Porn companies sue to overturn Los Angeles condom law


Recommended Posts

Porn companies sue to overturn Los Angeles condom law

Two major US porn companies have taken legal action to try to overturn a law requiring porn actors in Los Angeles County to wear condoms.

Vivid Entertainment and Califa Productions say the measure violates the guarantee of free speech in the US constitution's First Amendment.

The law, known as Measure B, was approved by voters in November.

The measure was supported by the Aids Healthcare Foundation (AHF), which said it would shield actors from HIV.

"Overturning this law is something I feel very passionate about," Steven Hirsch, founder of the Vivid Entertainment, told AFP news agency.

"I believe the industry's current testing system works well," he added.

Porn actors Kayden Kross and Logan Pierce are joining the challenge against the law.

HIV scares

Measure B expanded to county level an ordinance which had already been passed in the city of Los Angeles, requiring condom use as a condition of receiving a filming permit there.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa signed that measure into law in January 2012.

Adult production companies have threatened to move out of California because of the requirement, but face legal difficulties.

A 1988 ruling by the California Supreme Court prevented producers from being prosecuted under anti-prostitution laws, and only one other state - New Hampshire - has a similar ruling.

Adult film productions in the LA area have been suspended in the past because of HIV scares.

Critics of the condom requirement say actors are regularly tested, and such a requirement would hurt business and push production studios underground.

"We found that a lot of viewers at home don't want to see condom porn," Keiran Lee, a British porn actor in Los Angeles, told BBC's Newsbeat in January last year.

Source: BBC News

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the presence of condoms were that much of a turnoff I would ask why your eyes were focused on there to begin with. Unless of course, that's your thing. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vivid Entertainment and Califa Productions say the measure violates the guarantee of free speech in the US constitution's First Amendment.

I think the law was stupid, but...

Really awful argument. It's like saying business regulations that may make it more difficult to do business violate freedom of assembly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

do penises talk or something? Can't see how it is a freedom of speech issue. I think its a good idea, more people would use condoms then, less unwanted babies, less STD's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

with or without condoms it doesnt matter IMO if they wear them as it takes one condom breakage an the woman still ends up getting pregnant an or a STD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

do penises talk or something? Can't see how it is a freedom of speech issue. I think its a good idea, more people would use condoms then, less unwanted babies, less STD's.

They're making the argument that the condom laws were put in place as a sneaky, round-about way to prevent them from making porn, and thus limit their free speech rights. That's questionable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No clue on that since I prefer girl on girl porn and I don't like rubbing one out while watching a guys wang and balls on screen, I don't swing that way, but as for condoms I don't get the unappeal. Oh no please don't make me wear something that avoids diseases and pregnancy, I would much rather pay for a kid for 18 yrs then a $1 condom.

Then again I live in Canada and abortions are free so whatever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that they should have to wear condoms, as this is going to put them at a competitive disadvantage and they will just move to another county. The market currently prefers the fantasy of not wearing a condom with random loose women. However, I would like to see more voluntary scenes in the industry, just as to promote having safe sex when done in real life even if the actors and actresses don't practically need it (regular testing of STDs, no sex with partners not being regularly tested, use of contraceptive pill/implant, etc).

The marketplace is not going to change overnight, it would be a more realistic goal to say that 30% of scenes must be with a condom in the first two years, and if that is successful start moving the ratio requirements up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

with or without condoms it doesnt matter IMO if they wear them as it takes one condom breakage an the woman still ends up getting pregnant an or a STD.

Porn stars are actually very thoroughly tested for anything.

Almost anything they get is from outside their job; e.g. sex with other people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Porn stars are actually very thoroughly tested for anything.

Almost anything they get is from outside their job; e.g. sex with other people.

ya but the woman wear condoms so why not guys. The girls use those dental dam things so it looks like there's no protection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.