At ?5+ per film any business showing a balance sheet with sums of money in the hundreds of thousands of pounds will have to sell an awful lot of VHS tapes...... Assuming of course the business actually sold the tapes and the tapes weren't actually sold by someone else.... !wink!
But why assume they are taken to a Post Office? If the amount of postage required for each envelope is known (i.e. the items being posted are all the same weight and size as is the case with VHS tapes and DVD's) someone could travel around in a car/van and put them in post boxes beside the road ready for the jolly postman to collect and take to the sorting office...... !cool!
Fiona Cooper : Die cast models?
Re: Fiona Cooper : Die cast models?
Hmmm... you're probably right about there being multiple people involved. If you look at enough of the videos, right from the early days, then even the type of camera, lighting and reference books the film maker used to learn their craft can be discovered...... It's even possible to sort out where in the building the model release forms were kept and how many filing cabinets it took to hold them all....
The more tapes/films you have the bigger the picture of the operation you can get....... !sherlock!
The more tapes/films you have the bigger the picture of the operation you can get....... !sherlock!
Re: Fiona Cooper : Die cast models?
The question is ?what? exactly did the company do?
Let's not forget the company to which you refer to did run many, many films through the BBFC all of which received an 18 certificate without any cuts.
Now, the following is a general example and is not intended to relate to any living individual, company, business, etc.... Let me make it clear the following is an example for discussion rather than based on anything factual. Let me also make it clear that I'm giving this example to expose a potential loop-hole in the VRA 1984 not to encourage wrong doing.
****Start of example**** (for discussion - please consult with a registered and qualified lawyer before doing any of this....) :
Anyone in the UK can grab a video camera and make a XXX film then sell it without getting it certified, however if someone complains to the authorities they will fall foul of the Video Recording Act 1984 and end up being ?detained at Her Majesty's pleasure....?.
But let's take a look at the actual legislation of the Video Recording Act 1984 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/39) in particular section 3 (Exempted supplies), part 4, clause b, sub-section (iii) which includes the following :
?For the purposes of this subsection, any supply is a supply to the public unless it is :
(iii) a supply outside the United Kingdom.?
Remember, the Video Recording Act 1984 covers the ?supply? of video material in the UK only and not the ownership, possession or creation/filming.
Section 3 (Exempted supplies), part 2 states :
"(2)The supply of a video recording by any person is an exempted supply if it is neither?
(a)a supply for reward, nor
(b)a supply in the course or furtherance of a business."
Ok, so doesn't that say that providing the supply does not attract a "reward "and it's not "in the course or furtherance of a business" then the supply is exempted?
The law does not prevent someone in the UK filming a XXX move, providing of course the contents don't contravene the various Obscene Publications Act(s) in which case possession of the video recording would be a crime.
So let's assume for the purposes of our example that Mr X starts a company filming R18 content videos but doesn't bother getting them classified as he just films/produces them and has no intention of selling or supplying them to the public in the UK.
Suppose Mr X makes sure the original master copy of the film is given to Mr Y who is outside the UK (for the purposes of this example let's say that Mr Y is in Sweden). Also Mr X makes sure that the supply to Mr Y is not for "reward "and it's not "in the course or furtherance of a business". So far UK law has not been broken has it? In fact the supply is exempted under two exemption clauses in the VRA (Please correct me if I am wrong).
If Mr Y duplicates the video and sends it back (i.e. supplies) it to the public in the UK. Would it be classed as ?a supply outside the United Kingdom? as described earlier in the post? (Please correct me if I am wrong).
So, if my example (above) is correct, before thinking that someone in the UK is contravening the VRA 1984 we should first look at the labels on the video films to see where the supplier is based. Perhaps the person in the UK is merely a ?producer? and not a ?supplier??
After who would be stupid enough to film uncensored XXX content in their own house as well as appearing in the films letting their face be clearly seen, then invite the public to send money to a PO Box registered to them for copies of the tape? Especially if some of the videos show the outside of the house including front door and their car, name board of the house and nearby landmark features such as power supply pylons?
Now suppose the set up given above is lawful (Please correct me if I am wrong). Why not just pay Mr Y to sit there and do nothing while Mr X actually fulfils his role from within the UK so as to cut costs but if the authorities ever visited then Mr Y would say that he was actually playing his part in the operation? In fact why not also get the involvement of Mr Z in the USA too so there are two other ?fake? sources of supply to call upon should the need arise?
If Mr X decided that enough is enough and gets bored with the filming he could even just employ another person to film the videos at their studio/house while retaining copyright. Mr X can sit back and watch the money stack up in the bank.
We should also look on the VHS videos, internet site, DVD's etc... to see what exactly can be obtained from any UK addresses given? Does it just say that you can get printed catalogues (not covered by the VRA 1984) from the UK address? The supply of the catalogue is perfectly legal and not covered by the VRA 1984 is it?
The authorities are only likely to call if someone makes a compliant, so if nobody complains then there are no problems for Mr X are there? Suppose a rival springs up to Mr X ? all Mr X needs to do is complain to the authorities (or get a friend to complain) and the authorities will come down on the rival leaving Mr X to continue providing nobody complains about Mr X and his operation....
****End of example****
To sum up :
1. Before jumping to conclusions take a look at the video/DVD's and see what country is shown on the address from which it was supposedly supplied? Is by any chance the supply address outside the UK? Does the packaging give several address some of which are outside the UK? Is the internet site based outside the UK?
2. Do you just get the catalogue from the UK address?
There are ways around everything, look at Paul Raymond. At one time naked women could not move on stage ? so he made the stage move while the women stayed still!!!! By opening his ?Revue Bar? as a members only club he managed to get around laws on nudity!!!!
The big danger with being a producer of XXX material is getting tempted to become involved with the stars of the show, or worse still those working for you. If you're in XXX then you're in it for the money not the pleasure you can have with those around you in the working environment....
In my opinion the VRA 1984 needs updating ? a lot has changed in the past 33 years since 1984.
The Digital Economy Act 2017 tries to apply VRA style censorship to XXX content on the internet however the DEA 2017 is also flawed because from my understanding it allows UK residents to supply internet based XXX content to the rest of the world but not to the UK!!!! ( http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/201 ... 14/enacted ).
Let's not forget the company to which you refer to did run many, many films through the BBFC all of which received an 18 certificate without any cuts.
Now, the following is a general example and is not intended to relate to any living individual, company, business, etc.... Let me make it clear the following is an example for discussion rather than based on anything factual. Let me also make it clear that I'm giving this example to expose a potential loop-hole in the VRA 1984 not to encourage wrong doing.
****Start of example**** (for discussion - please consult with a registered and qualified lawyer before doing any of this....) :
Anyone in the UK can grab a video camera and make a XXX film then sell it without getting it certified, however if someone complains to the authorities they will fall foul of the Video Recording Act 1984 and end up being ?detained at Her Majesty's pleasure....?.
But let's take a look at the actual legislation of the Video Recording Act 1984 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/39) in particular section 3 (Exempted supplies), part 4, clause b, sub-section (iii) which includes the following :
?For the purposes of this subsection, any supply is a supply to the public unless it is :
(iii) a supply outside the United Kingdom.?
Remember, the Video Recording Act 1984 covers the ?supply? of video material in the UK only and not the ownership, possession or creation/filming.
Section 3 (Exempted supplies), part 2 states :
"(2)The supply of a video recording by any person is an exempted supply if it is neither?
(a)a supply for reward, nor
(b)a supply in the course or furtherance of a business."
Ok, so doesn't that say that providing the supply does not attract a "reward "and it's not "in the course or furtherance of a business" then the supply is exempted?
The law does not prevent someone in the UK filming a XXX move, providing of course the contents don't contravene the various Obscene Publications Act(s) in which case possession of the video recording would be a crime.
So let's assume for the purposes of our example that Mr X starts a company filming R18 content videos but doesn't bother getting them classified as he just films/produces them and has no intention of selling or supplying them to the public in the UK.
Suppose Mr X makes sure the original master copy of the film is given to Mr Y who is outside the UK (for the purposes of this example let's say that Mr Y is in Sweden). Also Mr X makes sure that the supply to Mr Y is not for "reward "and it's not "in the course or furtherance of a business". So far UK law has not been broken has it? In fact the supply is exempted under two exemption clauses in the VRA (Please correct me if I am wrong).
If Mr Y duplicates the video and sends it back (i.e. supplies) it to the public in the UK. Would it be classed as ?a supply outside the United Kingdom? as described earlier in the post? (Please correct me if I am wrong).
So, if my example (above) is correct, before thinking that someone in the UK is contravening the VRA 1984 we should first look at the labels on the video films to see where the supplier is based. Perhaps the person in the UK is merely a ?producer? and not a ?supplier??
After who would be stupid enough to film uncensored XXX content in their own house as well as appearing in the films letting their face be clearly seen, then invite the public to send money to a PO Box registered to them for copies of the tape? Especially if some of the videos show the outside of the house including front door and their car, name board of the house and nearby landmark features such as power supply pylons?
Now suppose the set up given above is lawful (Please correct me if I am wrong). Why not just pay Mr Y to sit there and do nothing while Mr X actually fulfils his role from within the UK so as to cut costs but if the authorities ever visited then Mr Y would say that he was actually playing his part in the operation? In fact why not also get the involvement of Mr Z in the USA too so there are two other ?fake? sources of supply to call upon should the need arise?
If Mr X decided that enough is enough and gets bored with the filming he could even just employ another person to film the videos at their studio/house while retaining copyright. Mr X can sit back and watch the money stack up in the bank.
We should also look on the VHS videos, internet site, DVD's etc... to see what exactly can be obtained from any UK addresses given? Does it just say that you can get printed catalogues (not covered by the VRA 1984) from the UK address? The supply of the catalogue is perfectly legal and not covered by the VRA 1984 is it?
The authorities are only likely to call if someone makes a compliant, so if nobody complains then there are no problems for Mr X are there? Suppose a rival springs up to Mr X ? all Mr X needs to do is complain to the authorities (or get a friend to complain) and the authorities will come down on the rival leaving Mr X to continue providing nobody complains about Mr X and his operation....
****End of example****
To sum up :
1. Before jumping to conclusions take a look at the video/DVD's and see what country is shown on the address from which it was supposedly supplied? Is by any chance the supply address outside the UK? Does the packaging give several address some of which are outside the UK? Is the internet site based outside the UK?
2. Do you just get the catalogue from the UK address?
There are ways around everything, look at Paul Raymond. At one time naked women could not move on stage ? so he made the stage move while the women stayed still!!!! By opening his ?Revue Bar? as a members only club he managed to get around laws on nudity!!!!
The big danger with being a producer of XXX material is getting tempted to become involved with the stars of the show, or worse still those working for you. If you're in XXX then you're in it for the money not the pleasure you can have with those around you in the working environment....
In my opinion the VRA 1984 needs updating ? a lot has changed in the past 33 years since 1984.
The Digital Economy Act 2017 tries to apply VRA style censorship to XXX content on the internet however the DEA 2017 is also flawed because from my understanding it allows UK residents to supply internet based XXX content to the rest of the world but not to the UK!!!! ( http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/201 ... 14/enacted ).