Home

Back to Essays


 



Thursday, March 22nd, 2001

Highlights From Jim And Rob's Lesbian Movie For Fat Dog

I walk in Wednesday morning and meet 26-year old spunky blonde Summer Storm. She says she spent five hours the night before reading my web site. She's appalled by the way I portray the business.

From California, she's done 30 movies in her three months in porn.

Rob Spallone complains about his phone getting shut off.

Rob: "I told them, '$18? I've got more money than God. You want $18 to turn the phone on?"

A girl calls up and Rob and Jim hire her.

Jim: "We don't care who they are, just so long as they have tits and a pussy."

The lack of quality control shows in the movie. Many of the performers are distinctly sub par - overweight, sagging, wrinkled and worse for wear.

Jim points at what looks like a brain in a jar.

Jim: "Luke, this is what happened to the last guy who ran a web site critical of the porn industry."

I ask Jim and Rob why they're making more Mafia movies. How do they know so much about this world? They both come from family neighborhoods in New York.

Jim: "I watch the Mafia movies like The Godfather."

Rob: "He reads l-keford."

Jim: "Luke, you taught me more about the mob than anybody else on the planet."

Rob: "We didn't even know what the word meant."

Jim tells Rob: "He [Luke] almost got f---ing killed before."

Rob: "And thanks to me, he didn't. That's the 50th time I've saved him."

Jim: "Bobby [Gallagher, owner of the stage where Jim and Rob shoot] was about to kill him."

Rob: "He asked me if he could."

Jim: "Bobby got that wild look in his eyes and everything."

Luke: "Did you straighten out the misunderstanding?"

Jim: "Doesn't mean he likes you. He'll tolerate you here today.

"Ever since Rob won that AVN award, he's been going to acting classes. He's thinking of changing his name to Rob DeNiro."

Luke: "Rob Spallone playing a wiseguy is like Courtney Love playing a heroin addict."

Jim: "What will be a stretch for him is when we put him in a movie playing a gay guy."

Dynamite's husband Gary says he finds it incredible how the people who write my site regard porn girls as irresponsible.

Gary: "I'm sure it doesn't describe Bridgett or my wife... There are a lot of girls out there who have common sense and take this as a real business. I can't believe that people still perceive that 1970s outlook."

Jim: "Boogie Nights did more damage to this business than Luke F-rd ever did. Because Boogie Nights made stereotypes of everybody in the business and said that this is what they are."

Bobby: "Boogie Nights is exactly the way it was. The drugs, the sex..."

Jim: "But it's not the way it is today."

Gary: "I was reading about that girl who had the chance for a mainstream job. But they wouldn't give her a chance because they didn't know if she would show up on set, is she going to show up strung out. Most of the girls in this business who make it big are not strung out on drugs."

Jim calls the VCA publicity girl Misha who refers to critic Patrick Riley as "Mr. IHateEverbody."

Jim and Rob giggle.

Rob: "Too bad we don't know anybody back East [to take care of Pat Riley]."

Jim and Rob smile maliciously.

Jim: "Bobby Gallagher is sitting here watching every word you say."

I turn around and there's Bobby giving me an evil stare.

Rob: "All I've got to do is go like this and it's over."

Bobby: "The thing is Jim, he's [Luke] sitting there smiling. He doesn't know that he could meet up with someone one day in a blind alley..."

Skeeter: "That movie by Jane Hamilton, Being With Juliette. Bridgett did a scene with Evan Stone that went eight hours. Bridgett was in piledriver for an hour and a half. They were getting every DVD angle. Everything that you could possibly capture. It was an incredible scene. And the review that Pat [Riley] wrote was that Bridgett does anal with Evan."

Jim introduces me to Lance, a Hungarian Jew who worked for national TV in Hungary but now works as a PA on a porno set.

Lance is carefully spoken and intense looking.

Jim: "He lives in downtown LA on skidrow. He's an interesting guy and he uses a lot of big words. You like guys who use big words.

"He doesn't even have a telephone so he certainly doesn't have a computer. To call Lance, you have to call his hotel and leave a message. He don't eat meat either."

Summer comes by: "Are you still recording?"

Summer takes my tape recorder and says: "f--- you, f--- you, f--- you.

"I'm just kidding. I think I like you. Since you're Rob's friend."

Summer thanks Rob for paying her.

Summer: "I hate these places that take weeks to pay you. I have $3000 that I can't even cash because I have to wait for my stupid IDs."

Summer strokes me. I get nervous.

Summer: "What's the matter? You've never been touched by a girl? That's because nobody likes you."

Luke: "What sort of an experience was it to read l-keford.com?"

Summer: "I thought you were a lunatic. I didn't know who you were. I just thought you should be shot. I was reading everything. Probably stuff from before I was born."

Luke: "What did you find most interesting?"

Summer: "Who you were. I didn't understand who you were. And then I went to a video store and I was wondering who you were. So I had somebody pull up your name and you were in it. I wanted to see what you looked like. You were in this documentary [Shooting Sex?]."

Steve Austin, former assistant to Jim South, walks in. He looks buffed. Steve offers Rob some deals on digital pictures. Austin says he works almost every day for Extreme, particularly in their Cocksmokers line. He may direct a lesbian series for them.

Luke to Jim and Rob: "How come you guys don't use any African Americans behind the scenes?"

Rob: "VCA has a black director."

Luke: "What are you guys doing to help integration in the adult industry?"

Jim: "You want us to bring a moolie here to work for us."

Bobby: "We don't hire people because they're black."

Rob: "We hire them because they're good."

Luke: "When was the last time you hired..."

Jim: "Tony Eveready, casting agent."

Luke: "What about to do the camera and other stereotypical white roles?"

Jim: "I shoot the camera."

Steve: "What about Ronnie from VCA? Does he still do camera work or is he just directing?"

Steve: "And he edits."

Jim: "Jim Lane's still photographer is a black guy. And DV, the guy with the dredlocks."

Bobby points out a black cameraman who "is really good but he doesn't get hired a lot because he charges a lot."

Rob: "Yeah, he's good. We hired him but he didn't show up."

Luke: "Because he felt an atmosphere of racial hostility on your sets?"

Jim: "Monkeys galore, they feel very f---ing relaxed."

Rob: "They get in the trees for us."

Steve: "How is his recorder still in tact?"

Jim: "What about Tim Studley?"

Bobby: "I rented him a piece of equipment and he returned it two years later."

Rob: "I hired him. I told him the price. He came and asked for more money. He's unbelievable. He was good at what he did but nothing but a problem every two seconds."

Jim: "He underbids to get the job and once he gets there, he tries to find reasons to add to it."

Rob: "He wasn't working and he was having problems. And we put him back to work."

Luke to Jim: "Do you oil up all the black girls in your productions?"

Jim: "Yes because they absorb light. White reflects light and black absorbs light. So we need to make them more reflective and shiny. We put a little blue gell on the light because black people look good with a little blue on them."

I talk to Skeeter Kerkove about his recent deal with the Canadian pornographers Black Knight Productions. Seymore Butts distributes the movies.

Skeeter: "We do three movies for them a month. We do Bubblegum Girls, Bongs and Thongs, and Bridgett Kerkove's Let's Get It On. We film two of the movies a month at our house. The theme for Bubblegum Girls is the younger collegiate look. All the scenes are anal. Everybody's french kissing through the whole thing. There's no name calling. Ever. No mean stuff going on. But extremely wild hardcore sex. We film the whole domestic version for thirty minutes. Stop. Then tell the editor, here comes the European stuff. And the really wild stuff goes on for about twelve minutes [peeing, fisting, etc]. And that will be edited with the domestic version for all of Canada, Europe and Australia.

"The girls are blowing bubbles as they have sex and using candy and having lollipops. They're dressing in a younger style. I into the glamor look, not the young girl look. We're like the host of the show and Bridgett is all glammed up.

"Bongs and Thongs is for entertainment purposes only. A lot of people will have bongs and pipes and will pretend to smoke fake pot and tobacco. And wild sex. And sometimes they will take breaks during their sex acts to start smoking out of bongs and pipes. And they sign releases saying that it isn't real pot. And we have this stuff that comes in a bag and looks very real but it has the origin of where it comes and from and it doesn't contain anything illegal."

Luke: "Do you snort anything as well?"

Skeeter: "Oh no. What would you compare it to? Like a Cheech and Chong movie. They're not really smoking pot on the set. We're not promoting pot smoking. I've never even smoked it before and I am 36. So I just smoke tobacco out of a bong which makes me cough a lot. It's really wild sex and everybody's happy and smiling and french kissing. And Bridgett Kerkove's Let's Get It On is also all anal and really wild sex. No softcore.

"Bridgett's still doing three to four movies a week. She only had one day off in February. We're doing our first internet deal with a company called Gamma. We've never done any internet deals with anybody because we don't trust any of the internet companies.

"So we're going to allow a six month lease of her name. And we will provide them with 1000 digital stills a month and we will get our money one month in advance.

"Our still photographer is Richard Monfort. We met him when we did the chopsticks scene. He's getting 600-700 stills per movie.

"The decadent Kerkoves are good savers.

"The tattoo on my kneck says 'white trash.' I know that the majority of people who write about us on the internet have never met us. They've never been to our home. But they were comparing us to Mojo and Gauge. And I loved that. They said that we were anti-American white trailer trash. I know that the guy didn't know that we owned a $400,000 home. And a $55,000 Jaguar and a $27,000 new truck and four small commercial buildings on Foothill Blvd and Tujunga that are paid for. If he knew that, he wouldn't have said that."

Luke: "When did you get the tattoos and what do they represent?"

Skeeter: "My tattoos was a big mistake I made when I was young. I started getting them when I was 16 and I quit getting them when I was 21. I'm 36 now. If I could make them all disappear with a magic wand, I would."

Luke: "What were you in prison for?"

Skeeter: "I loaned money for a drug deal. When I got arrested, of course, I wouldn't tell. So I went to trial and I lost. And I got convicted as a co-conspirator in the attempted possession of cocaine for sale and transportation and distribution."

Luke: "How long were you away?"

Skeeter: "Three years. I wouldn't tell. If you're gonna break the law, and you get caught, you have to go do your time. When I loaned this money to this guy, I had no idea that I could face such criminal penalties. It was stupid. It was way before I had children and I met my wife. It was after my bike wreck when I got hit by a drunk driver. I fractured my skull, I broke my neck and my femur in my left leg came through my skin and muscle in two different places. My hip was disintegrated. It fractured my right femur and broke both wrists. So they put a titanium rod through my left femur to hold it together and gave me a new hip."

Luke: "Any after effects?"

Skeeter: "Arthiritis."

Luke: "What do you think of Patrick Riley?"

Skeeter: "He's a tough critic. Roger Pipe is being a lot nicer to Bridgett now. It's obvious that Bridgett has a boob job. It's obvious that 85% of the top A class actresses who've been around for a while have had a boob job. I notice he's being a lot nicer to Brianna Banks. But now he's being very fair. Bridgett is the most photographed and videotaped girl in porn since January 1999. With over 440 movies to her credit."

Luke suspects that Bridgett's 440 movies is probably more than any other female porn performer aside from Sharon Mitchell and Nina Hartley.

Roger Pipe says: "I was never intentionally mean to her. Even in the last review that set him off, I didn't say a thing bad about her. I even nominated her for some awards because I recognize her appeal to fans. Are you asking if I'm being nice to her because he threatened me? Nah, I stopped long before that. I don't pile on. There is a list of women I don't find personally appealing...."

Skeeter: "She did a pay-per-view thing for VideoSecrets. It was their largest turnout ever for a single girl."

Luke: "How do you handle it when she gets bad reviews?"

Skeeter: "I don't get my feelings hurt. It's been about two months since I got my feelings hurt. I realize that the majority of people reviewing her don't know her and are not on the set. And all the guys who are in the pedophile who are into the young natural look, they're not going to like somebody like Bridgett. She's a glamor girl. We don't think of all the girls in porn as the young look. Glamor is very womanly and that's what sells a lot of magazines. Playboy doesn't go for the young look.

"Now she's getting huge offers to go on the road dancing. Sometimes on Playboy, Spice, she'll be in ten different movies in one month.

"When she goes on the road dancing, she plans to take that whole sum of money and put it towards retirement. Because doing these three movies a month is more than enough to pay her bills. She's thinking of doing one dance appearance a month. It's a three day gig, you leave the day before..."

Blast From The Past - 1/25/01

Skeeter Kerkove Goes After Critic Roger Pipe

Skeeter Kerkove writes Rog of Rogreviews.com: "Roger I read your review on the Sopornos 2. Why on earth are you talking about Bridgettes tits again? When you review Jenna Jameson, do you write post boob job? NO! Of course not. Do you write that about Alexa Rae, Serenity, Stacy Valentine, Kylie Ireland, Asia Carrera, Janine, Jewel D Nyle, Kendra Jade, Wendi Knight, etc., etc., Look Bridgette has done over 200 movies since she got her boobs done, its not new news. It was over a f---in' year ago, get the f--- over it. Every other magazine gave Bridgette and Tonys scene a smokin' review. Have never seen you put down other top stars for their boobs,so stop messing with my wife. I am really getting upset. On Jewels review you did not write post boob job or mention balooned up tits. You did not mention on Kendras post nose job, Surgically upturned lip, filled with fat to make them fuller, or post her boob job. You didnt even mention the quality of Kendras boob job.

"Obviously for some reason you have it in for Bridgette, one of the greatest female performers of all time. Obviously there is a reason why she is the most video taped and photographed girl in 1999 and 2000. Just dont ever mention my wifes name again in a review. I'll see you at the next show homeboy. You can't miss me. Im six foot one 210 pounds and covered in tatoos from when I was in Prison. I have a shaved Head and an ugly beard. See you soon baby. How does your body look? Taylor St. Claire told me you look nerdy and wear glasses, kind of creepy. Bridgette has made over six hundred thousand in two years. How about you Super Stud?"

Brian Kushner writes: "Skeeter is a f---ing asshole..Every time I read something by him it's the same s---..My wife is great, my wife made 10,000 movies. What the f--- is wrong with this guy? He has got to be the most insecure dude on the planet. And as for being 6ft 1" and 210 lbs with PRISON tattoos, obviously he isnt enough for his wife or she wouldn't be out f---ing every motherf---er in the world. AS I said before Luke, these two are done in less then a year. You better give me the kudos when the split happens. Brigitte will wake up (I hear she started to already) and realize what the f--- is up keeping this s---load Skeeter around."

Gilles writes: "That guy Skeeter Kerkove certainly has a problem.He will have a bigger one when Bridget gonn'a leave him."

Ramsey writes: "Luke, I just read Skeeter Kerkove's comments about Mr. Pipe and I could not agree more. I think Skeeter is a very lucky man because Bridgette is THE hottest pornstar right now (with Tiffany Mynx of course). Bridgette is the perfect pornstar because she's beautiful (especially those lips) and she does it all. I'm kind of addicted to Bridgette after I saw her the first time in 'White Trash Whore 11'. I try to get every movie she's in because I can't get enough of her. That's why Mr. Pipe's attacks on Bridgette are really pathetic but so are most of his boring reviews. I have been in a lot of flamewars with this Mr. Pipe (after I exposed his favorite director/performer Tom Byron for doing a she-male) so I can understand Skeeter. I really think Mr. Pipe should end his pathetic attacks on Bridgette with or without the help of Skeeter because Bridgette is the real deal! Ramsey (The biggest Dutch Bridgette Kerkove-fan)."

Roger Pipe rejoins: "Hey Luke, I want to thank Ramsey for joining Skeeter's mis-informed rant. Neither of them bothered to actually read the review in question, since all I did was point out that this was a post-implant scene. As for Ramsey's hard-on for Tom Byron, he should probably get over that. He's the only one who cares. I wish he and all of the Bridgette fans the very best. I wish Bridgette the best and as I told Skeeter, I hope her implants make her a TON of money. I just hear from fans who, unlike Ramsey, don't like the implants on Bridgette and WANT me to tell them if it's pre-or-post. Most of them understand the concept of personal taste and don't get their panties in quite as big a bunch as he does. Just do me a favor and actually read before you jump on a bandwagon."

Amber@EroticVideos.com writes: This Roger Pipe thing makes me laugh. Reminds me of the days of Racquel Darrian when our movie reviewers used to specify if the movie was a Derrick Lane only movie or if Racquel actually took on other porn studs. But the funny part of this was, Racquel Darrian actually only made a couple movies, in the very beginning of her Vivid career only performing with Derrick Lane. After those first few, all movies were open to various actors. So the first 5 times I caught a review with the information, I thought it was funny - but after that it got kind of old. Especially when I read a review of Racquel Darrian's movie Rolling Thunder, which was made 10 years after her making the decision to perform with other porn stars besides her now husband Derrick Lane. The review made a huge point to let her fans know the good news "This is a movie where Racquel takes on other studs". DUH! We've known that for 10 years now.

So what I'm getting at is, if they are really a fan of Bridgette they would know she got a boob job and that all of her new movies will include shots of her WITH her boob job considering the fact that they are now a permanent part of her body. So after the first couple of reviews telling about her boob job, I think the subject can be dropped. Wouldn't you say?

Although on a side note, Bridgette's husband needs to calm down and back off. Not all of the porn world will like his little wife and he can't go threatening to beat up everyone who doesn't. Makes both him and her look bad.

KendraJXXX: do me a favor??
KendraJXXX: send a message to skeeter kerkove for me
KendraJXXX: tell him to shut the f--- up about me
KendraJXXX: or the quality of any of my surgical work
KendraJXXX: he and beigette both have always been cool to me face to face
KendraJXXX: BUT to drag me into whatever war they are having is bulls---
KendraJXXX: and i only hope they can say to my face what they say in print
KendraJXXX: P>S> the quality of my boob job??? please skeeter...what does that mean?? have you looked at ...oh..nevermind...whatever

The Future Of Sex.com

I talked Tuesday morning to a key member of the new Sex.com management team.

Daron Babin (SEGuru) will run the site along with webmaster Brian Jones and attorney Greg Geelan (aka Otto...one of the owners of YNOT).

Daron: I've always said that if I ever had the ability to take care of sex.com, I'd filter and target the traffic as much as possible. The best model to do that with would be an adult directory. You're quote yesterday about an adult Yahoo was almost correct. We want to take it farther. We want to make it more personable.

We're taking a look at the traffic. We're it's coming from. We're looking at an international strategy. Along the lines of a magazine with communities built into it so it becomes sticky. Right now the site [sex.com] is bleeding to death because the traffic has always come and left to never return again.

Luke: Yes. Because there's nothing there but some obscene banner ads.

Daron: I can tell just by looking at stats from banner clicks that there are a lot of really new users. People who are just discovering the web and how a browser works. And what is the first thing they type in? Sex.com. They may not be looking for hardcore... We want to see where their interest lies, give them something for their interest, and make them want to return.

There are many different adult search engines out there. But I don't think there is one site that we're looking at to emulate. We want to marry the community to a particular lifestyle. Where the alternative lifestyles are concerned, such as the gay community. We want to make sure that we don't put something up there that's fluff and doesn't actually appeal to the gay community.

I don't see these adult engines now that have gone to that level. They're strictly search. That's it. I don't think that's a good solid business model because of the single revenue stream.

We're looking to become a bit of a content provider and to plug our stuff into the major portals.

Luke: Is there anyone making money on the web aside from porn?

SEGuru: Sure. As search engine placement specialists, we deal with people in both the mainstream and adult.

Luke: I was shocked that Yahoo lists bestiality sites.

SEGuru: I was shocked. So does Dmoz. It's project started by two guys, a volunteer project to create a directory like Yahoo but with a volunteer staff. They were acquired by Netscape.

Luke: They've got a human editor at Yahoo listing bestiality sites...

SEGuru: We won't list bestiality sites. We want to play safe ball all the way around.

One of the partners [Lewis Payne] in Persian Kitty has secured the hosting agreement and contract with Sex.com. When was the last time you heard Persian Kitty was down? PK knows how to keep a site up and running.

Getting A Contract With Vivid, Wicked

Tara writes: Hi Luke! I was wondering, how does a porn starlet go about getting offered a contract from one of the major porn companies(aside from sleeping with the owner of the company, that is)? Is it based on her looks? Her, ahem, "body of work"? Her willingness to do certain things on(and/or off) camera? All of the above?

Vivid girl Lori Michaels writes: Luke, Saw the post from Tara regarding what it takes to get a contract with Vivid. Here is what I did. I sent a video of myself to Vivid and told them I was interested in doing the adult videos. Steve Hirsh and Marci both talked to me and then Vivid flew me to LA. After I arrived I actually never even talked to Steve Hirsh personally (so I sure as hell know you don't have to sleep with anyone to become a Vivid girl). Marci handled all the details, etc.

Vivid sent me pics of the actors that I could choose from and basically treated me like gold. I never had anyone hit up on me, and did my first two movies with Toni English who I think is one of the best directors I've ever worked for. I was up front with Vivid before I flew out, and told them all the horror stories that I had heard about the adult industry. None of them are true. At least not when it comes to Vivid. I personally would not work for anyone else. I even love Howard, but he can sure be a butthead at times. hehe Love ya Howard.

Something else that Vivid did was to give me the rights to a scene that I did with Jenteal in my first movie. I told them I wanted it for my web site since Earl Miller was doing a photo shoot on it. I have had a great relationship with them ever since. I'll sent them "at home" pics and galleries that I take for me web site so that the Vivid members can see them on the Vivid site. In return Vivid sends me pics of my movie scenes that I can use on my site. They have also been really good about supplying pics for the fans. If anyone would like a Vivid glossy of me, just send a 8 1/2 x 11 self addressed stamped envelope to:

Lori Michaels
PO Box 3855
Lawrence, Ks. 66046

and I'll send you one. Vivid provides them for me which is another benefit of being a Vivid Girl. Hope that might help answer the question. I still have two movies to do under my last contract and one movie that hasn't been released. Portrait in Blue was my latest release.

Tricia Devereaux's Award Winning Scene With Her Husband John Stagliano

Luke writes: Did I read correctly that the XRCO is nominating you and John for best sex scene? When was this scene done?

Tricia replies: We did the scene the last week of November 1999 (a few months after I moved in with John) and the scene was released in Buttman's Toy Stories in January 2000. Joey Silvera was the cameraman during the times that John appears in front of the camera. I'm very flattered by the XRCO nomination, and even more so because I really do think that together with my masturbation in the movie, it's the best video I've ever done. There are no definite plans for us to be in front of the camera again, but perhaps if I ever get around to shooting the video I've planned on doing, I might be able to talk John into appearing with me again.

Luke F-rd Live

Listen to Tuesday's show.

Topics for discussion: Pat Riley's critiques of JimmyD's movies.

James DiGiorgio's 19-year old daughter, and his 13-year old nephew and younger brother snuck into the chatroom without revealing themselves. Jimmy started hitting on them. After the show, he found out who they were. He was appalled.

Listen to Jimmy's embarrasment as he finds out the woman he's been flirting with is his daughter.

Read the chat here.

Luke reads Jimmy a Riley review which calls his girls "utility grade."

Pat writes about "Tales From The Darker Side": "The motif seems to be girls appearing to guys in abandoned houses, jail cells, etc., wordlessly screwing the guy, and then vanishing. Saves on a lot of foreplay and afterplay, I suppose, which might be a good thing and so might the movie except that the girls are utility grade."

Jimmy: "I'm going to forward his review to the Bloods and the Crips. Because some of those girls go out with those guys. They won't have a clue what he's talking about. I don't even know what he means."

Riley writes: "Tracking these one name black girls is nearly impossible."

Jim: "They tend to have names like Africa, Kenya, Ebony, Obsession..."

Luke: "What do so many black porn girls only have one name? Do the white pornographers think them unworthy of having two names?"

Jim: "It's when they fill out the model releases, they have less to write. They just use one word names that they can spell."

Riley writes: "Tracking these one-name black girls is nearly impossible so I'll just give a quickie description and you'll have to work out if the same name in another movie means the same girl. No one is ID'ed but I think the first girl is Africa. She has a passable face, long black hair (probably a wig), plucked eyebrows, shaven pussy, tattoo left bicep, medium droopy tits, and a tattoo on her right calf outside. Tony screws her ending in a tit cum shot. Shai is near-white and has short curly brown hair, small/medium tits, passable face, outie belly button, bushy eyebrows, and a stubbly pussy. Devlin screws her ending in a facial. Kenya has long red hair (probably a wig), cantaloupes, marginal face, tattoos on right and left shoulder backs, and a thick body. Byron screws her ending in a facial. The next girl has rope-like short black hair, not too pretty face, medium/large droopy tits, C-section scar, shaven pussy, and a thick body. Julian screws her ending in a facial. The last girl is ugly with long straight black hair, large droopy tits, and a near plumper body. Tony screws her including an anal ending in a tit cum shot."

Jim: "Africa is very pretty. And that is not a wig. It's her real hair.

"There are not that many black girls in the business. So if we regularly do a black girl series we have to find new black girls. Do you think it is easy finding new black girls? Do you know the jeopardy that we have to put ourselves in to find new black girls? These are girls who generally come in and do one movie. They meet somebody and want to make a couple of bucks and do a movie. They're not seasoned porn stars. They make up a frickin' name, make their $400 bucks and then they go buy some crack cocaine. That's the way it is for a lot of them. Not all of them.

"Now granted, these girls may not take care of themselves like porn stars do because they don't make their living doing that."

James DiGiorgio: "VCA ain't telling you nothing anymore Patrick Riley because they ain't sending you any more movies. You won't have to worry about VCA telling you whether it's a comedy.

"You notice that he can't say anything nice... What kind of movies do you think he really likes? I bet he's a pedophile. He probably liked my Plaid movies because they reach out to that part of him. I made those movies for him. I understand that some guys are closet pedophiles. They can't come out because it's illegal but in their hearts. Just like I make the fat ugly women movies, I will make movies to appeal to those guys. But you're in heart, Pat, you know who you are... And if you ever go to jail, you're going to get buttf---ed by a whole lot of people.

"And you better hope that I don't talk to people at Wicked, Vivid and these other places. Then you'd be completely done. Nobody will send you any movies because now I am going to make it my personal crusade to see that you are done.

"Pat Riley watches movies morning, noon and night. He doesn't have a f---ing job. This guy is so jaded. His libido has been so pummelled by all these movies that the only thing that is going to get his dick hard is a pedophile movie. Ok Pat, I'm going to help you out. You don't need therapy. Because I am going to have you cut off from this business. Where does he live?"

Luke: "New York."

Luke says: "Jimmy, I think you're wrong. Reviewing movies is a hobby for Riley. It earns him little income. He has a mainstream computer-related job."

Luke reads from the following Riley review:

BLACK CHEERLEADER SEARCH #28 1999--Woodburn's Inner-Cit, IVC Distributors Producer/Director: Nate Woodburn Featuring: Rachel, Mercedes, Sasha (Black), Nicole, Deja Vu, Jake Steed, Herschel Savage, Guy DeSilva

I noticed that this one was no longer for sale from one of the online retailers so I presumed there's a possibly underage girl or some other problem with it. Naturally I needed to see it immediately but my effort was for nought. None of the girls look particularly underage and there's nothing like a Harley Davidson dealership in the background. They probably just ran out of stock and didn't think it was worth firing up the production line for this volume.

Jim: "Did you ever consider that perhaps they sold out? He presumed there was an underage girl in there so naturally he needed to see it immediately. Pat Riley is a pedophile. Have I out this guy or what? Did he review my Black Tail Shooter?"

Luke says: "Yes, let me read it to you."

Black Tail Shooters 3

BLACK TAIL SHOOTERS #3
2000--VCA
Producer/Director: Johnny Sharp Jr., Jim DiGiorgio
Featuring: Kenya, Kia Ivey, Lola Lane, Caramel, Cashmere, Karl Kinkade, Cuba DeMoan, Julian St Jox

A couple of beasties here and the rest aren't too good either. Waste of time.

The Cashmere in this one is the just-out-of-the-obstetric-ward not too pretty woman from {Booty Talk #21} and not the good looking Cashmere from {P.Y.T. #3}. Caramel still has a pleasant fun personality but her body keeps deteriorating every time I see her. Karl is an English black guy who Kenya, based on his accent, accuses of being French (yuk, yuk!). He's most offended.

The set up is just like the earlier volumes: the guys pretend, not very convincingly, that they're big time pornographers and audition (read: screw) the girls. As usual with the black girls, be careful of trying to match up names; they might not be the same girl. Kenya can be seen in {Tales From The Darker Side} and Kia and Lola are near plumpers and can be seen in {Off Da Hook #3}. Sexwise: Karl screws Kenya; Cuba screws Kia; Julian screws Lola including an anal; Cuba screws Caramel including an anal; and Karl screws Cashmere. All scenes end in facials and all scenes use condoms.

Luke asks: "Who's Johnny Sharp Jr?"

Jim: "That's Rob [Spallone]. Rob's dad was Johnny Sharp. Then by mistake, I put Rob's name on a movie. Rob's got an ego. So he liked it. So he said, 'From now on, keep my real name on it.'

"Let me ask the audience... If you're jerking off to one of these black girls, do you really give a s--- what her phony name is?

"Pat Riley can sue me to his hearts content. I've got no assets. I'm litigation proof. I've got nothing in my name.

"I am a member of the Writers Guild. I did start out at one time to be a writer. I failed. I did make some money at it. I had a sitcom that NBC produced and had a couple of movies that were optioned. But then my wife got pregnant and we had a kid and it wasn't enough money. It was ok when she was an actress and I was a writer. But I did have some success. The sitcom was called Whacked Out with Dana Carvey and Desi Arnez Jr. Around 1980. It lasted one episode. I was the co-creator and executive story consultant."

Luke: "Who's DP, this Dave Patterson who left Sin City and GVA West?"

Jim: "He was their head buyer. Everybody who wants to sell to GVA, had to go through DP. That's everybody - Wicked, Vivid, VCA..."

Luke: "How much money would he make?"

Jim: "Well, the Dalai Porn Llama [owner David Sturman] ain't always the most generous guy on the block."

Luke: "That's because he's a Jew."

Jim: "I guess he probably made $50-60,000 a year guy. But they do things in this business called spiffs. A spiff for sales is when you get a bonus for moving hard-to-move items.

After the show, Jimmy and I talked privately.

Jim: "Video Ed thinks I'm going to stroke out. I'm convincing. You know what the hardest thing for me is when I go on a rant like that? To not bust up laughing. Because you break the bubble. It's like breaking the fourth wall.

"AJ_and_meadow want to talk to me. Let's see. Matt and Steven say hi and they love your radio personality too. I love you daddy."

Luke: "Is this your child?"

Jim: "What? Is this my daughter? That was my daughter."

Luke: "You wanted to have sex with your daughter. You're a sick sick man."

Jim: "Well, she's overage. She's 19."

Luke: "It's still disgusting."

Jim: "That was my daughter, my brother and my nephew. Oh man, now I am embarrassed as hell. I feel really bad for all the stuff I said. Don't you say anything Luke."

James DiGiorgio writes: regarding this pat riley thing, i want to straighten out a big misconception: i don't give a f--- what pat riley thinks of my movies. his reviews don't matter, everyone knows that. where are they publiched? anywhere important? i dont think so. but what set me off, besides trying to make some interesting radio, was the fact that nearly every review i've ever read by this guy is f---ing negative. he rarely seems to like anything, he rarely seems to like anyone. if you ask people in the business about him, they have the same take on him as i do. everyone says, 'oh, you mean mister doesnt like anything." he must be a miserable person to spend each day wallowing in so much negativity. trust me, luke, if i thought everything i did on my job sucked, i'd find another job. maybe mr. riley needs to do just that. maybe if he did, he wouldnt be such a miserable f---.

Luke talks to Rob and JimmyD Thursday afternoon.

From RogReviews.com:

Readers Have Questions, I Go Looking For Answers.

This just in from a reader.. "Dear Rog, I have been following your links to www.geneross.com and read some of Todd (sic) Hunter's comments on the President. He refers to Mr. Bush as "Little Boots." Any idea what that means?"

Though I have my own guesses, I will pose the question to Tod directly and see what he says. Tod wrote back and it's what I expected. He feels that George W, is a smaller version of daddy and uses the image of a small pair of boots next to George Sr.'s. (I would have thought that the footsteps aspect would have come into play.)

To Which, the reader replies... "So Tod (better?) thinks it's funny to knock the President because he if following in the footsteps of his father. Someone more experienced perhaps? Someone with greater ability perhaps? That GW is simply living off the name of someone more skilled and deserving that he? Sort of like a hack writer following in the footsteps of a more skilled, humorous writer with a bigger name, more credibility and trying to pass the 'new' site off under the old name? Come to think of it, that is pretty damn funny. Rog, from now on, would you please refer to Tod Hunter as 'Little Toupe'?"

While I may take exception to some of the things Tod says, I don't think I will adopt the LT gloss. I think we can all appreciate the irony though, thanks. (And I'm sure Gene thanks for you calling him 'more skilled.')

Legion writes Luke: I believe the reference comes from the Penthouse film "Caligula". Caligula (Malcom McDowell) is referred to as "Little Boots" by both the Tiberius Caesar and Caligula's sister/lover in the movie - it was a term of endearment.

I don't think there's any crime in calling Dubya "Little Boots" if the reference is a comparison to Caligula. Bush threatens to push America not only into an economic recession, but an intellectual one as well. Every time I see Dubya babbling like the idiot he is, I quietly wish to myself that stupidity was painful.

Sasha writes Luke: How disappointing you are. Penthouse film! Tell your writer that it comes from history not some sordid Helen Mirren career mistake. Would your writer also say that the term "Gladiator" comes from a film of the same name starring Russel Crowe?

Porn Plays Big Role In Web Economy

Lewis Purdue (lew@eroticabiz.com) is finishing up a book on the internet porn industry.

He writes regularly for the Wall Street Journal Online, including this March 21st column:

Pornography has always been the last thing the Internet industry wants to talk about.

But as mainstream Web companies -- particularly content sites and application-service providers -- go out of business, Web-hosting firms and bandwidth sellers may have to lean more heavily than ever on revenue from porn.

Meanwhile, porn-site executives are increasingly worried about potential legislative and policy changes they fear will make their businesses more difficult to sustain. One hidden consequence of any crackdown on pornography: It could make the current tech-sector slump even worse.

Getting solid data is tough. Pornographers avoid the mainstream media, and the few Internet-industry research firms that once monitored the adult online sector -- such as Forrester Research and DataMonitor -- have stopped covering those companies. For the most part, adult operations don't buy the research reports and "the rest of the tech sector would prefer to remain in denial," says one research analyst who has worked on porn-industry reports.

There are some solid user statistics, however, that show the reach of the sex industry. Figures from Web-traffic measurement firms Netratings and Jupiter Media Metrix show that more than 25% of U.S. Web surfers visit adult sites in a given month. Search-term research firm Wordtracker says that "sex" is consistently the most frequently searched word on mainstream search engines. DataMonitor's last porn-industry research report, issued last year, projected that adult sites would take in 69% of all premium-content revenue on the Web in 2001. And while analysts a year or two ago predicted that porn's importance would diminish as nonadult premium-content sites grew, there is no indication that has happened.

Estimates vary on what portion of Internet traffic is porn-related. Some claim porn takes up 80% of Internet traffic. While that number may be high, no estimate puts it below 40%. Some on the front line see it somewhere in the middle. "I'd say that about 65% of the data transferred through the data center I work in is porn," says a network engineer with Exodus.

Another SEC Fraud Case Includes Porn Star

From today's Los Angeles Times:

Calling it one of the biggest mortgage fraud cases in years, federal officials alleged Wednesday that two California men bilked investors of more than $100 million--and some of the funds were spent lavishly to woo a porn actress.

Securities and Exchange Commission officials, seeking an injunction, asked San Diego Federal Judge Marilyn J. Huff to prevent Michael J. Fanghella of Carlsbad and James L. Hillman of Oakland from soliciting investors for PinnFund USA Inc., a Carlsbad mortgage lender. Huff froze the firm's assets Wednesday, ordered it not to destroy documents and set a hearing on the full request for today, SEC officials said.

She said Fanghella, 49, allegedly spent about $10 million of the investor funds on Kelly Cook, 35, a onetime girlfriend and porn star known as Kelly Jaye. A spokesman for Van Nuys-based Vivid Pictures, a prominent adult movie production house, confirmed Wednesday that Jaye had appeared in at least six movies, such as "Sexual Healing" and "Blonde Angel."

The two met in December 1999 while both were finalizing divorces, according to SEC court filings. Believing the two would marry, Fanghella bought Cook a $5-million house in Laguna Niguel, gave her $2 million in cash, a $75,000 piano, New York shopping trips and sumptuous meals. In addition, he transferred at least $3.7 million of other investor funds to an offshore account at Barclay's Bank in Barbados, the SEC court filings say.

Cook is not accused of wrongdoing, the SEC said, but the agency wants to recover investor funds allegedly given to her as gifts.

Kelly Jaye appears in films like Malibu Dreams and Kelly Jaye: Close Up.

"Her first effort, Channel Blonde, has her take an awesome back rub from Janine, who goes much further than you would think in taking the kinks out of this lush and drop-dead gorgeous gaim." (96 AFW D. p.30)

"Kelly Jaye looks like the prudish, unyielding, type of L.A. tease you've always wanted to defile. Blonde. Preppy. It's that "look-but-don't-touch aura which makes her perfect for porn"." (AFW)

Kelly hails from a strict Christian home in the South. Angela Summers introduced her to stripping in 1994 and then the two did a nude magazine layout.

"I didn't become sexually active until I was 19," says Kelly. "I've lived a sheltered life. My parents adopted me. I went to a private school. I started dating a guy who had been with Ginger Lynn for six years.

"I wish I could throw away my first couple of movies. I was so nervous.

"Vivid has not allowed me to take facials. When I was on the set one day, I was doing a scene with someone, and he asked, "Can I come on your face?" And Director Bud Lee said 'No. Kelly, you're a Vivid girl because your face sells. Why would we want to destroy something beautiful.'"

XXXPassword - Its the surfer's key to Ecstasy.

Using the last name Jackson, Kelly posed nude in numerous magazines before entering hardcore.

The blonde former Atlanta Hawks cheerleader appeared in a couple of Playboy Newstand Specials under the name Kelly Jackson. She later worked adult videos under the name Kelly Jaye. Orginally signed by Vivid, she began performing under the Kelly Jaye moniker to avoid confusion with Vivid's other Kelly Jackson, aka Racqual Darrian. (Dick O'Stone)

Rame fellatio expert Dick Bendover gives Kelly the award for porn's worst cocksucker. He rented Channel Blonde, and in the beginning, "I was pleasantly surprised. She's with Nick East. I get a chubby, I'm all set to rub and then... she blows him (her word, not mine). Imagine being all set to watch a Playboy model get treated like a rag doll, then subsequently see her perform the absolute WORST, MOST MECHANICAL BLOWJOB" I've ever seen. She puts the helmet of Nick's cock in her mouth and then seems to pass out. No head movement, barely any hand movement... terrible! My cock went PHHHFFFTTT!"

Kick Ass Time With Montana Gunn

DallasDave writes on BigDoggie.net: Wow! I am still thinking about what a kick-ass time I had today with Montana Gunn here in Dallas. Let me say that my entire experience from end to end couldn't have been better. For starters I asked for and got a same day appointment, which was pretty amazing considering how busy Montana is. Things were very easy to setup through ASF ... they made me feel comfortable with everything since I was a first timer with their agency. Montana called to give me directions and we spoke on the phone for a few minutes. When I arrived at her location she was dressed very sexy in a 2 piece pant outfit. We talked for about 15 minutes before our session and she made me feel really comfortable. Then we started. I won't give details cause they are our secret, but let me just say that there WAS NOTHING WE DIDN'T DO ... all languages that I wanted were offered and spoken. After our session we talked for another 20 minutes before I had to leave. The only thing I regret is that I didn't spend more time with her today.

Luke Gets Mail

Goddess writes: Hey, Lukey baby! I'm over on the Coca Cola website nominating the person who inspires me the most to carry the Olympic Torch in the Salt Lake 2002 Olympic Torch Relay. I was going to nominate you because I'm inspired by the fact that you can sit on your Australian behind, do nothing and collect a five figger American paycheck. But we both know you couldn't run more than three feet without having to stop to kvetch about how you're torn between Judaism and writing about porn. BORING! Then I was going to nominate Gene because his whipcord thighs inspire me, BUT...*somebody* is still miffed at Gene. Helpful suggested I nominate Quasarman, but you know why, don't cha, Luke? Helpful is hoping that while Qman is off with the torch in Salt Lake, Qman's wife will be helping herself to Helpful's "torch" back home. I can't be party to THAT! So then I gave it some real thought and knew there was only ONE PERSON I could nominate....Mike South of www. mikesouth.com. When I can't cum, nobody inspires me like the General!! I just hope he doesn't have a massive heart attack while running. It's one thing to lay on your belly and eat pussy for three hours, it's quite another to run AND carry the torch at the same time....Viva La Patriotism!

Sergio writes: Hey Luke, I've been an avid porn watcher for last 15 years, but VERY rarely in the last 5 years. I CANT beleive my eyes when I see modern porn!!! I think modern porn is crap. Too many cheap, mechanical, unininspiring stuff. Look at the glut of teen virgins, freshmeat..genres coming out with mediocre stuff.

The way things are going - anal, double penetration, females urinating, males masturbating etc etc will soon be mandatory in each hetero porn scenes. What little foreplay existed is now dispensed with, and rectal licking is foreplay!!! Is this fair to a significant section of porn viewers? I do beleive that porn is gravitating from providing sexual entertainment (80's to early 90's) to an object of perversion. I wouldnt be surprised if child porn gradually gets accepted too.

Fujiko writes: Hey Luke,everytime I post on the Big Doggie New Orleans board(no porn stars,just the usual whores)and add a link to your site (which I do just for the Hell of it) the post gets deleted,no matter how inocuous. Imagine that. I did this four times. My links to Rotten.com,Max Hardcore,and Mondo Family are still up though! Also,being Catholic,I'm subject to intense cravings for salacious perverted sex and violence. Needless to say the guilt factor is preety strong. Sometimes I feel like a failure. Perhaps I can derive strenth from you. As a Jew, do you ever have cravings for pork? It's the other white meat y'know.How do you deal? This could possibly help me not to succumb to temptations that are morally,psychologically and spiritually unhealthy.like lusting after obnoxious Jasmin St. Clair and laughing at that poor bitch in Jamie Gillis' Walking Toilet Bowl.

Mimi Miyagi writes: Latest News Press Release Mimi Miyagi: I have delved into doing more community service and including the humanitarian efforts to vote for the male democrat as just a supporter to BILL HENDERSON. The only 2 people running in this years Las Vegas, NV race, for Municipal Judge here in Las Vegas. Bill Henderson is a Democrat, an attorney in Las Vegas at Tingey & Tingey Law Firm, who really cares for his clients and is truly is "Who Vegas Really Needs".

Since the campaign, I have been inspired to complete my course to become a paralegal from the Washington Online course to be certified to practice across the country, unfortunately except for California. But living in Las Vegas, will help me indulge my intellectual abilities to a higher ground. I've been doing counseling to people in crisis lately, because of my new found social skills being adaptable to people that are intellectually stimulating for me to carry on a conversation that will hold proper relations to their problems.

But owning a live chat room site :mimisgirls.com, which consists of mainly 18-22 years olds in average, I am happy to objectively perceive the sociology of these models as well as business associates especially. Crisis counseling has been satisfying to my life, helping me to not only show my true love for my daughter since day 1 she was born, but to all humanity.

March 31, there is a big Electronic Music Festival to help promote to the new Rave/ Trance 21+ group. Our focus is also in the interracial minority group. Best news, we made it to win during the annual Music convention at NAMM 2001, to win the largest traffic booth, beating out companies as the largest musical instrument companies, as GODLYKE's new spokes model, me and my boss there were extremely thrilled it has actually been in print in the industry trade magazines. More details can be found in nation wide guitar magazines of the event. Or http://www.guyatone.com/

Also Jenny Jones has requested me to come back for Th. 3rd time to perform in the talk show Tuesday March 27. Air date to be posted soon. Friday March 30, Mimi will be filming with Danni's Hard Drive.

Jeff Wozniak from Sin City writes: As of March 23rd, Dave Paterson will no longer be employed at GVA. After 15 years, Paterson, also known as DP, is leaving to pursue other personal and professional relationships, and we wish him well. DP was a loyal, knowledgable and dedicated member of the company who contributed to GVA's success and its ranking as the leader in sales and distribution of quality adult entertainment. The unenviable task of replacing him goes to Bob Wolf, who will assume the role of General Manager of GVA in addition to his current position as GM of Erotech. Wolf brings years of adult industry experience as both a salesperson and member of the GVA team, and is highly qualified to take over in Paterson's place. He can be reached at (415)468-5600, extension 632.

Hello From Tricia Devereaux

Tricia Devereaux writes: On your posting on March 6, I again read comments that I've become very used to. Yes, I was being a little selfish when I decided as an HIV+ woman to try to have a baby. But I will once again defend myself, as it truly bothers me to think that people would condemn me for something I'm so happy about.

First, I contracted HIV over 3 years ago from someone who betrayed the entire adult industry. I've actually gotten fairly OK emotionally about this. However, if this alone had denied me the chance to ever become a mother, I don't think I could have ever gotten over it. I never wanted to have a child until after I moved in with John, and afterwards, we spoke at length with specialists about the possibilities of having a healthy child. After a LONG time, and many doctors telling us that the risk of transmission was between 1 and 5%, we decided to try to have a baby.

Many people have been outraged, and I apologize for offending their sense of morality, but I don't apologize for my decision.

My "selfishness" stopped the day I found out I was pregnant. I took my anti-HIV medicines perfectly. I got over my vain tendencies because I knew that I needed to have a C-section for the baby. And I did everything the doctor's told me to do. And the result is that my baby girl has already been tested twice for HIV and there have been no signs of it in her blood. She will continue to be tested for safety's sake until 4 months old, but the doctors are already giving me a thumbs-up for her. Many people have said that my only reason to have this baby was so I could hold on to a husband that I would have probably ended up losing. Those are comments that I stopped letting bother me months ago, because they're from people who don't know me or John, or at least not the way they think they do.

San Fernando Valley Lesbian Shoot

I sat in on the Rob Spallone - James DiGiorgio lesbian shoot for Fat Dog Wednesday at Bobby Gallagher's studio.

When I arrived I encountered a ferocious pitbull of a pornographer who hated my work. He said that I'd accused him of having Mafia ties. He saw me this past weekend on FOX TV and he wanted to know who appointed me spokesman for the adult industry. He did not appreciate me spreading lies about the industry he's worked in for over 20 years. And he was only allowing me on the premises out of respect for Rob Spallone.

Marc writes: summer storm seems to have a bette midler/barbra streisand/taylor dayne thing going on, albeit with smaller breasts

  1. Image:0103216
    Gary, Bridgett


  2. Image:0103217
    Luke, Summer Storm

  3. Image:0103218
    Jim, Summer

  4. Image:0103219
    Jim, Summer

  5. Image:01032110
    Bridgett, Summer, Lance

  6. Image:01032111
    Summer

  7. Image:01032112
    Summer

  8. Image:01032113
    Summer

  9. Image:01032114
    Bridgett

  10. Image:01032115
    Bridgett

  11. Image:01032116
    Bridgett

  12. Image:01032117
    Summer, Jim
  1. Image:01032118
    Summer

  2. Image:01032119
    Summer

  3. Image:01032120
    Summer, Jim

  4. Image:01032121
    Summer, Jim

  5. Image:01032122
    Summer

  6. Image:01032123
    Summer

  7. Image:01032124
    Summer, Jim

  8. Image:01032125
    Summer

  9. Image:01032126
    Dusk, Jim, Steve

  10. Image:01032127
    Gina, Dusk

  11. Image:01032128
    Gina, Dusk

  12. Image:01032129
    Gina

  13. Image:01032130
    Dusk, Gina

  14. Image:01032131
    Dusk


  15. Image:01032132
    Dusk, Gina


  16. Image:01032133
    Dusk, Gina

  17. Image:01032134
    Dusk, Gina


  18. Image:01032135
    Dusk, Gina


  19. Image:01032136
    Dusk, Gina


  20. Image:01032137
    Dusk, Gina


  21. Image:01032138
    Dusk, Gina


  22. Image:01032139
    Steve, Dusk, Gina


  23. Image:01032140
    Steve, Dusk, Gina


  24. Image:01032141
    Steve, Dusk, Gina


  25. Image:01032142
    Steve, Dusk, Gina


  26. Image:01032143
    Steve, Jim, Dusk, Gina


  27. Image:01032144
    Jim, Dusk, Gina


  28. Image:01032145
    Jim, Dusk, Gina


  29. Image:01032146
    Dusk, Gina


  30. Image:01032147
    Dusk, Gina


  31. Image:01032148
    Dusk, Gina


  32. Image:01032149
    Dusk, Gina


  33. Image:01032150
    Dusk, Gina


  34. Image:01032151
    Jim, Dusk, Gina


  35. Image:01032152
    Jim, Gina

  36. Image:01032153
    Dusk, Gina


  37. Image:01032154
    Summer

  38. Image:01032155
    Jim, Skeeter


  39. Image:01032156
    Jim, Skeeter

  40. Image:01032157
    Summer

  41. Image:01032158
    Summer

  42. Image:01032159
    Bridgett Kerkove, Jim

  43. Image:01032160
    Bridgett Kerkove, Jim, Summer

  44. Image:01032161
    Bridgett Kerkove, Jim, Summer

  45. Image:01032162
    Bridgett Kerkove, Jim, Summer

  46. Image:01032163
    Bridgett Kerkove, Jim, Summer

  47. Image:01032164
    Summer, Bridgett

  48. Image:01032165
    Dusk, Jim

  49. Image:01032166
    Dusk, Jim


  50. Image:01032167
    Dusk, Jim
  1. Image:01032168
    Dusk, Jim

  2. Image:01032169
    Skeeter in front of his wife's Jaguar

  3. Image:01032170
    Dusk

  4. Image:01032171
    Dusk

  5. Image:01032172
    Dusk

  6. Image:01032173
    Dusk

  7. Image:01032174
    Dusk

  8. Image:01032175
    Rob, Summer

  9. Image:01032176
    Rob, Summer

    1. Image:01032177
      Summer smokes

    2. Image:01032178
      Rob, Summer

    3. Image:01032179
      Dynamite

    4. Image:01032180
      Jim

    5. Image:01032181
      Dusk, Gina

    6. Image:01032182
      Jim, Skeeter

    7. Image:01032183
      Jim, Skeeter

    8. Image:01032184
      Rob, Dynamite

    9. Image:01032185
      Rob, Dynamite

    10. Image:01032186
      Gary, Dynamite

    11. Image:01032187
      Gary, Dynamite

    12. Image:01032188
      Rob, Dynamite

    13. Image:01032189
      Dynamite, Gary

    14. Image:01032190
      What happens to anti-porn journalists

    15. Image:01032191
      Jim, Rob

    16. Image:01032192
      Jim, Dynamite

    17. Image:01032193
      Summer

    1. Image:01032194
      Summer, Jim


    2. Image:01032195
      Rob, Jim

    3. Image:01032196
      Jim

    4. Image:01032197
      Summer

    5. Image:01032198
      Rob

    6. Image:01032199
      Rob, Jim

Tony writes: Luke- am I asking too much to have you link your pix up so that when I click on one that says "billie brit" I don't see some fat guy eating fast food? seems like you pix are mislabeled all of the time. whats up with that???

Aghast writes: Jeezus! Those broads from the Valley lesbo shoot were something else. In a shot titled Steve, Dusk, Gina (Image:01032142), Steve actually had the nicest ass! Spallone where is your quality control?

Evil Drunk writes: When I was perusing your site today I found myself laughing harder than I have in weeks. Was that the infamous Rob Spallone dressed in a white t-shirt, white shorts, and white shoes? Damn, I thought Kid Vegas looked ridiculous. I don't know if this cat is trying to convey a look of purity or he just requires an outfit that will not readily show semen stains. From what I understand from my reading is that Mr. Spallone is "mobbed-up" and I am quite aware of the fact that I could be "rubbed-out" for making such disparaging remarks. That is a chance I will take. As a matter of fact I have been looking for a proper way to "check-out" for quite some time. If referring to Rob Spallone as a "low-rent-Liberace" will do the trick, then so be it. Luke, if you could please tell Mr. Spallone that the tags on the Garananimals are supposed to match with differing animals, we would all be better off.

Becky Carols writes on RAME: Ol' dog Riley does troll here now and then but his reviews (while brutal) are usually accurate. I would never trust a reviewer who always gives high marks on every smut vid he sees. If DiGiorgio can't take Riley's criticisms then he should go work for a real company like Evil Angel which hires plenty of young, hot-looking girls and leave lame-ass VCA and their gang of old, has-beens.

Roger Pipe writes: Luke, Sorry I missed the show (Listen to Tuesday's show) the other day. Jimmy D pulling Riley from the VCA screener list...that's harsh. At least Patrick is on the VCA screener list. I've been waiting 4 years for them.... Just to add a side, banning critics from screner lists. Max had me taken off the list from Legend, of course he didn't do it on the air.

AOL VS CEN

Attorney Charles Carreon (cclawyer@home.com) helped regain the domain Sex.com for Gary Kremen. He writes the following about the AOL lawsuit against CEN for spam. The copyright to this article is owned by Charles Carreon.

 
It doesn't take very long to learn that the people who consider themselves to be the legitimate commercial proprietors on the Internet have conceived a deep-seated hate for spam.  I wasn't going to spend more than one night on this project, and I'm sure I missed something, but aside from one semi-eloquent broadside found in the below-listed "History of a dispute with a spammer," there isn't really much pro-spam posting out there.

Looking at AOL's Past Litigation Wins

The law is definitely not lining up on the side of the pro-spam faction.  AOL v. IMS is a 1998 case that seems to indicate that AOL has the inside track on the claims it's made against CEN.
AOL has sued CEN for all the same legal claims as it did IMS, and in the same court.  A read at the opinion below will clue you that, unless the facts in CEN are quite different, the result is likely to be the same.  (I've edited the opinion a little, to make it more readable.)
The only big difference between the IMS case and the CEN case is that AOL alleges that CEN "aided and abetted" the bulk emailing, rather than doing so directly.  I'll discuss this more later below, but first let's look at the similarities between the two cases.  There's an abbreviated version of the case at the bottom of this page, and if you want to see the full text, it's here: LEXSEE 1998 U

Back to the Future -- The Cybertort of Trespass to Chattels: 

As in AOL v. CEN, in the prior IMS case, AOL sued for "trespass to chattels."  You'll recall that in The Taming of the Shrew, Shakespeare refers to a wife as chattels -- a piece of personal property.  You "trespass" on a "chattel" by doing something like joy-riding -- you don't keep the car, but you used it all afternoon, and I wasn't able to use it.  AOL feels the same way about its servers, its bandwidth, etcetera.  The theory of "trespass to chattels" is based on protecting the "property rights" of hardware owners and service providers, who claim that they have a right to not have other people's uninvited bits and bytes infesting their machines without permission.  In AOL v. CEN, the Webmaster affiliates are accused of bombing AOL servers with email that has no right to be there.  In the context of unwanted email, I presume that AOL's bulk mail policy (
AOL Unsolicited Bulk E-mail Policy) functions as a "notice not to trespass," and that all uses of the email system not in accordance with the policy are deemed to be "trespassory invasions."  The courts don't seem to get specific, though.  In the IMS case, the court applied the "cybertort" version of trespass to chattels and found it applicable:


    Courts have begun to recognize that the unauthorized mailing of unsolicited bulk e-mail may constitute a trespass
     to chattels under state law. See Compuserve, Inc. v. Cyber Promotions, Inc., 962 F. Supp. 1015 (S.D. Ohio
     1997) (finding that bulk e-mailing by the defendants caused "the value of [Compuserve's equipment to be]
     diminished even though it is not physically damaged by defendant's conduct," id. at 1022).

Traditional Infringement and Dilution Claims for Using the AOL Trademark: 

The other claims that the court dealt with in the ruling were claims that IMS had tricked AOL users into thinking that the emails were coming from AOL by putting that information in the headers.  These claims are under the Lanham Act, the traditional trademark statute that makes it unlawful to appropriate someone's commercial mark, or to use it in a way that will cause it to be "diluted," that is, to become degraded in the public eye by being associated with a lesser quality of services. The court didn't have much trouble ruling for AOL on these claims.

What's the difference between the IMS case and AOL v. CEN?
"Aiding & Abetting" Violations of Law

Two words describe the difference between the IMS case and AOL v. CEN:  "Aiding and Abetting."  IMS appears to have done all the spamming directly, whereas here AOL seems to assume that CEN doesn't send out spam directly, but that its Webmasters are encouraged to do so.  Many of the Webmasters are named as "Doe Defendants," that is, defendants whose identities could not be discovered.
Here are the kinds of things that AOL says it can prove that CEN does to "aid and abet" its Webmasters to send out spam:
      • Providing "the adult content that is being sold and the banners and hypertext links used by the Webmaster Defendants ..."  Complaint, paragraph 72
      • Agreeing "to share ... the revenues generated by the traffic driven to its adult Websites by the UBE messages."  para 72
      • Making it "difficult to determine who is responsible for the UBE messages"  para 73
      • Allowing the Webmasters "to advertise on Cyber Entertainment's behalf without first requiring the Webmaster Defendants to provide any valid identifying information."  para 73
      • Paying or authorizing payment "through means designed to make it difficult to identify the Webmaster Defendants -- such as through wire transfers to foreign bank accounts or through checks made payable to false corporate names."  para 73
      • Failing to terminate Webmasters "upon learning of their illegal conduct."  para 73
      • "Providing technical and marketing goods and services to the Webmaster Defendants," including "harvesting" email addresses, managing bulk email address lists, "phishing" for passwords, etc.  para 74
So two questions arise:  Does Aiding and Abetting apply here, and do these facts establish it?  Finally, a third question must be considered -- whatever you call it, does CEN stand to get tagged for the conduct of its Webmasters?

"Aiding & Abetting" Is A Criminal Theory of Liability That May Not Apply To CEN; However, The Theories of "Agency" and "Apparent Authority" May Produce the Same Result

My research into aiding and abetting ("A&A") as a basis for liability indicates that AOL is plowing pretty new ground in the Federal Courts.  An online search of Virginia case law indicates that A&A appears to be strictly a criminal concept that has not been applied to civil cases.  A countrywide search of federal cases applying A&A in the Lanham Act context produced only two cases, both from the Third Circuit, which do not appear to be in agreement.  I just looked at Lanham Act cases because it seems that the courts would likely follow a similar analysis as to all of AOL's claims. The first case, ELECTRONIC LABORATORY SUPPLY COMPANY v. CULLEN, 977 F.2d 798 (3rd Cir, 1992), an appeal from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, found that Congress didn't intend to create A&A liability under the Lanham Act:

Where a statute specifically limits those who may be held liable for the conduct described by the statute, the
          courts cannot extend liability, under a theory of aiding and abetting, to those who do not fall within the categories
          of potential defendants described by the statute. To impose such liability would circumvent the express intent of
          Congress in enacting these statutes that proscribe narrowly defined conduct and allow relief from precisely
          defined parties.

Admittedly, Electric Lab was a special case, because the plaintiffs were suing under a special provision of the Lanham Act that allows someone whose goods have been wrongfully seized under the Act to sue for wrongful seizure.  The Third Circuit found that persons injured by improper Lanham Act seizures could not sue the lawyers, but only their clients, and refused to apply A&A liability to extend the reach of the law to the lawyers.  Still, the analysis should apply to the entire Lanham Act, because the Third Circuit threw in a lot of strong language about not importing A&A liability into federal law unless the judges can determine that Congress intended to impose A&A liability:

Even if we thought that aiding and abetting liability would further the statute's purpose, we could not expand the
          scope of liability significantly beyond the statute's express limits, absent some evidence in the text or structure of
          section 1116(d) indicating that Congress intended for us to do so. We have found no such evidence.
 

A couple of years later, in AT&T v. Winback, 42 F.3d 1421 (Third CIr., 1994), the big phone company sued one of its contractor/competitors, Winback, for misappropriating the AT&T name and logo.  The trial court judge refused to enjoin the conduct of Winback's distributors.  The conduct of the distributors is described in the opinion as follows:

At the hearing, much of the testimony described Winback's method of attracting customers. The evidence
          demonstrated that Winback employs no marketing or sales people on its staff. Rather, it attracts business solely
          through the use of sales networks and/or marketing representatives. Specifically, it uses about 50 different
          marketing agencies, which in turn employ or contract with scores more individual sales representatives. The
          representatives work out of their own offices, and receive no supplies, equipment or space from Winback.
          Winback compensates these representatives purely on a commission basis, and the representatives are under no
          minimum obligation to Winback. Indeed, many representatives market for various resellers. This does not mean,
          however, that there is little connection between the agents and Winback. The agents are supplied with forms
          which AT&T requires to be completed to transfer customers to Winback's services (the transfer forms). Until
          October 13, 1993, these forms contained the initials "AT&T" and the AT&T globe symbol. On that date,
          AT&T ordered the resellers to delete those references. These forms also make reference to Winback.
          Moreover, at least one of the representatives contacts Inga on a regular basis, and Inga attempts to "police" the
          agents to avoid misrepresentations.

When it came to strict discussion of A&A liability, the Third Circuit talked the same talk as in its prior opinion in Electric Lab:

"[A]iding and abetting liability is not a well-settled mechanism for imposing civil liability. Rather, "aiding and abetting
          liability traditionally applies to criminal offenses", see Electronic Lab. Supply Co., 977 F.2d at 805; Petro-Tech,
          824 F.2d at 1356. While it has been borrowed in certain civil contexts, "precedent, except in the securities area,
          is largely confined to isolated acts of adolescents in rural society." Halberstam v. Welch, 227 U.S. App. D.C.
          167, 705 F.2d 472, 489 (D.C. Cir. 1983) (also quoted in Central Bank, ____ U.S. at ____, 114 S. Ct. at
          1450). This is because aiding and abetting liability, with its focus on the defendant's substantial and knowing
          assistance to the commission of a tort, rests by definition upon acts that encourage a tort rather than acts
          constituting the tort. See, e.g., Halberstam, 705 F.2d at 481-86 (canvassing aiding and abetting tort cases). By
          definition then, the act rendered unlawful under an aiding and abetting theory is different than the act rendered
          unlawful by the underlying tort.

But when it got down to business, the Third Circuit found that Winback could still be held liable for the conduct of its marketing reps, based on theories of "agency" and "apparent authority."  The Third Circuit gave the trial judge a pat on the back first, agreeing that Winback's reps were independent contractors; but then, the appeals judges went further:

"[T]he district court properly found that the sales representatives were independent contractors.
          However, the court erred by stopping at that point. The district court failed to determine whether the sales
          representatives were agent-independent contractors or non-agent independent contractors.

The appeals judges then engaged in a lot of reasoning about agency and master/servant relations before turning the gun on Winback for the conduct of its sales reps:

          We hold, then, that when a principal authorizes its independent contractor agent to conduct and conclude a
          transaction with third parties on the principal's own behalf, and the principal benefits financially from the
          contracts, the principal will be liable in an action brought pursuant to section 43(a) of the Lanham Act based on
          the agents' foreseeable infringing actions upon which it would be reasonable for the third party to rely, provided
          the third party has no notice that the representations are unauthorized.

If this is the law, some key questions in the CEN case will be: (1) whether the Webmasters appeared to be working for CEN, (2)  whether CEN authorized the Webmasters to "conduct and conclude transactions" on behalf of CEN, and (3) whether CEN benefits financially from the relationship.

The next issue, of course, would be whether CEN knew that some of its Webmasters were infringing the AOL trademark, and what other affiliate programs can do to insulate themselves from the misconduct of cowboy Webmasters who infringe trademarks:

Of course, it would be unfair for a principal to be liable for all misrepresentations of its agent independent
          contractors. Thus, we include the requirements that the misrepresentations be foreseeable and that reliance be
          reasonable. In considering whether the infringing actions were foreseeable, the district court should consider all
          of the surrounding circumstances. For instance, if the principal went to great lengths to ensure that the agents
          knew not to make certain representations, such representations, if made, may be found to be unforeseeable. But
          if, at the same time, the principal gave the agents carte blanche to hold themselves out as the principal itself, then
          such infringing actions may become foreseeable, notwithstanding the principal's efforts at policing the agents. The
          point, of course, is to hold the principal liable when it is just to do so, but still to encourage the principal to police
          the agents enough so as to avoid liability. This is the type of balancing the district court must undertake in the first
          instance.
 

*  *  *

          Under the doctrine of apparent authority, the district court should have looked to the principal's actions and the
          third parties' reasonable beliefs. AT&T contends that Winback authorized its sales agents to conduct
          transactions as though they were Winback. If this is true, then the district court may find that Winback held its
          representatives out to the public as its servants or as itself, and that the third parties reasonably relied on that
          relationship in deciding to enter into contracts, and, therefore, that the misrepresentations were authorized by
          Winback. In other words, Winback may have created an agency under the theory of apparent authority, and
          Winback may be liable for the misrepresentations. Because the district court made no findings in this regard, we
          must remand the case for additional fact-finding.

So What Can Responsible Affiliate Programs Do?

Exactly what logic, and the wording of the big blocks of legal text quoted above, would suggest:  (1) Establish webmaster guidelines for soliciting new members.  (2) Make it clear that trademarks are to be respected, and that bulk email policies are not to be circumvented.  (3)  Require that webmasters provide a place where they can be contacted reliably in the event of legal problems.  (4) Put indemnity and "hold harmless" agreements in your webmaster contracts, and explicitly provide that the agreement can be terminated for illegal conduct.  (5)  Don't send money offshore -- it just looks bad.

Anything Else Interesting About This Case?

One More Thing -- "Distributing UBE Software In Violation of the Virginia Computer Crimes Act":  Count IV of the complaint alleges a violation of Virginia law that makes it unlawful simply to distribute bulk emailing software.  I question whether the mere "distribution" of the software should be a violation of the law.  That puts a particular type of code on the same level as a controlled substance.  It appears to regulate speech on the basis of content -- or on what the effect of the content will be.  If so, the statute may well be subject to the highest level of constitutional scrutiny under the First Amendment.
 

What's AOL really looking for in this lawsuit?

The answer may be in paragraph 77:  "AOL sells advertising banner space to various merchants, who pay fees based on the placement and duration of their banners on AOL's website.  Defendants do not purchase this advertising space.  Instead, the Webmaster Defendants promote Cyber Entertainment's adult Websites through UBE messages sent to AOL Members' e-mail accounts at virtually no cost to Defendants."

It's hard to argue that AOL has no rightful beef with spammers as free-riders on a system it built and maintains at its own expense.  Adult sites pay other adult sites for traffic, so why should AOL be excluded from this trade?

What's Scary, And What Can We Learn From These Lawsuits?

First
, its scary the way AOL is using the A&A theory of liability, even without legal grounds.  They want to make adult webmasters look like criminals, so they invoke scare stories about huge volumes of spam, put forward the crazy screen names and the hokey corporate structures, swizzle in a little talk about offshore accounts, and pretty soon the defendants are hog-tied and ready for the party.  So much the worse if there's truth behind AOL's arguments.
Second, it doesn't help that the suits are too often uncontested by the webmaster defendants.  Media giants are making bad law based on the conduct of people who don't stand up to defend themselves in any meaningful way.  Thus, the courts are adopting arguments offered by corporate media lawyers, arguments that are not exposed to any meaningful criticism through the adversary process.  Judges are learning about the Internet from the people who want to own it.
Third, we can learn something obvious.  You can choose to know what the law is, and try to comply.  You may not make as much money, but you'll sleep a lot better.  If you want to be a cowboy, probably nobody's going to change that, but increasingly, the big players will probably not need your company.

Here are some links to laws you should know about.
This link is to the federal anti-fraud law that AOL uses to beat up spammers.
US Code : Title 18, Section 1030
This is the VIrginia law that gives the local AOL kourt jurisdiction over spammers.
Bill Tracking - 1999 session
This is a link to a Washington State site that guides anti-spam complaints.
Junk E-Mail: Take Action
These are decisions in which AOL has beaten 1st Amendment and Sherman Antitrust Act defenses to spamming activity.
AOL v. Cyber Promotions
AOL v. Cyber Promotions

Here's an abridged version of the AOL v. IMS court ruling.
(my comments in italics)
AMERICA ONLINE, INC., Plaintiff, v. IMS et al., Defendants.

Civil Action No. 98-0011-A
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
24 F. Supp. 2d 548; 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17437; 48 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1857
October 29, 1998, Decided
October 29, 1998, Filed

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before the Court is America Online's Motion for Summary Judgment Against Joseph J. Melle, Jr., as to Liability
     Under Counts I, II, and V and for Damages. The motion involves two claims under 15 U.S.C. § 1125 (1994)
     ("the Lanham Act") and one claim under the Virginia common law of trespass to chattels. n1 As to these counts,
     AOL seeks an award of compensatory and punitive damages and attorneys fees and costs.

     BACKGROUND

     Plaintiff America Online ("AOL") is an Internet service provider located in the Eastern District of Virginia.
     Defendant Joseph J. Melle, Jr., ("Melle") is the creator and operator of defendants TSF Marketing and TSF
     Industries (collectively "TSF"). Melle and TSF had their principal place of business in California during the period
      relevant to this litigation. AOL alleges that Melle and TSF improperly sent unauthorized bulk e-mail
     advertisements ("spam") to AOL subscribers. Specifically, AOL alleges that Melle sent over 60 million e-mail
     messages over the course of 10 months; that he continued to send unauthorized bulk e-mail after he was notified
     in writing by AOL to cease and desist these activities; that his activities caused AOL to spend technical resources
     and staff time to "defend" its computer system and its membership against this spam; and that Melle's messages
     damaged AOL's goodwill among its members and generated more than 50,000 member complaints.

     AOL sued six defendants under five causes of action: false designation of origin under the Lanham Act (Count I);
     dilution of interest in trademarks and service marks under the Lanham Act (Count II); violation of the Computer
     Fraud and Abuse Act (Count III); violation of the Virginia Computer Crimes Act (Count IV); and trespass to
     chattels under Virginia Common Law (Count V). Of the six defendants, only Melle filed an answer to the
     complaint, and the Court found the remaining defendants to be in default. After entry of those defaults, Melle
     stipulated to a permanent injunction against him. AOL filed its summary judgment motion on September 2, 1998,
     and agreed to dismiss the remaining counts of the complaint against Melle, if summary judgment were granted in
     its favor. Melle filed his opposition on September 10, 1998.

*  *  *
     Courts have begun to recognize that the unauthorized mailing of unsolicited bulk e-mail may constitute a trespass
     to chattels under state law. See Compuserve, Inc. v. Cyber Promotions, Inc., 962 F. Supp. 1015 (S.D. Ohio
     1997) (finding that bulk e-mailing by the defendants caused "the value of [Compuserve's equipment to be]
     diminished even though it is not physically damaged by defendant's conduct," id. at 1022). The facts of
     Compuserve are nearly identical to the facts of the case at bar. In both cases, the defendants sent unsolicited
     e-mail advertising to hundreds of thousands of Internet users, many of whom were subscribers of the respective
     plaintiff's Internet services. Both defendants concealed the origin of their messages by forging header information.
     Both plaintiffs alleged that processing the bulk e-mail cost them time and money and burdened their equipment.
     Both plaintiffs contended that they received complaints from subscribers, and both contended that the bulk
     e-mailers continued to send messages even after they were notified that bulk e-mailing was unauthorized. Indeed,
     because the Compuserve case is so strikingly similar to the current litigation and the trespass law of Virginia is so
     close to that of Ohio, we will rely on the reasoning of Compuserve. n2

The reliance on prior court decisions unfavorable to spammers is snowballing.

     In the instant case, Melle's conduct fully satisfies all the elements of AOL's claim of trespass to chattels. It is
     undisputed that Melle intentionally caused contact with AOL's computer network by sending bulk e-mail
     messages; Melle's contact with AOL's computer network was unauthorized; and Melle's contact with AOL's
     computer network injured AOL's business goodwill and diminished the value of its possessory interest in its
     computer network. Melle has provided no evidence whatsoever to counter the facts as alleged by AOL. In fact,
     he admits to contacting intentionally AOL's computer network by sending over 60 million pieces of unsolicited
     bulk e-mail over a ten-month period. Melle Depo. at 51-52, 61. Melle admits that he received a cease-and-desist
     letter from AOL dated October 15, 1997, and that as a result of the letter, he knew his contact with AOL's
     computer network was unauthorized, yet he continued spamming. Melle Depo. at 107. Finally, Melle offers no
     evidence to rebut AOL's allegation that its reservoir of goodwill and its possessory interest in its computer
     network have been diminished by the bulk e-mailing. Levitt Decl. PP 14-17; Korn Decl. PP 21-25; Price Decl. P
     7. There is, therefore, no factual dispute as to whether Melle committed a trespass to chattels against AOL's
     computer network. As such, AOL is entitled to summary judgment on Count V.

As you can see from the above, if the spammer admits "intentionally contacting" AOL users and putting deceptive information in the email headers, they have no defense to the trespass to chattels claim.

     COUNT I: FALSE DESIGNATION OF ORIGIN UNDER THE LANHAM ACT

False Designation of Origin claims are based on the unlawful use of a trademark or business identifier.

     The undisputed facts indicate that Melle falsely designated the origin of his products in violation of the Lanham
     Act. The Lanham Act is designed to make actionable the misleading use of marks in interstate commerce and to
     protect those engaged in interstate commerce against unfair competition. See Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana,
     Inc., 505 U.S. 763, 767-68, 120 L. Ed. 2d 615, 112 S. Ct. 2753 (1992). The Act "provides national protection
     of trademarks in order to secure to the owner of the mark the goodwill of his business and to protect the ability of
     consumers to distinguish among competing producers." Advanced Resources International, Inc. v. Tri-Star
     Petroleum Co., 4 F.3d 327, 333 (4th Cir. 1993) (quoting Park N' Fly, Inc. v. Dollar Park and Fly, Inc., 469
     U.S. 189, 198, 83 L. Ed. 2d 582, 105 S. Ct. 658 (1985)). Section 1125(a)(1) makes unlawful the use in
     interstate commerce of:
     "any false designation of origin ... which ... is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the
     affiliation, connection, or association of such person with another person, or as to the origin, sponsorship, or
     approval of his or her goods, services, or commercial activities by another person." 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(a)
     (1994).
     The elements of a false-designation violation under the Lanham Act are three-fold: (1) the alleged violator must
     employ a false designation; (2) the false designation must deceive as to origin, ownership or sponsorship; and (3)
     the plaintiff must believe that "he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such [an] act." Id. § 1125(a)(1).

     As for the first element, it is undisputed that many of Melle's messages contained the letters "aol.com" in their
     headers, thereby creating a false designation. The initials "AOL" have been a registered trademark and service
     mark of America Online since 1996; AOL has used "AOL" as a trademark and service mark to identify its
     products in various forms since 1989. Any e-mail recipient could logically conclude that a message containing the
     initials "aol.com" in the header would originate from AOL's registered Internet domain, which incorporates the
     registered trade and service mark "AOL." Many of the 60 million messages transmitted by Melle contained the
     registered trade and service mark "AOL" -- in the form of "aol.com" -- in the header of the e-mail message. Levitt
     Decl. PP 25-26.

A spammer who misidentifies the source of the email as being from a large company, by using their trademark in the header, has just painted a target on their forehead.

     Second, AOL members were deceived into thinking that AOL sponsored or approved of Melle's bulk e-mailing
     activities. Korn Decl. P 18. Third, Melle's false designation caused damage to AOL. Korn Decl. PP 16, 22-25;
     Levitt Decl. P 26.

     In his motion opposing summary judgment, Melle failed to dispute any material fact that supports AOL's factual
     allegations. Instead, he merely claimed that he did not know why his e-mail program, Stealth Mass Mailer, put
     "aol.com" in the header of his e-mail messages. Melle's Argument Against America Online's Summary Judgment at
     4-5. However, Melle offered no evidence to support his claimed lack of knowledge. Further, Melle admitted that
     after he was alerted that the letters "aol.com" were in his headers, he continued to send e-mail with "aol.com" in
     the message header. Melle Depo. 118-119. Therefore, even if we accepted Melle's argument that he did not
     initially knowingly use "aol.com", there is no doubt that at some point his use became intentional. Moreover, under
     the Lanham Act, false designation of origin does not have a scienter requirement. See Ames Publ'g Co. v.
     Walker-Davis Publications, 372 F. Supp. 1 (E.D. Pa. 1974); Parkway Baking Co. v. Freihofer Baking Co.,
     255 F.2d 641, 648 (3d Cir. 1958) ("There is no requirement that the falsification occur willfully and with intent to
     deceive.") Thus, Melle's alleged lack of intent does not cure his violation of [*552] federal law, and therefore,
     AOL is entitled to summary judgment on Count I.

The foregoing says that it's bad if you keep violating the trademark after getting a cease and desist letter; however, you've already broken the law even if you do it once.

     COUNT II: DILUTION OF TRADE AND SERVICE MARK UNDER THE LANHAM ACT

A "dilution" claim is based on the idea that every time a trademark gets misused, it loses a little credibility in the eyes of the public.

     The undisputed facts indicate that Melle diluted AOL's trademark and service mark in violation of the Lanham
     Act. Section 1125(c) permits an owner of a mark to obtain relief against another person's commercial use of the
     mark "if such use begins after the mark has become famous and causes dilution of the distinctive quality of the
     mark." 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c) (1994). A dilution claim is made out by showing: (1) the ownership of a distinctive
     mark; and (2) a likelihood of dilution. See Hormel Foods Corp. v. Jim Henson Prods., Inc., 73 F.3d 497, 506
     (2d Cir. 1996). The "likelihood of dilution" element can be established either by a showing of "blurring" or by a
     showing of "tarnishment." Id.

     Both elements of a dilution claim are satisfied in the case at bar. First, AOL clearly owns the distinctive "AOL"
     mark. See AOL's Mem. Exhibit G. The mark is registered with the United States Patent and Trademark Office,
     and the mark is used and recognized throughout the world in association with AOL's online products and services.
     Price Decl. P 3.

     Second, the "AOL" mark was diluted by tarnishment. "The sine qua non of tarnishment is a finding that plaintiff's
     mark will suffer negative associations through defendant's use." Hormel Foods Corp., 73 F.3d at 507. The
     "AOL" mark constitutes a valuable business asset for America Online. Price Decl. P 3. AOL contends that
     Melle's conduct has tarnished its mark, and that there is a strong likelihood of dilution by negative associations that
     AOL subscribers make between AOL and Melle's junk e-mailing practices. AOL's Mem. at 25. AOL receives
     more than 100,000 complaints a day regarding junk e-mail generally and can point to more than 50,000
     complaints aimed at Melle's spamming. Melle puts forward no facts to dispute these allegations. Therefore, AOL
     is entitled to summary judgment on Count II.

It looks like the defendants just laid down on the dilution claim.  But how would they fight it, anyway?

     DAMAGES

     As to the specific damages, Magistrate Judge T. Rawles Jones has under advisement AOL's ex parte proof of
     damages against the defaulting defendants. Because the evidence against those defendants is related to that against
     Melle, we will defer ruling on damages until the Report and Recommendation has been issued. Melle will be given
     an opportunity to object to that Report and Recommendation.

     CONCLUSION

     For the foregoing reasons, AOL's Motion for Summary Judgment Against Joseph J. Melle, Jr., as to Liability
     Under Counts I, II and V, was GRANTED on October 1, 1998.

     Entered this 29th day of October, 1998.
     Leonie M. Brinkema
     United States District Judge

     Alexandria, Virginia
This is more tech-oriented material about spamming.  It's all anti-spam.
History of a dispute with a spammer
Lawsuit
[Suespammers] One approach to Safe Harbours for SPAMmers, e.g. uu.net et al
The suespammers 2000-December Archive by Subject
Judge Blocks Whois Spam
Registrar Sues for Whois Spam
Spammer Pays Up at EBay
EBay Fights Spiders on the Web
CompuServe, Inc. v. Cyber Promotions, Inc.
What is Third-Party Mail Relay?
MAPS TSI: Anti-Relay: What is Third-Party Mail Relay?
MAPS Realtime Blackhole List
MAPS RBL Rationale
Anti-Spam Provisions in Sendmail 8.8
Welcome to CAUCE
TechSearch