are ultimately used to generate revenue which would probably put them under regulation.
It would seem to be the exact scenario as prostitution. Two people can have sex as much as they want, but include money in the mix and everything changes. I have a feeling porn will be classified the exact same way… If you sell clips to a site, you better have 2257 forms and a record of where the scene was shot to comply with any particular laws because the government and/or OSHA could, potentially, go after both the person who sold the clip as well as the company who bought the clip. Or, even anyone who could generate revenue from its existence… Once money enters the picture (whether a transaction between 2 parties or anything generating revenue) everything changes.
2257 requirements are what brought this to mind for me…a swingers magazine tried to exempt itself from 2257 because the people they sold image space to were couples seeking other couples for private enjoyment purposes. The ruling said the individuals were free from 2257 compliance until they submitted their images for distribution regardless of publication type even or purpose. With shared content and streaming cams anyone posting the content must meet 2257. The line about IF OSHA applies in this scenario or who the “producer” (point of accountability) isn’t clear when considered in the light that even professionals have protected individual freedoms.
Monetary gain or distribution intent doesn’t have to present at creation of the images for 2257 to apply retroactively so where does OSHA draw the line to determine workplace? It’s reasonable to expect that (amateur) couples filming themselves would be exempt from OSHA even if they filmed every sex act they shared and later distributed them for profit, but what happens when two performers agree to create content? With sites devoted to amateur content there is virtually no difference in the end result, no way to determine if two performers are “working” or filming personal experience. Even to say that using a human vs tripod to handle the camera doesn’t offer clarity because I could ask a professional to do a personal favor to film me having sex with hubby where it clearly isn’t a work environment but may later be distributed as a commercial product.
Using the favor scenario doesn’t negate possibility that there is a contract for a reduced fee, so even a contract isn’t a clear measure. If I contract an artist to paint a nude canvas OSHA isn’t gonna knock on my door but if I go to the artists studio I’d expect that OSHA would apply regardless of whether he paints in a commercial venue or a room at his home.
Ambiguities like this get the consistent application policy queen in me going. Policy that can’t be evenly or clearly applied are invitations to abusive enforcement so they bug the hell out of me.
Agreed that OSHA is currently addressing “traditional” adult filming aka big guns, the concern is that policies created and adopted for industry compliance/enforcement may be applied to existing facets of the industry, making it essential that they be considered to the extent possible to avoid post adoption legal quagmires. The more a policy is nitpicked and tested for consistency of uniform application in development the more likely it is that a equitable product will be presented. OPIM policy by OSHA and mandatory condoms are separate approaches to the identical issue the industry relies on testing to address.
Creating considered input by those most experienced and affected before they even open the policy for public input can’t happen soon enough. Waiting until action is imminent creates threat and fear based reactions with emotionally charged narrow focus agendas. Relying on the FSC, AHF with the attorneys they paid to fight reactionary agendas produced the condom laws and OSHA OPIM draft but hasn’t done much to improve a career in porn. There are so many passionate individuals who believe in choosing porn to earn their living who can and will be affected through the coming changes. Voicing questions, concerns and experience of your reality is the best way to put the overlooked issues on the radar for inclusion.
“Well… this is the basis of the whole argument. It isn’t “ok” per say. I am just as “ok” with it happening in porn as I am if it happens in real life. Which is to say I don’t want it to happen, but if 2 adults consent to a sexual behavior that leads to an STD, I am “ok” with that enough to let them have choice. Doesn’t mean I want it to happen.”
THIS statement is exactly where your problem lies.. it is the same exact theory that the porn industry has used for years. Primarily because they’ve never been regulated.
You can’t take 2 adults that “consent” to do something and then stick them into the workforce. “Consent” almost never applies in the workforce. This isn’t 2 people in a bedroom on their own personal time. There is a whole host of other things that need to be considered when someone gets hired to do a job.
Porn has always had this theory that as long as 2 people consent to do something that it automatically makes it ok… in your personal life, go for it. In the workforce, everything changes. There is almost NO room for people to just make up their own choices without it somehow affecting others whether it’s the other workers, the company, the producer, the boss, the law, the rules, the regulations, etc. etc. etc.
The primary reason for many rules and regulations required is because PEOPLE ARE FUCKING STUPID. Seriously. I’m not kidding. Most people on earth would come to the conclusion that a dentist should probably wear gloves while drilling into someone’s mouth… some fucking morons aren’t smart enough to figure this out. Therefore, regulations enter the picture.
Do you really think the dentist and the patient are going to sit there for 10 minutes debating whether both parties “consent” to gloves vs. no gloves? What if one wants to wear gloves and the other doesn’t? Who wins? Or, do they just leave and find another dentist? What if no dentists want to wear gloves? Everyone on earth knows a dentist wearing gloves helps protect both the dentist and the patient. This isn’t something that needs to be debated or “consented” to… it’s common fucking sense.
If a dentist and patient both “consent” that gloves would be a distraction of some sort, then they won’t be used. If the patient contracts HIV somehow from the dentist he will sue the shit out of the dentist even though they both “consented” to the dentist not using gloves. The patient will win and get a huge amount of money. The dentist is fucked.
But, they “consented” so everything should be ok, right?
The reason the porn industry has operated under this “consent” bullshit for so long is because the producers and/or production companies have very rarely been held accountable for anything… if the new OSHA regulation for non-condom porn becomes $15,000 per incident do you think a producer is going to look at the 2 performers and ask “would you both like to consent to not using condoms?”
It’s NOT the performers decision to make… In the workforce, no one really gives a shit what you are willing to “consent” to… it has more to do with health/safety/liability reasons, not what 2 people “consent” to do… because we all know some people are fucking stupid. Most of the rules and regulations are put in place because of this…
I really do enjoy Erics comments. In my opinion he represents pretty mcuh straight out of the industry talking points. I just love it when he compares the porn industry to other industries. Yes stunt people get hurt, yes firement get hurt, and yes porn performers get hurt and get diseases. But their is a HUGE difference. In all these other industries it is the EMPLOYER who pays when someone gets hurt. In porn the EMPLOYER says “Tough shit, youre one your own”
Every other industry that has these inherent risks also provides remedies for these risks, what does porn do when these known risks actually happen? Rhetorical question, they do nothing. Ask darren james, Lara Roxx, Missy arroyo, and Jessica Dee just what TTBoy productions did for them? Again, rhetorical question, he told them to fuck off.
And i just love the “other industries break rules too,” which is true, but hardly a defense.
Yes, but do you write articles and act like the sky is falling when the washer doesn’t put up the sign?
“It’s NOT the performers decision to make”.
Really? I could have sworn they have been operating that way for the entirety of porn. It in fact IS and has been the performers choice. You are arguing what what you would like to be true or ideal. You truly don’t have to write 7 paragraphs to tell me you disagree and you certainly aren’t bringing up any new points to change my mind.
You can’t assume what other people will “consent” to? As you have stated, it should be obvious that the nurse wouldn’t consent to not using gloves, but what if she did? Now you have 2 people dealing with infection/disease possibilities without any protection in the hospital. You honestly think that sounds ok because they both “consented?”
What happens if the next patient also consents with the nurse to not use gloves and on and on… now the entire floor of the hospital has a bacterial infection.
The concept of “consent” is great for your personal life, but trying to apply “consent” to the workforce brings a whole host of other problems…
Just to be clear, I am not arguing that porn is obeying OSHA rules. I’m not even arguing that they should not get fined. I’m arguing that simply because they are breaking an OSHA rule does not mean that the behavior is wrong/immoral or should be stopped.
Never argued against performer compensation.
Yeah and what if potatoes were explosives? They aren’t and nurses wouldn’t consent. You are allowed to make logical assumptions within an argument. There is real world evidence that people would consent to unprotected sex. No such evidence exists for modern day nurses or doctors WANTING to decline gloves. You assuming for your scenario that they would consent is illogical. My assuming they would not is logical. Let’s be logical. Sure anything is technically possible, but you literally can’t get anywhere if that is your position. “Flying Spaghetti Monster” COULD be in the sky, but it is logical to live your life and base your assumptions on him not being there.
In all the industries you’ve talked about they rallied together/unionized to get more safety precautions. In other words, they clearly wanted them. Porn performers at the very least are split, but I think the argument could easily be made that they are majority against mandate. I understand this doesn’t change how the law is applied to them, but it does affect my opinion on the issue.
Actually, No I don’t… I run right through the wet floor and make sure to hurt myself whether it’s hitting my head or maybe spraining my ankle and then I sue the fuck out of the hotel….
Porn performers can do the same exact thing to producers now… Now it’s a question of who’s willing to do it and/or who’s desperate for money.
And, no, I don’t condone this. But, this is the real world and people will get money any way they know how…
Ok, so I guess the performer also gets to choose what to wear, where to shoot and what positions they want to do…
They’re getting paid money to do a job. The performer is to show up to set ready to work for the producer/director. What if 1 person wants to use a condom and the other doesn’t? Who do you think makes the decision on what happens? The producer. It’s HIS movie.
Whether a performer wants to have blue hair in a movie doesn’t really matter… she is getting paid to do a certain job, look a certain way and perform certain acts… that’s what she’s getting paid for…
I’m obviously not sure of any of this, but wouldn’t the simple fact that a scene/video has been involved in a financial transaction therefore make it “commercial” where all rules and regulations apply?
A husband & wife can make sex tapes all they want, but if they go to sell those scenes to someone else or post them to their own paid site wouldn’t that then classify them as “commercial” and/or “available for public consumption? ” It would fall under tax requirements, so I can’t see it not falling under 2257, OSHA, obscene materials, etc.
You have seemed to miss the entire point again… the reason this condom vs. no condom debate is even happening is because the producers take responsibility for absolutely nothing health related. At this point, they can freely say it’s “performer choice,” even though most have publicly stated they will not use condoms. But, if they were held responsible for injuries, infections, disease on set then that “performer choice” bullshit would be 100% over.
Producers aren’t going to let talent choose whether to wear condoms or not if their ass is on the line for thousands of dollars. Do you honestly think a production company who could be fined $10,000 is going to ask talent “Would you prefer a condom or not? It’s your choice.” Fuck no!!
Yes. Of course. If you don’t want to wear something or do a specific position, you don’t. Your decision may have negative repercussions, but of course you get to make the call. Are you implying that the producer gets to force you to have sex? Yeah, a person who is deathly afraid of being around food can work at a grocery store, but it will limit their ability in their job. They know that when they take the job. They made a choice, knowing the downsides and factors to still do it. Also, please acknowledge the difference between hair/accessories and how sex is performed between 2 people. They are so different, it isn’t really good to compare.
So you then would want to require the husband and wife to wear a condom? Just to clarify.
Let’s note here that Lacey’s family (IIRC) owns a stunt business that works on Hollywood level mainstream movies so if she hasn’t been in a scene where she fakes bleeding and runs through a human length glass window she knows someone who has. I have done neither and also don’t have HIV and I have to say I agree with her comparison comment.
However, I do not agree with mandatory condoms. With the current testing regimen the chance of someone getting HIV on a set is extremely low — even if all of the cases last year were on-set transmitted (which I highly doubt) the rate of infection last year would be well below one tenth of one per cent (1/1000). Yes, business is down but I think it reasonable to estimate that the biz filmed at least 3K combined male on female and male on male scenes last year (I won’t count lesbian scenes even though it would make a better case for my argument if I did because the chances of transmission via lesbian sex is almost nil, making the numbers less valid IMO). I don’t have numbers on other VD transmission (if anyone does, let me know as Diane Duke and the PASS clinics won’t release the numbers). Chlamydia, gonorrhea, syphilis and the other VDs are less of a problem because they can be cured and herpes is less of a problem because it is a minor annoyance at worst that people can decide for themselves about taking the risk. If a person wants to work in the biz they have to take the risk. If not, don’t get into porn. Condoms aren’t the answer and they don’t work well for porn sex anyway IMO. If the HIV rate were to skyrocket I would change my opinion but 1/3 of one percent is a livable number, especially considering most of the ten years before that we did not have a single case of HIV (in 2004 the biz had four cases while filming at least twice the number of penetrative scenes filmed now and in 2008 we had two IIRC while filming at least 3K penetrative scenes, the same as my 2013 estimate).
Having worked in the janitorial arts as a teenager I have to agree Erik. About the only thing listed that I didn’t handle as a janitor was cum. I even had to clean up vomit once at one of the credit unions I worked at and I was working in legal compliance — as white collar as professions come. I volunteered to come in to work with my rubber cleaning gloves to clean a piss-soaked/stained padded chair (one of our more senile members accidentally pissed on it) after the cleaning crew forgot about it that week but my boss said no fucking way, the cleaning service needed to do it. We really needed that chair back, too and I know how from my time as a janitor.
Yeah… I have zero clue what any commenter here or there families do for a living and it isn’t that important to me. I figured she probably had a reason to bring up stunt work.
I agree that there should be a hierarchy of issues with death being more important than a paper cut. I also agree that HIV is an issue in porn. I just think that as long as it is manageable we shouldn’t obliterate an industry which condoms would do to porn. For example I am sure even with strict OSHA regs the construction industry (I have been on a ton of construction sites in my day) has more than a 1/3 of one per cent injury rate (see my comment above for how I come up with that number for the porn industry HIV infection rate). So does stunt work for that matter. If we can live with that number for construction we sure as hell can for porn.
We have townships in my area where there aren’t any building permits, you just do it (permitting is handled by the township in some counties in Michigan). That is the way it was where my brother lives until very recently. That is becoming more rare, however as I learned when my furnace installer had to pull a permit (fortunately he did it for me, I would have been a like a lost baby in the woods answering their questions) to replace my furnace (I live close to town, however).
To answer your statement Lacey yes, if you put a scene on the internet involving sex you need 2257 paperwork from all performers, paid or not. it is the publication that triggers 2257, not the exchange of money.
Thanks mharris127!
You just helped with my point… hahaha.
Janitorial Industry deals with all the crap, BUT, as mharris said, they are required to wear gloves (a form of protection)
So, I’ll ask again:
What other industry handles piss, shit, vomit, cum and everything else with NO protection…
@eric
Your question is off base…my point affirming that porn is a legitimate industry (employer …revenue producer) subject to the same workplace safety as any other work place. This isn’t a moral dilemma.
To respond to your question…find me an industry that doesn’t require it’s janitorial staff to put out the wet floor sign and yes I’d consider writing on an open forum they provide. Again not a moral dilemma…what would you tell the janitor who bemoaned wet floor signage as persecutory regulation by moral police…think Syracuse NY where it is wet eight months of the year 🙂
@mharris
I’m with you that a condom free option should remain an option. The problem is that the industry has fought regulation for the sake of fighting regulation so long that they may have closed this door. Start reading the OSHA stuff to see the industry obstruction which makes even commercial building regulations look like a cakewalk. The FSC even tried a last minute effort to use an epidemiologist to prove the medical experts OSHA relies on as faulty yet refused to supply any industry numbers. HIV may be your main worry but is only one of thirty plus conditions that are occupational exposure issues when dealing with human fluids. To focus exclusively on HIV discounts the known cancers associated with HPV and HepC along with antibiotic resistant strains on the radar.
You miss the point entirely again…this isn’t a moral dilemma with one better than the other. Somehow you seem to think porn should be exempt from workplace safety going to the extreme of justifying the workplace exposure risks with personal choice risk exposure.
@eric
Yet another useless off point justification to deflect the point…you really can’t be this obtuse. OSHA is workplace safety period. It doesn’t matter if a union is present…in fact a union is most often formed to protect the employee beyond regulated minimums IG hourly wages, arbitration to limit employers ability to fire the employee for cause etc.
When it comes to choice…even mcdonalds or the local coffee shop removes employee choice by requiring a uniform. If by chance they should unionize they might fight to have these mandatory uniforms cleaned and pressed at the employer expense. More to the point of porn it is a tiny minority who actually have the ability to exercise choice to use or not use a condom. Performers have often shared that they know they might have the request to use a condom respected on a given set…with the reality that it will be the last set they have an opportunity to be considered for.
Roflmao…I just commented that you couldn’t be this obtuse…it isn’t meant to mean…it’s meant to point out that it’s to the point where it seems like you are arguing for the sake of arguing because of the arsenal of unrelated off base issues /questions you keep throwing at the original question.
@jilted
I also enjoy the position …they do it so porn should have a free pass, anyone who doesn’t agree is picking on porn
@lacey
Ok ..I’m stumped 🙂 Even hotel room service wear gloves to service any area they expect to encounter bodily waste…wet or dry.
You may not be wrong, but where was “required” in his comment?
Putting up a sign is not comparable to controlling how someone has sex.
If I miss the point, why do you keep responding? It’s okay for me to be wrong in your mind. That’s okay. Let me be wrong. If I’m so off the reservation, what are you looking to accomplish.
YOU miss the point. We are talking about 2 different things. I’m not trying to argue that they are within the rules or should not be fined. I’m arguing that just because it is against the rules does not make it wrong. You keep going, “But, OSHA says” …. That’s fine, but not what I’m arguing. They have been going against OSHA for their whole history, right? I’m arguing against mandates.
Again. Why do you keep responding. If you truly believe someone is arguing for no reason do you keep engaging. Pretty weird. What original question? This is a comment thread. No one asked a question. Just responding to me with “obtuse” or “Missed the point again” is silly.
What point? This isn’t serious business, we aren’t working toward solutions. Am I the only person that realizes where we are? We are typing at computers. There is not some grand point. It’s a comment thread, it evolves and devolves constantly.
“Never argued against performer compensation.” is not missing anything, It is literally just stating something. A fact.
@eric
Putting up a sign isn’t comparable to controlling how an “individual” has sex…it is comparable to showing up and doing what you need to do for a paycheck! That’s the point that keeps getting overlooked, we aren’t talking about the government trying to regulate how I have sex with my husband…we are talking about how the government can and does regulate the workplace regardless of the work requirements.
Perhaps calling money a paycheck will help make this distinction?
@eric2690
Yes it’s okay for us to have very different points, even opposing opinion…though at some point it would be nice to have clarity on the points presented vs unrelated deflections that seem to be intended to argue for the sake of arguing.
Now you know the agenda on this end…what’s yours?
@eric
I get that you are trying to argue against mandates…we keep trying to point out that a workplace can’t expect exemption from EXISTING regulations that have faced legal challenges yet remain. It seems like you expect “personal freedoms” to apply because of the nature of the work requirement…that individual sexual freedoms should somehow apply to paid sex work.
Asking if you are obtuse in no way implies I believe you are arguing for no reason. The comment thread is the relevant point…it is about production companies…DP specifically making a deliberate choice to skirt the mandates you are arguing against.
Asking if you are being obtuse is related to comments like this one that in no way refer to the subject at hand…
There is a question raised…several actually if you really read the comments. Most questions relate to or have relevance to the original post
“Just responding” lol …now who is really being silly? Look at your responses for relevant comment and look at the patience displayed with relevant content in every response to you. Not just my responses but several folks who have patiently tried to stick to current issue via relevant responses to your comments.
@mharris
Wow no building permits? Is that just for interior modifications/repairs?
You’re point is on target, but … this happens in every other industry. The rules that OSHA, the department of health, the FDA or some other regulatory agency get developed for the General Motors, Chili’s/Applebees, or Walgreens of the world. But the mom and pop manufacturer with one employee on the line, the local diner and the one-man pharmacy have to play by the same rules as the big guys. One man carpenters have to pull building permits and their work pass inspection, the same as the big construction firms. In the state where I live, the local house painter has to put up a protective barrier before he sands exterior paint just like the big painting contractor. As Lacey points out somewhere in here, its because the activity has evolved from you and met sanding the clapboards before we paint the house to a commercial activity. Heck, this is the reason Republicans hate business regulations – they say the big guys can absorb the impact but it kills the little guy.
If you want to be involved in porn for money, you’re involved in a business and not a hobby. You play by business rules. This is not discriminatory.
By the way, every other form of adult entertainment is regulated. In Nevada, the only place where prostitution is legal, there are all kinds of regulations, including testing and condoms. Strip clubs are heavily regulated – and in some locales the girls still have to wear pasties and G-strings. Only porn producers argue that they’re exempt from regulations and can regulate themselves.
@BT
It is precisely because I’ve been a part of the process in numerous industries working with OSHA that I’m encouraging the IC input…relying on the big folks who can absorb this or that too often takes those off the table as agreed concessions to the larger issues the major players are contesting. Performers and independent producers are getting bullshit lip service about how FSC and their paid guns are watching out for them…as the FSC and their legal team go for the holy grail of total exemption they have opened the door to opposing interests from numerous fronts.
Using Applebys as a reference is right on target…as a chain they have developed “brand standard policies” for use by their franchisor/franchisee liaisons who use these to ensure investor ROI isn’t reduced by local health dept fines and possible closure. Opposed to the interests of a mom& pop establishment that buys food storage containers locally that may or may not meet the stringent requirements Applebys didn’t care to contend because they had just signed a food service agreement giving them disposable containers w/o BPA.
Hustler, Kink, Vivid aren’t worried about the requirement that cum wipers wear gloves but the independent might be surprised that the language gets written in a way that they are forced to employ a cum wiper….this shit happens all the time.
I honestly get the feeling that “debating” to you just means blindly questioning everything that someone says… it’s the same as me saying “the sky is blue” and then have you fight with me on why, how, when did that happen?
It’s the same exact reason that I ask you how old you are… not to be offensive or something, but you have to have at least a “general” idea of how industries operate and liability aspects to “get” what we are debating… you obviously don’t have that which is fine, but instead of constantly questioning every single thing someone says why not at least try to understand the opposing points of view before bitching about how stupid they are….
If you were a business owner, your opinions would change drastically. Especially when that $78,000 bill shows up….
You’re making morality and discrimination comments and we’re making logical, legal and business oriented comments… there’s no problem in making your comments whatsoever, but don’t try to debate legal and rational issues with your opinions on “why it isn’t fair.”
We’re not debating whether it’s fair or not. We’re debating the legal, ethical and factual information surrounding the situation not philosophy.
If you want to have a debate revolving are philosophy principles then start one… but, you can’t take a business or regulatory debate and insert philosophy in it all the time…
I don’t want to drive tge speed limit of 60mph. most of the time, but trying to debate it on a personal opinion level isn’t really productive because whether I think it’s fair or not I still have to drive at 60mph.
Now, I can *technically* drive any speed I want to, but there are consequences that go along with that and just declaring “well, that’s not fair” isn’t going to do a damn thing in the long run.. the laws are on the books. You either obey them or face consequences. If you think they are unjust then you fight them. But, that in no way means you’re going to win.
And, if you keep disobeying them then the penalties and fines just get bigger with every offense. That’s *kind of* where the porn industry is at this point…
No agenda. I’m talking on a blog comment thread. I’m purely stating my opinion. This isn’t my life’s work. I make a comment and someone tries to convince me I’m wrong so I respond. I’m not trying to change minds.
There is no “current issue” or “relevant topic”. This is a blog comment section not a formal discussion.
Listen, there isn’t a rule on what I have to stick to in the comment thread. You take this way to seriously and act like it’s a structured topic that I have to stay in. You found me on Twitter for some reason, just stop. You aren’t convincing. Saying this is wrong because the rules say so is not convincing in every case. Just saying “But… rules” is not going to hold much weight. I never argued they operated within the rules.
@erik2690 –
No problem. I’m not sure you’ll ever really get it, but at least I honestly tried to help. Oh well. I wish you well. I will also block you on Twitter since that seems to bother you. Good luck out there…..
Block me? I never tweeted at you. You started following for some reason. Me not “getting it” is an opinion. Just as I don’t think you “get it”. The difference is I don’t talk down and say I’m trying to “help”. We don’t agree. Neither of us needs helping from the other. Disagreement is fairly normal.
Oops.. maybe I should have said I will unfriend you… I’m not the best at Twitter lingo.
Also, to be honest I don’t even remember where I found you? You must have had a conversation with someone I follow because your name showed up in my timeline for some reason.. sorry.
As I said before, good luck!
I haven’t heard of it happening unless there was malice or reckless endangerment of a person causing severe injury or death (the only case of this I can remember in Michigan was where a box compactor wasn’t maintained causing the death of two grocery store workers) and what is now LARA (our version of OSHA) wasn’t the agency involved in disciplining the employee — the county Circuit Court was and the sanction was a felony criminal sanction with prison time. The grocery store was fined out of business, however with a multi-million dollar fine imposed by LARA.
I will add that the lack of a condom almost certainly would not add up to reckless endangerment unless you knowingly fucked a person with HIV and did not tell them about it beforehand.
That is not my understanding. Granted these are country townships without any towns in them and they probably have one or two houses a year being built.
Actually I expect Peter to shrug off $78K as a cost of doing business and a bribe to the state. The porn fines from OSHA are is legalized bribery by force and an attempt to run porn out of California. I hope the major companies do move to Vegas and show CA the mistake they made in attempting to mandate condumbs. I guess the SF Armory building can sit and decay for another 30 years before someone else buys it.
I agree that Ackwhorth probably wont actually appeal, He isnt as stupid as TIM. But i just have to laugh at your OSHA trying to run porn out, and the bridery angle.
OSHA did viturally nothing for over two decades regarding porn., They were dragged into this, kicking and screaming by AHF. Same as the LA Health Department. LACHP had a very good relationship with AIM for years. LACHD used to do the syphilis testing free for AIM, and often provided treatment for stds for free, or very low cost for AIM. Not until AHF began filing complaints was LACHP forced, just like OSHA, to take action, actions that they had not taken for over 20 years. OSHA ignored the industry for over TWO DECADES, does that sound like they are trying to run porn out of california. AHF is not stupid. They know that OSHA MUST respond to their complaints, and the outcomes of those complaints is virtually guaranteed. How can OSHA ignore a complaing about putting a bleeding penis in soemones mouth? How could they possibly not find the complain legit, as with many complaints, the eveidence is on tape.
regarding shrugging off the fine and continuing with business as usual. Once OSHA fines you for something they keep an eye on you. This incident at Kink was NOT an accident, it was intentional, remember, they all voted to continue. If they get nailed again, and they will, the pattern of wreckless behavior can then be submitted to law enforcement for criminal charges. Workplace safety is a RIGHT, under law, in California. Denying a person their RIGHTS under the law can open one up for a Civil Rights lawsuit, and dont for one minute think that AHF isnt getting the ducks lined up for this. And again, AHF doesnt care if they win, they care about publicity, and they get tons of it when they do stuff like this.
LOL
@eric2690
Right..wrong..rules? What the fuck? You are the only one spouting this crap…now I’ll spout…there aren’t hard and fast rules but there is etiquette when posting on most comment forums…the comments are generally related to the OP (original Post/er)
Just because the site host hasn’t posted or enforced “rules” doesn’t mean that other commenters will continuously overlook “off topic” bullshit. Calling you out on the crap is just that calling you out on crap …not saying you are “wrong” or breaking rules just that crap gets old.
@mharris
What happens when someone in Nevada decides to make complaints because they could be making more if they didn’t comply with regulations but must comply because the few compliance responders have them on the radar?
Will that be an attempt to force porn out or level the playing field? This is America…regulations aren’t going away…the best we can hope for is finding a happy medium that keeps regulators happy with a positive net income for the regulated business keeping the economy going with the economic flow they create.