Re: What's the difference between a Provider and a Porn Star? Why is one legal and the other isn'

Good question !!

One falls under freedom of speech/media, the other is an act behind closed doors which is solitarily illegal.

It makes no sense to me either, but that's the law. They cannot make porn illegal because it would be unconstitutional, oddly enough (well it is outlawed in several places but not by federal only by local laws).

It's one of many inconsistencies in our legal system, much like marijuana (I have stomach problems and can't sleep -- oh here's your medical marijuana card!)

-M

To answer your question, they're both legal.  You're only paying a companion / provider for time.  Anything else that happens is between two consenting adults.

You're confusing a provider with prostitution, which is illegal (in most places in the US except a few counties in Nevada).  Just like most guys here, I've never paid for sex.  I've paid for time with an Escort and happened to score.  I've also paid for dinner and entertainment for "civvie's" and gotten lucky with them too.  There's legally no difference.

As for porn, it's not legal to shoot a movie nor is it legal to watch it in all counties and all states.  I'm not sure you could legally shoot porn in Alabama, for instance, since it violates local moral standards and obscenity laws.

Another person also responded related to freedom of speech, which is also a big factor on why you can shoot a movie and not get arrested, but not see a prostitute.  In a movie, it's not sex for money, but acting for money.  You're in character, and the role happens to include you having graphic sex.

In pretty much every state of the Union (certain parts of Nevada excepted), including my beloved California, it is illegal to pander, to engage in lewd conduct and to solicit amongst other things.  If the LA DA wanted to bust all the porn producers in LA tomorrow there are sufficient statutes to do so and they are pretty much the same ones used to bust providers. So please don't make the mistake of thinking one activity is legal and the other illegal--the First Amendment will not protect you from a charge of lewd conduct, pandering or soliciting if a smart prosecutor and the right jury gets a hold of your ass.

The difference is in priorities.  The DA mostly looks at porn as a vice that keeps to itself, does not hang out on street corners, does not (usually) employ under age girls, and does not make a spectacle of itself across from the local elementary school or in someone's expensive neighborhood.  And for the most part as long as providers follow the same rules they usually go unmolested by LE.  But while porn is produced in windowless, remote, unremarkable studios where no nosy neighbors can be disturbed, providing occasionally intrudes on a quiet neighborhood or threatens to overrun a hotel or business district.  It is then that LE usually will step in.  Of course there will always be the occasional high-profile bust so that LE can prove to the uptight masses that it is protecting the moral fabric of society but if TER is any indication, LE has not brought the full weight of its thousands of police officers and prosecutors to bear because as long as we don't make too much of a nuisance of ourselves and don't bring too much attention to ourselves we just don't matter that much.

if you want the answer, go search their archives.  Otherwise, save the bandwidth.

A porn set is, in essence, a movie set. Producers get permits and licenses, actor's information is on file, records are kept and a movie is being filmed.  The sex acts that take place between the actors are a part of the scene and they are legal because the supreme court has said that they are-as long as the camera is rolling it's art.
Without the proper permits and record keeping etc. film or not, it would be prostitution and it would be illegal.

Is it about money? Sure it is. As is every other profit-making business endeavor. As with any business, the lion's share of the profit will go to the party taking the biggest risk. Porn actors are paid a flat fee per scene and they walk away with that money in their pocket-regardless of weather or not a single copy of that DVD is ever sold.  Their financial risk is minimal. In fact, there is none!  
The producers have to pay the talent, the crew, the cost of production and distribution, permits, catering and any other expense that come along.  They are on the hook for the entire cost of filming the movie-regardless of weather or not a single copy of the DVD is sold.

Any porn star can start a production company and make movies. Most choose not to. They don't want to take the risk of investing their own money when it's easier, and a safer bet, to walk away with their performance fee. In the 21st century, with the internet cutting into porn profits in a big way, it has become more common for stars to produce their own content and make it available on their web sites. There is less risk and less profit but the talent is, in this case, reaping the larger portion of the profits.

The porn industry is no different than any other facet of the entertainment industry.  The investors make most of the money because they take most of the risk.

-- Modified on 1/18/2008 4:41:54 AM

pornstar- it's ACTING and it's "ART" so it's legal.

provider- undercover, generally considered as not paying taxes (though this is wrong in my case) and generally unregulated except in certain areas.

Katie