The gist of it is this:

Porn is protected by the First Amendment, sex for money is not.

The question becomes now one of convincing LE that what you are doing is really making a porn film rather than paying (or being paid) to have sex.

It is not as easy as setting up a video camera while you screw.  You have to make a convincing case that this video will indeed be offered for sale or be promoted commercially somehow.

Also bear in mind that if you do suceed in convincing the cops that you are legitimate porn artists, the question of business zoning becomes relevant to the discussion.  Believe me, you don't want to go there.

Yes, I know, the logic doesn't make a lot of sense to me either, but have you checked out the tax code lately?

(still not a lawyer)

-- Modified on 4/7/2008 5:23:02 AM

they will explain to you that shooting a movie and acting out a scene is a means of artistic expression that is protected by law. Permits must be obtained, codes must be met and records must be on file. The actress is not selling sex and the actor is not buying it.  They are in fact both being paid to act in a movie.

if a Provider just "acts" like she's having fun or engaging in an intimate act, then she is safe from all legal liability and any case will be thrown out of court.  This very rarely happens, however, since very few providers are "acting" when with a hobbyist.

OTOH, if a female Porn Star happens to actually have an orgasm while taping, then she crosses the line from art to real life and is subject to legal liability.  Since it's very hard to tell sometimes because the Porn Stars are such great actors, there are OI's (Orgasm Inspectors) on site for each film, paid for by the producers, to ensure that real orgasms are recorded. Because the Orgasms are not intentional, the female porn stars are usually only issued a ticket for a civil infraction, but sometimes, in cases of intense orgasms, there are arrests and the porn star has to be replaced.  All of this greatly increases the costs of Porn, which is, unfortunately passed down to us consumers.

The reason these films are only shot in California and New Jersey is that the Bureau of Orgasm Inspectors "BOI" only has those two regional branches due to budget cuts.  I've applied to be an OI several times, but the job is very difficult to get.

So, the bottom line is that, if you are only "acting" like you are having fun, you are OK, and it can be an affirmative defense to a charge of prostitution.  However, if you actually have fun, you are opening yourself up to liability.  The providers that I personally see are relatively lucky, because I have been unable to truly please a woman in a very long time.

One real problem that I haven't addressed since it wasn't asked about is the liability of the Producers and Casting Directors.  Some case law suggests that if the actors have orgasms, the Producers and Casting Directors who hired them may be liable for pandering per se, but it is only usually pursued in the Deep South.

Good luck

-- Modified on 4/11/2008 3:08:47 PM