Page 2 of 2
Re: Mandatory condom use in US porn
Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:09 pm
by jj
Len801 wrote:
> If you carefully look at the chart I linked, there were 4.5
> million registered voters.
> A little under half of those registered voters actually cast a
> ballot. That is not too shabby.
No, I didn't bother with the chart- I get quite enough dodgy stats from UK
politicians and lobbyists : -)
Half is quite a high turnout- my 20% is nearer the usual for a run-of-the-mill
'Prop. 101' plebiscite.
I agree that a high fraction probably hadn't considered the full implications of
the vote- and let's not forget we are talking about one of the better-educated,
more liberal states.
Re: Mandatory condom use in US porn
Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:21 pm
by soljARis
They will probably just move a few miles away, just outside the county borders.
Already now quite a lot of stuff is already shot in San Francisco (kink.com and most of the other fetish stuff) or in Nevada and I think that one of the major Internet porn producers (Reality Kings?) is Florida based.
In fact here the biggest losers are probably those off-Hollywood technicians (mainly camera workers) that are firmly LA based because of their main job. They will lose most of the chances of porn side jobs.
Re: Mandatory condom use in US porn
Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:56 pm
by Len801
The porn industry has been saying this for months (moving to other friendly places).
But the USA porn industry has been entrenched in L.A. for 30 years now. That is where the producers, distributors, DVD duplicators, talent agencies, directors, actress/actors live, play and work. And as you correctly pointed out Soljaris, there are people in the mainstream entertainment business who moonlight in porn productions to make a few extra bucks and ride out some occasional dry spells.
And it was only a couple of weeks ago I think that Kink.com announced that they were setting up shop in L.A. So I have not seen or heard of any moving trucks relocating Vivid, Evil Angel, Wicked (even they don't like Measure B) and other large outfits out of L.A.
Re: Mandatory condom use in US porn
Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 4:59 pm
by soljARis
This will probably swing the pendulum even more toward porn producers that are website oriented in the first place.
If you consider the top porn website producers, none of them is based in Los Angeles.
21st Sextury and Tainster are based somewhere in Eastern Europe (Hungary or Czech Republic) and shoot almost exclusively there. Killergram is in England and only shoots there. Brazzers is based in Las Vegas and I think 90% of their American stuff is shot in Nevada or Texas, though they also have people shooting in Europe. As I wrote before, Reality Kings is based in Florida and they shoot mainly there, in Brazil and in Europe. Bang Bros also works mainly in Florida, though they have some people still in LA. Kink and its fetish competitors are all in the Bay Area. Not to mention the dozens of Russian and Latin American web rings that are flooding the net.
Even a company dominating the DVD market like Evil Angel, a distributor of independent producers half of whom had always been shooting mostly out of LA anyway, has become more and more internet-savvy in recent years, with most of the aforementioned independent producers publishing their new material on their own websites before it gets printed on DVDs.
For those companies, that are getting the majority of their revenue from direct internet streaming/downloading, the implications of 'proposition B' will mainly be a further delay in physically publishing their DVDs if their headquarters have to move away from the 'material' side of the business (printers and distributors).
In the end the most affected companies will be those few (Vivid, Wicked, Hustler) that are still churning out plot driven porn, since they are the ones more reliant on the off Hollywood aspects of being in LA. Some of these are already condom friendly while maybe the others will adapt to the new LA County law since their target of public should also be less condom adverse than the customers of the gonzo websites.
Re: Mandatory condom use in US porn
Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 7:13 pm
by Len801
It was obvious from the beginning that AIDS Healthcare Foundation chases porn where it is most prevalent and present. Los Angeles was a huge target. The city, county, whatever they could ensnare--and they succeeded on both counts.
It is difficult to attack a cyber porn company that shoots all over the place in other districts.
I agree with you that the web companies you cited will logically thrive in this new atmosphere of post-Measure B. I also believe there will be increased production in euro porn produced and financed for and by american companies.
Measure B will have some collateral and negative affect on the large US producers of plot-driven movies (Vivid, Wicked, etc), and the porn performers/technicians who depend on them for a livelyhood. Will they adapt and accept these new conditions, or just hire out what they need from out-of-town sources? But these are large companies which prefer close control and supervision over their product (they finance, own and distribute), and I am not sure they could just operate the way Evil Angel does (as a basic distributor of independent product).
Keep watching the skies.
Re: Mandatory condom use in US porn
Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 8:28 pm
by jj
On a selfish note, I can't shed too many tears- although I bear in mind the
notion that what happens in the US, often happens later to the rest of the
world.
I do find these periodic poorly-disguised attacks a trifle amusing: they remind
me of the old story about the Yorkshireman, caught having a knee-trembler in
a doorway and brought before the Beak.... "I'll tell 'ee summat, Milord- tha'll
nivver stop fookin' in Bradford". [Translation available on request]
IOW, it will be got around, somehow.