From http://www.ynot.com/content/117693-phoenix-attorney-adult-industry-faces-jail-time-az.html
Phoenix Attorney: Adult Industry Faces Jail Time in AZ by Marty O’Brien
The Maricopa County Attorney has a piece of advice for adult studios considering a move to Arizona in order to avoid the condom requirements popping up all over Southern California: Don’t.
On Tuesday, Bill Montgomery distributed an official statement saying adult film producers may be prosecuted under Arizona’s prostitution laws if they pay performers to appear in their films.
“Furthermore,” the statement noted, “anyone involved in other aspects of producing pornographic movies, including soliciting individuals to appear, collecting a fee from the monies received by individuals solicited to appear by virtue of an agent relationship, transporting individuals from California to Arizona for the purpose of appearing in a pornographic movie, and/or establishing a venue for the filming and/or production of pornographic movies may be guilty of committing one or several felonies in the state of Arizona.”
The statement also noted prostitution convictions in the state carry “mandatory jail time as well as the possibility of other penalties.”
Arizona law offers a broad definition of prostitution, defining the crime as “engaging in or agreeing or offering to engage in sexual conduct under a fee arrangement with any person for money or any other valuable consideration.”
Montgomery’s comments apparently were precipitated by recent adult industry debate about whether it’s time for studios to abandon their traditional digs in the San Fernando Valley north of Los Angeles in favor of other locations where condom usage on adult movie sets hasn’t been hardwired into local law. L.A. and several surrounding municipalities and counties either already have passed “condoms required” mandates or are considering them.
Arizona and Nevada have been mentioned as possible new hubs if the industry does bail out of California, which is one of only two U.S. states where adult movie production is legal. The other is New Hampshire.
According to Montgomery, increasingly conservative Arizona may not be inclined to change its statutes in order to accommodate an industry conservatives feel should not exist at all. State statutes outlaw the existence of “prostitution enterprises,” which are defined as “any corporation, partnership, association or other legal entity or any group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity engaged in providing prostitution services,” according to Phoenix CBS affiliate KPHO.
“Enterprise,” in legal vernacular, usually implies “criminal conspiracy,” a wide-net class of felonies prosecutors — especially conservative prosecutors running for re-election — find particularly appealing as targets.
Would Montgomery or other Arizona political animals demand prosecution of porn producers, should any have the temerity to shoot in the Grand Canyon State? There is no clear answer, but Montgomery’s website offers clues: He’s running for re-election in 2012 and courting Tea Party voters. He’s also a proud member of notable conservative groups including the National Rifle Association, National Right to Life and The Federalist Society. The latter is an organization of conservatives and libertarians seeking reform of the legal system based on a literal, textual interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.
Montgomery’s spokesman equivocated when Phoenix’s New Times asked for comment about the county attorney’s intentions.
“There have been people doing all kinds of things that are illegal, but not everyone’s caught and prosecuted,” Jerry Cobb told New Times, adding that no one in the county has faced prostitution charges related to the production of pornography in the two years Montgomery has held office.
“Not everyone’s caught and prosecuted.” That’s hilarious. NO ONE is prosecuted, and the reason why is that they know they would lose in court and open the floodgates — as Arizona became the third state to have officially adjudicated the issue of whether porn production can be prosecuted under pandering laws.
The most cursory overview of Arizona case law makes it clear that Arizona courts have already cited favorably both the line of reasoning of California’s Freeman decision, and the decision itself. As the article notes, Montgomery is “courting Tea Party voters.” This is politics, not good law or good public policy. EVERY SINGLE prosecutor and dealmaker I’ve spoken with in Arizona (on the state and county level) accepts this reality. The last thing they want to tell Arizona property owners is that they will be denied the RIGHT to rent their properties for profit to any type of film production.
You know who moves out to the desert? Rich people who don’t want folks looking into their business, spying on them, or interfering with their property rights. They shoot trespassers out here. If someone wants too shoot an adult movie out here, I’d hate to be the poor son of a bitch who got in the way of that property owner’s location fee.
I’m sorry Michael but moving anywhere outside California is just too risky and irresponsible.
It’s not a move if you’re already there, origen. Porn is shot in Arizona almost every day. Straight and gay.
I don’t think this is a good practice to encourage. I’m not an attorney but I have listened to numerous entertainment and free speech lawyers who say it isn’t wise to shoot pornography outside California given the lack of clarity in the laws and enforcement regimes.
Even South Florida is pushing it–despite the fact that some of the largest producers exclusively operate there.
Either we find a new Hal Freeman in AZ, NV and FL, or the industry goes underground while it fights in CA courts.
As for enforcement, the shoot locations in AZ are well known and have been for years. Where are the busts and prosecutions?
Yeah Michael, I’m sorry, but there has to be a better way. Just because a course of action hasn’t been taken yet, doesn’t mean it never will. Just ask Kimberly Kupps. I think her husband is still rotting in a Central Floridian jail cell while other sites like Tampa Bukkake.com are still operational.
Stupid phony politicians. The new state motto and/or bumpersticker will soon be “Cum to Arizona…. where it’s Hot”!
Personally, I think this is just political posturing on Mr. Montgomery’s part, for the benefit of his right-wing followers. If he does attempt to use prostitution laws to stop porn production, then things could get rather interesting.
Of course, he could then just follow Weinstein’s lead and call for a condom mandate law similar to LA.
I always thought that Vegas was a better venue, anyway.
Anthony
I think trying to run away is the FIRST step in admitting defeat. This is far from a settled issue and it puzzles me why so many people are open to immediately leaving the state.
I don’t think the relocation of the adult industry from Southern California should be an option on the table. Negotiating with groups like AHF, it has to be clear that the adult industry is always going to be “in your face”.
What about coming up with a more thorough and centralized STD testing regime that could rival any condom mandate in terms of effectiveness? I believe such a scheme must guarantee that performers are able to DEMAND condoms on set–without financial penalization. It also must guarantee that ALL performers lack any kind of communicable infection. If performers have herpes, their outbreaks must be treated so that infection is not transmitted. As far as HPV is concerned, soon there will be an effective treatment preventing infection but condoms should be the norm for now.
How can the Industry create such a scheme? By having medical doctors approve of EVERY SINGLE scene pairing. AIM should return and with a vengeance.
OK lets call it like it is here.
If AZ doesn’t want porners then porners should clearly stay out.
Never mind whether it is or isn,t prostitution, they can clearly make it undesireable for porners simply by passing the same condom laws.
Give it up on Porn Valley moving to AZ it aint happening…they aint moving period.
Gee Mike, I hate to tell you, but there are a dozen sites that shoot porn in Arizona right now, and have for years. Some big companies are (Pink Visual) and were (Club Jenna) headquartered in Arizona. And then there’s the gay companies.
Im willing to back any bets on when vivid, wicked, dp, hustler, evil angel or elegant angel moves to AZ
I say….wont happen
Who says they have to move? They can shoot on location anywhere without moving, or they can sub-contract shooting to AZ or NV LLCs.
Phoenix and Vegas are each about an hour’s flight time from LA. It’s also a terrific drive; I recommend it.
Condoms are mandatory in Nevada brothels as is regular testing. Highly unlikely Nevada would force sex workers to use condoms if the work place is a brothel and give a pass to sex workers when the work place is a video shoot. That is especially the case when actresses in particular are no longer just actresses – they’re sex entrepreneurs who sometimes ply their trade on webcams, sometimes on a video shoot, sometimes in a Nevada brothel and sometimes as escorts.
From a liability standpoint, a large company like Vivid would be putting itself at significant risk if a California-based company it chooses to shoot outside of California specifically to skirt the condom issue and a performer is subsequently infected with an STD. You now create a situation where the company knew, or should have known, that it was putting performers in harms way and intentionally did it anyway.
A gonzo producer with a website might not have a lot to lose. A large company like Vivid has a lot at risk.
Complete nonsense, from start to finish.
In Nevada brothels, only one half of the equation (the sex workers) are part of a regular testing regime. Brothels are open to the general public, porn shoots are not.
The rest has been covered before. Volenti non fit injuria.
Soon you’ll need a non Italian cruise liner to shoot in international waters.. preferably nowhere the coast of Somalia..