California’s Mandatory Condom Law Targets Bloggers Who Post About Bareback Porn
AIDS Healthcare Foundation’s proposed “mandatory condoms in porn” law—which will be on the ballot for California voters this coming November—has always been an unenforceable and unnecessary pipe dream cooked up by corrupt AHF slimeball Michael Weinstein, but after reading the full text of the legislation, it’s even more draconian and unconstitutional than previously thought.
The measure’s passage and enforcement would be a clear infringement on First Amendment rights—not just for California porn studios and performers producing bareback films, but also for bloggers who write about and promote those films produced in California. This text from the measure indicates that, if passed, the state would fine anyone involved in commercial distribution of bareback films.
(a) Every person who possesses, through purchase for commercial consideration, any rights in one or more adult films filmed in California in violation of Labor Code section 6720(a) and who knowingly or recklessly sends or causes to be sent, or brings or causes to be brought, into or within California, for sale or distribution, one or more adult films filmed in California in violation of Labor Code section 6720(a), with intent to distribute, or who offers to distribute, or does distribute, such film(s) for commercial purposes, shall be assessed a penalty…
In other words, Str8UpGayPorn—which is based in California—could be fined for posting a blog entry about a Sean Cody bareback fuckfest—all of which are (currently) filmed in California. What’s entirely and insanely unclear is whether or not the law would apply to blogs based in other states (or countries), and if it would apply to retailers and online distributors based out of state. Never mind how, if at all, it would apply to the coverage or advertising of bareback porn that was filmed prior to the law’s passage. Equally insane is the language used in determining the amount of the fines:
…shall be assessed a penalty of the greater of: (1) not less than one-half times, but not more than one-and-one-halftimes, the total amount of commercial consideration exchanged for any rights in the adult film(s); or (2) not less than one-halftimes, but not more than one-and-one-halftimes, the total cost of producing the adult film(s).
That’s deliberately written to be confusing, but it appears that the fine would be (roughly) equal to whatever the scene’s production cost was. So, if the state wanted to fine a blogger for writing about a Sean Cody scene, the fine could be anywhere from $4,000-$8,000. (On the flip side, the fine for writing about a Treasure Island scene would only be, like, $50.) But, who is going to determine the cost of a film (or a scene) and assess these fines? Someone from AHF? The state? Someone from the studio itself (who would be the only one with actual knowledge of the costs involved)?
Perhaps anticipating that their law will be easily challenged on First Amendment grounds, AHF has thrown in an exemption for those engaged in “legitimate” activities involving bareback porn. Maybe Str8UpGayPorn should re-brand itself as a science blog?
(e) This Act shall not apply to legitimate medical, educational, and scientific activities, to telecommunication companies that transmit or carry adult films, to criminal law enforcement and prosecuting agencies in the investigation and prosecution of criminal offenses, and to any film rated by the Motion Picture Association of America unless such film is an adult film.
The most telling part about the section above is the exemption for telecommunications companies, a clear and almost hilarious double standard. As powerful as AHF thinks they are, they’re not stupid enough to think they have more power (or more money) than Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, and Time Warner, all of whom would easily and swiftly shut this entire law down if there was even a hint that their businesses would be affected. So, the big cable providers and mainstream entertainment companies with bareback porn On Demand in hotels and homes throughout California can continue to sell as much bareback porn as they want, but anyone else writing about or distributing it (i.e., the entire adult industry) will be fined. Only AHF and Weinstein could be sleazy enough to try and pull something like this off.
If the law does pass in November, it’ll face a number of clear constitutional challenges (and never mind the fact that it won’t be enforceable to begin with)—but hopefully it won’t come to that if enough people vote “no.” Here’s the full text of the initiative, which as of now is known as “#15-0004.”
