We have a fundamental value difference here in how we see the content. You see it the same as Hollywood and for most of this, I just don't. So maybe we just agree to disagree, and that's totally okay. Hollywood pays actors hundreds of thousands to tens of millions of dollars for movies. They're also in the SAG and that has its benefits.

At the low end here, and for MOST instances, we are talking largely about actors paid a few hundred to a thousand or more dollars for a whole spectrum of hardcore activity. In fact, most people come and go in a short period of time, and statistically don't do many scenes. The question (in my mind) isn't what should someone do with a Jenna Jameson or a Bree Olsen, because they're the one percenters, that's our Hollywood. Of course this is completely subjective, but I'm not suggesting that such content come down.

I thought the question here was about the real entry level here of one or multiple scenes. This is what I've seen cross my desk in the past. Usually from surviving family members, usually on people who didn't do very much. Holding on to a piece of truly unimportant content that's already aged when a mom or dad reaches out to tell you that their daughter committed suicide or died of an overdose doesn't really seem worth the rub to me.

Brad

Well said but essentially my (economic) point. The 'only shot a few scenes' girl isn't earning you, the producer, that much anyway so take it down and save everyone the hassle. But if Jenna Jameson's mom comes knocking....uh, sorry no.

Hey buddy this thread more an ethical standpoint. Im just curious everyones thoughts.
Lets take Amber Rayne as we were very close. From a financial standpoint she was paid for a product and I continue to use that product. She loved her job and always loved seeing her stuff online.

But on the other point. with classic porn are we saying it should all come down as lots of the performers has passed away. What about August Ames. Should all her content come down. I dont know either way. I have content of her and have not used it.

Brad has it right here. There's a huge difference between Jenna and some young woman who is struggling and decides to shoot porn for a quick buck. The only way to go about it is to remove, IMHO... everything else will create issues, and also, if you have no feelings about it, it's on you, but you can lose a lot more for something that should be your moral duty.

Like he said, Hollywood has SAG, porn doesn't... and more often times than not, porn talent will be ridiculed and paid peanuts, while the paysite operators will milk the content for all it's worth and re-sell it, recycle it, etc... IP is IP, and nobody is disputing that. You produced it, and you own it. But there will be certain limitations on how you expect to use it 20 years later for example... you would be singing a different tune if it was your wife or your daughter, of course..

So youre saying whenever a porn model passes away the content should be taken down.
Whats the difference between Jenna and a newbie They are both humans with familys. Now im not saying you wrong. just a friendly discussion.

:thumbsup

I would add that if the model was enjoying what she was doing and made that known, I wouldn't have an ethical issue with it. But if it was a fly by nighter that just wanted a quick buck, I could see the argument for that.

How about have ethics to begin with and don't shoot anyone who is just desperate and does not really want to do adult work?

That's a pretty offensive point of view to have about your clients.

It also shows remarkably little knowledge of Carrie Fisher's life story. But that is not the rude part.

Is the owner of AFSC already passed away?

It's not you that anyone (Brad, most notably) would have an issue with or call predatory, it's the "boys". You know that some sites to this day use coercive tactics and lie to talent as well. While you wouldn't shoot anyone who is desperate, they would, and they are the reason why porn has a bad rep.

I mean, you are far more "erotica" than you are porn, in my opinion, so it can't apply to you to begin with, as this is more to do with something distasteful...

Fiddy dead models

these first world problems are really entertaining to my ethiopian side :1orglaugh

so now we're rating porn based on niche so we can decide whether a dead actor's content should come down?

porn is fucking porn and anyone in this industry should be supporting every fucking producer in the business. the producers are putting their asses on the line. the actors are just showing their ass for a few hours. OWN your content if you want it to go to the grave with you.

some of these "morality" comments should get the fuck out of here. especially based on whether an actor did drugs or didn't shoot enough films :1orglaugh:321GFY

#

You always struck me as a creep, and I guess you just confirmed it for me.

The only producers you should stand behind are those who take care of their talent, and don't shoot for quantity's sake. There are ethical producers, but there are a lot of bad ones too.

you can't pick and choose "ethics" based on what you enjoy. you are either in the industry or out.

the single most important reason i left corporate america for porn 25 years ago is freedom of expression. if you support censorship you should not be here.

most likely you are just a tissue filler, probably watch free porn too.

#

We ain't into the bible-belting business indeed . . .

Brandon lee? Heath ledger? John Wayne? Part of show biz.

Nascar Races still are shown where a driver crashed and died. I just watched an old fight— boom boom mancini vs du ku kim. Kim died in the ring. Why does it change because they are women and the circumstances surrounding their death? I still watch bruce lee movies, I still listen to Elliott smith. I still watch and read anthony bourdain and listen to chris cornell. What you’re really doing Brad is posthumously sex shaming. Yup. Mr virtue. That’s what you are doing by definition.

Yup. Spot on