Why not join a site that will allow you to cam as your own studio? I have a friend who lives in Australia works the same site I do and they signed her onto the site as her own studio. Kicks out middle men etc. Just a suggestion.
Printable View
Why not join a site that will allow you to cam as your own studio? I have a friend who lives in Australia works the same site I do and they signed her onto the site as her own studio. Kicks out middle men etc. Just a suggestion.
I've been reading comments on facebook to reports by a few of the papers...I've only seen a couple of posts from women thinking it's a good idea because of exploitation of women in porn, most posts are from men and women not happy about it and men and women questioning why squirting isn't allowed, and guys saying they will just watch foreign made porn instead.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainm...medium=twitter
Whilst I don't even specialize myself in any of the listed things, I cannot imagine how many UK camgirls, content creators and porn producers who actually specialize primarily in BDSM and squirting etc as their main niches are feeling right now. If they heed this, they will lose their jobs and the UK government will lose out on a nice chunk of tax ££££ that comes from those studios, performers, companies, etc, etc, etc. Whilst I hope it smashes them in the face, it can't hurt them without hurting us too, it's so corrupt.
The right to record, produce and sell content that is made by consenting, legal adults is something we need to fight for. By all means should the law clamp the fuck down on individuals - minors and adults alike - being exploited for profit in the sex industry, but deciding that certain sex acts and fetishes should simply stop being practiced in front of a camera is NOT going to stop that. It just deprives a whole lot of us consenting adults from a simple right. They are ignoring so much common sense - safe words, safe work environments, practicing techniques to avoid actual harm.. If film-makers are permitted "stunt men/women", why not can porn performers and sex workers who engage in "dangerous" acts be permitted the same right in their jobs?
Besides, if they actually think that just "quietly" coming out with this bullshit law is going to go ANY way in preventing those truly corrupt individuals abusing and exploiting children and adults in the sex industry, they have no fucking idea.
We don't all automatically fall under the definition of providing providing “on-demand programme service” though...I'm carrying on as I am and will dispute it if need be.
I think I'm not reading enough certified sources on this on how this will specifically affect performers like us; - there's a lot of blogging, fluff-journalism, and angry article writing going around about this to wade through. Naturally there's a lot of hysteria birthing a lot of potential misinformation, sensationalism and blurring lines which already seem blurry as fuck, but even if it doesn't affect me as just one performer at all, it's a frightening prospect that this could affect UK porn to any extent.
Check out my post just a little way above...or have a read all the way through, there is a lot in this thread. :)
Backlash UK are the organisation working on fighting this and promoting freedom of sexual expression. If you look at the previous page you'll see the responses they've given to my questions.
Myles jackman (obscenitylawyer on Twitter) is working with them and available to help any of us should this quango actually come calling!Quote:
The new Atvod rules apply only to sites regulated by Atvod, that is if they have 'determined' you provide an ODPS.
So as things stand you only have to bear the OPA in mind. The courts have held that the geographical location of your server is not relevant, if controlled from the UK. From what you say it doesn't sound like you have any obscenity issues if within the BBFC's R18 threshold and only likely to be found by adults.
Atvod are busy hoovering up as many adult sites as they can find, with their fortunately limited resources.
So far as I know they've not tackled any Camgirls yet. They have attacked C4S 'editorial controllers' ie UK people who upload to C4S.
The EU's AVMS Directive from which Atvod derives their powers was actually intended as a primarily economic measure, to level the playing field with traditional TV which was already regulated. It was not primarily a censorship measure, that's just where Atvod has chosen to take it, driven largely by their ambitious evangelical CEO Pete Johnson.
You are supposed to notify Atvod if you are providing an ODPS, not wait for them to track you down.
However I am pretty sure you should not qualify as an ODPS, and therefore you need not notify. Or are caught by the new law.
Should you be approached by Atvod, do NOT ignore their letters, which unfortunately share some characteristics with scam shakedown attempts, but get in touch with Backlash, who will be happy to advise you how best to respond.
You will probably be aware that Backlash was instrumental in causing the first adult producer to ask us for help, US-SC.com , to have Ofcom overturn Atvod's decision. In other words, Backlash has a better appreciation of what the law means than Atvod.
So in short, carry on as normal. You do not need to take down videos or not make niche fetish clips, and you're free to work on any sites you choose. Just keep the obscenity regulations in mind and try to stay of atvod's radar as they will try to say that you are an ODPS and that what you offer IS tv like. The case with urban chick last year though has set a precedent so we are in s good position should we need to fight. None of this applies to live cam either, just videos x
I don't know if you guys would prefer to move this over to verified and delete the thread here? i know i started it but I'm a bit paranoid now that it's a big red flashing sign over all of us saying "Come and get us atvod" :-/ Totally don;t mind if you want to delete it or move it, just keep me updated on any new developments. I'm happy to give anyone the info and contacts i have as well if you need help via PM x
I think they would already have found us through clip4sale since they seem to be on their radar or to have found us just from posting generally here. We're saying in this thread that we don't think the new regulations apply to us, rather than that they do.
The UK list of banned activities actually now brings the UK in line with US obscenity law. We can do these things but not publicly, in a broadcast or a video for others to view.
Chaturbate recently became more strict on complying with US obscenity rules and the list they published was pretty much the same as the new UK one.
It seems though, that the UK has found a way to enforce these rules by enlisting the banks. If a customer uses an UK card to purchase on a site flagged as not enforcing the rules then the payment will be blocked. So, we are at the mercy of admin on each site.
AdultWork has had us confirm that our free to view content is suitable for minors and that age verification is required to see shows and buy content. They will suspend the account of those not adhering to this. Therefore, UK payments will not be blocked as AW is actively enforcing the age verification rule.
Just imagine if all the sites did this! I don't think we would see a drop in income, just a drop in under age viewers and free loaders. Those who buy tokens will still do so.
This is not a blanket ban in relation to all pornography. These new rules ban certain acts relate to “on-demand programme services”, which we may not be providing, and DVD's.
If we don't fall under the ODPS definition, we are governed by the existing obscenity laws.
"These new regulations impose even more draconian restrictions on the types of pornography that can be depicted on regulated Video on Demand services. Previously the Crown Prosecution Service’s Guidance on the OPA provided a list of sexual activities which were deemed illegal to publish.
However these new Regulations specifically state that only sexual content that is equivalent to the BBFC R18 Category can be sold via VoD service. This is a significantly lower threshold." http://obscenitylawyer.blogspot.co.u...cceptable.html
There are two issues here being discussed in this thread. What we can and cannot do is one, which actually doesn't worry me.
That websites which are flagged for not enforcing age verification and/or allow unacceptable content for those who have not yet verified can be blocked by UK payment methods does bother me. Whether or not we are classed as TV On Demand is neither here nor there. Age verification is a good thing regardless.
What we should be doing is asking the sites we use to set up and use proper age verification and enforce it without exception.
Whether we are classed or not as providing “on-demand programme services” does matter...if we are, we have to register with ATVOD and pay a licence fee.
Atvod, if they get you in their sites will say you are regardless. It'll then be down to you to fight it. That's why this is so worrying, and obviously the wider impact all this will have on our future ability to earn on certain sites.
Maybe it will help if I post this again...I'm sure Susie posted earlier the reference for it being TV like video only though.
Before we think about the types of movie clips we make, we need to know if we are providing “on-demand programme service” (“ODPS”) as that would mean registering with ATVOD and paying a fee, regardless of whether you film the banned material.
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/bin...vices/ucsc.pdf
A service is only an ODPS if it satisfies the defining criteria in section 368A of the Act. Key amongst these for present purposes is that in section 368A(1)(a)3:
“… a service is an ODPS if –
…… its principal purpose is the provision of programmes the form and content of which are comparable to the form and content of programmes normally included in television programme services.”
It helps to understand where they are coming from:
The AVMS Directive is a European Directive amongst the purposes of which is to provide a measure of fair competition across Member States between those providing:
a. traditional (linear) television broadcasting services; and
b. on-demand services that are essentially the same, or sufficiently similar, and which compete for viewers and advertisers.
It seeks to provide a level of protection in accordance with that which consumers of ODPSs might expect.
ATVOD is trying to apply "TV like" broadly - http://sexandcensorship.org/2014/11/...-1st-december/
The new law only affects providers of On Demand Programme Services (ODPS) that are regulated by ATVOD. ATVOD’s power comes from the EU AVMS regulations, which relate only to “TV-like” services. In most European countries, most websites (including adult websites) are not considered to be TV-like. However, in the UK, ATVOD has chosen to apply the regulations far more broadly, and encompass a wide range of services, including adult sites. This gives ATVOD the power to regulate, and control, any website it decides is TV-like.
Note that ATVOD has repeatedly been struck down by Ofcom regarding its broad definition of TV-like. The Sun newspaper, the BBC, and a number of others, have successfully appealed that various services cannot be considered TV-like, and so have escaped regulation by ATVOD. Recently, a dominatrix also appealed that her site, Urban Chick Supremacy Cell (NSFW), was not TV-like, and won. Sites that have removed themselves from ATVOD regulation in this way are not bound by the new law.
If your movie clips are regulated by ATVOD, you need to register with them and pay a fee.
Still images are covered - ATVOD publishes determinations that two further ‘adult’ services – operating across 34 websites - breached statutory rules requiring UK video on demand providers to keep hardcore porn out of reach of children as new rules for UK video on demand services come into force
In this newspaper report, they are using the words "video films". Basically the online version of a porn DVD that you would buy in a shop. http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2...P=share_btn_tw
Yes it's video only for now although I am pretty sure they'll do what they can to get their grubby hands on cam to at some point!
The term Video On Demand isn't helpful for us in understanding what this legislation means, it's an On Demand Programme Service:
The Audiovisual Media Services Regulations 2009 - inserted into the Communications Act 2003:
368A Meaning of “on-demand programme service”
(1) For the purposes of this Act, a service is an “on-demand programme service” if—
(a) its principal purpose is the provision of programmes the form and content of which
are comparable to the form and content of programmes normally included in
television programme services;
(b) access to it is on-demand;
(c) there is a person who has editorial responsibility for it;
(d) it is made available by that person for use by members of the public; and
(e) that person is under the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom for the purposes of the
Audiovisual Media Services Directive.
(2) Access to a service is on-demand if—
(a) the service enables the user to view, at a time chosen by the user, programmes
selected by the user from among the programmes included in the service; and
(b) the programmes viewed by the user are received by the user by means of an
electronic communications network (whether before or after the user has selected
which programmes to view).
(3) For the purposes of subsection (2)(a), the fact that a programme may be viewed only
within a period specified by the provider of the service does not prevent the time at which it
is viewed being one chosen by the user.
(4) A person has editorial responsibility for a service if that person has general control—
(a) over what programmes are included in the range of programmes offered to users;
and
(b) over the manner in which the programmes are organised in that range;
and the person need not have control of the content of individual programmes or of the
broadcasting or distribution of the service (and see section 368R(6)).
For anyone who wants to fight against the new legislation regarding the specific activites which are now illegal, there is an official petition to sign. http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/72693
There is also going to be a protest on 12th December, outside parliment.https://www.facebook.com/events/751869001527441
There's a 38degrees one too https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitio...ve-legislation
The government do not have to pay any attention to petitions other than the epetitions.direct.gov.uk ones. So while the 38degrees one is useful, the other one is the one that they MUST pay attention to.
Anyone wanting more ideas of how to fight - Pandora Blake has included several options at the bottom of this blog which also sums up the media coverage the whole situation has received over the past few days, and has written a very detailed description of how to make a complaint via the ATVOD website on this post here. You don't have to be from the UK to make a complaint to ATVOD (they only require a name and an email address).
The e-petition that gained the highest ever number of signatures did not result in a change of policy, there are also reports of e-petitions being arbitrarily closed early. 38 Degrees on the other hand have had a number of successes. Sign both, there is no harm in doing that.
I really want to go but it's 3 hours travel from me and would be a fortune on the train grr!