• profile

Recent Forum Posts

• most extreme studio? 12/12/2005 9:47:52 PM
  
  Rey de Azulejos wrote: Yeah, I think they are bootlegged actually. The ones I have jump around from scene to scene all willynilly, and I emailed the dude about it who runs the site, but he said they were supposed to be like that... oh well. What sucks is not only were the Opearl vids like that, but ALL the vids I ordered, six of them... I mean, the vids are excellent for content, but its a bummer they dont have a case or are even legit. Are there any good DVD sites that cater to just fisting porn? Not really. If you're willing to hunt a little bit, erodvd.nl and yourchoice.nl offer some very good titles.

• most extreme studio? 12/11/2005 8:51:14 PM
  
  Rey de Azulejos wrote: O'Pearl... I think she is a real deal lifestyle submissive owned by Lady Madeline. Google around. I have some of her vides off faustdvd Bootlegs of her appearances in the "Erotic Passion" series from Creative Arts Collection? (actually, that's not really a question.)

• 10/22/2005 2:41 PM
  
  It's not really that recent a title. I believe it was released by Multi Media Verlag. In Canada, you might be able to find it on kaytelvideo.com.

• 2257 Changes - new image policy coming 8/11/2005 7:15 PM
  
  The things described in that article were, I thought, good for producers, but on the whole, internet retailers were still screwed. Just my interpretation...

• Inflagranti 7/17/2005 2:17 PM
  
  Ejac wrote: Scott Kinney wrote: Joey Starr wrote: I like their best of compilations, especially "HIGH LIGHTS FETISCH-SEX". +1 for the "Highlights". I have "Fetsich-Sex", "Fist-Fuck" and "Natursekt". The Arena series is hit-or-miss for me. What do you find to be hit or miss? All I want is a good quality fuck video. No fists. No water sports. Just fucking. If I like the women, if they have some sort of chemistry, then it's OK. If not, it's pretty average. Not that that's any kind of stunning revelation.

• BB Video 7/17/2005 9:38 AM
  
  If you are a fan of the classics, BB is releasing VTO's Foxy Lady series on DVD. They try to be a little like Videorama, a little like SG Video. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

• Inflagranti 7/17/2005 9:36 AM
  
  Joey Starr wrote: I like their best of compilations, especially "HIGH LIGHTS FETISCH-SEX". +1 for the "Highlights". I have "Fetsich-Sex", "Fist-Fuck" and "Natursekt". The Arena series is hit-or-miss for me.

• Pregnant G/G? 7/6/2005 9:38 PM
  
  Adult Video Netherlands (now produced and distributed by Scala) has a couple of these. Like anything else, it depends on the actresses involved. I've been pretty happy with those appearing in AVN titles, both G/G and G/G/B.

• Adult DVD Empire: What's going on here?? 6/26/2005 6:39 PM
  
  Drew, sweetie, I already know a fair amount about the new USC 2257 rules, and have contributed to this thread in the past. My post about Jaded is two basic points: 1. The task of making a site with scope of Jaded's is truly monumental. How will they be able to cover it all? 2. I don't think the negotiations between DoJ and the FSC were such that people in the room felt that the new regulations were completely null and void, or, soon would be. So, what are they thinking with their current site? Regards, Scott K.

• Adult DVD Empire: What's going on here?? 6/26/2005 3:54 PM
  
  On the same subject, but a different retailer, what's up with Jaded Video? Assuming they are an FSC member, they've just bought time, not a pass from the new regulations. I can't imagine the scale of the effort they face in getting documents for all the titles they offer (and are still showing boxes for), the videos they stream and so on. Not to mention the data and physical storage issues they've got to solve. Yikes!

• Adult DVD Empire: What's going on here?? 6/25/2005 9:13 PM
  
  tmd5 wrote: ...I'll be amazed if they actually do. I run an adult site selling DVDs and I refuse to follow these rules, they can come after me if they want. I sell Japanese titles, how am I supposed to get the required information from companies? It's impossible! 10 years x # of undocumented explicit images = pretty damn 'amazed'

• Where Have All The Pictures Gone? 6/16/2005 10:23 AM
  
  Hardware wrote: I wonder what your legal responsibilities would be if you contracted a European firm to publish the images on a server based in Europe and provided URL's to that on your site. This has been asked and answered many times in this and its companion thread. If I display, or cause to be displayed, an explicit image, I become a secondary producer under these regulations.

• Where Have All The Pictures Gone? 6/16/2005 9:50 AM
  
  picman wrote: I realize you've made up your mind about closing shop, but, for what it's worth, I always found your descriptions to be more helpful than the covers. I think I only bought one video from you but that was primarily because the stuff I really wanted never were offered on DVD. Thank you, I really appreciated the compliment. When I looked at the larger picture (forgive me) of selling on the 'net after the regulations take effect, I did not like what I saw. I would be in a position of listing text titles and descriptions, in a world where customers have (since 1998 when I started) demanded more cover art, bigger cover art, screen caps, video clips and streaming video. And where a US producer can still offer these. I simply canno...

• Where Have All The Pictures Gone? 6/16/2005 7:06 AM
  
  Mike Quasar wrote: Front covers from many companies should be no problem. Non-explicit content does not fall undr the 2257 jurisdiction. Soft versions of front covers for DBM, most Videorama, SG Video, MMV, Inflagranti, AVN, Scala, and Book & Film do not exist.

• Where Have All The Pictures Gone? 6/15/2005 8:50 PM
  
  Flash wrote: Scott Kinney wrote: all the covers down by the 23rd, and I'll be out of business the month after that.... I hope you don't end up out of business. I never trust boxcovers anyway since I remember the days that they never matched what was inside. Flash, Thanks for the kind thought. I really will be completely closed by July 23rd, though. I'm selling through all the stuff I have left on my shelves along side as many new releases as I can keep up with. (Now if I could just find someone that wants to buy my domain name...)

• 2257 Changes - new image policy coming 6/14/2005 11:35 PM
  
  lee_carver wrote: Well I guess I will stop drafting that e-mail to you pretty much saying the same thing. I look at talking about 2257 like discussing politics and religion. It all depends on your POV and no one is really right or wrong. Until someone goes to jail that is. Then they were wrong. Well, my POV is pretty simple on 2257. To show box covers, I need to have the documentation (and all the other pieces that go with it.) Videorama used to do less-hardcore covers for the Spanish market, but only in limited quantities, DBM doesn't do it at all, AVN has stopped since Scala took them over, and John Thompson,...well... It would be illegal for the European producers I deal with to provide me with the documentation. I could attempt to ...

• 2257 Changes - new image policy coming 6/14/2005 11:10 PM
  
  lee_carver wrote: ... What some of the content providers and web sites in Europe are apparently being told by their lawyers is that if ANY part of your business is in the US (servers, sites, billing) then you should be 2257 compliant since the DOJ will have jurisdiction over those entities. ... It's been pretty settled that if any part of a 'criminal operation' touches US soil, the US can go after the whole thing, particularly if any of the money/banking/funds transfer is done in the US. According to the final rules, the DOJ would consider any non-compliant material from Europe to be in violation. Like you've said about box cover images, I don't imagine anyone wants to be first to test that.

• Where Have All The Pictures Gone? 6/14/2005 11:01 PM
  
  Thanks Drew. For some reason it keeps slipping my mind that it's only A-D. Still, I'm sticking to my 'totality of circumstance theory' when it comes to interpreting box cover images. Well, that's probably moot in my case since I'll be taking all the covers down by the 23rd, and I'll be out of business the month after that....

• Where Have All The Pictures Gone? 6/14/2005 10:15 PM
  
  lee_carver wrote: dvddude - As the rules are currently written then a "sane" person would tell you that a softcore version of an adult movie boxcover should be able to be posted without documentation. However, that is an "interpretation" of the new rules and you really won't know for certain until someone tests the theory in court. I was trying to find the exact definition to quote to show why Lee calls it "Interpretation". Basically, the definition starts at explicit sexual conduct, travels down to genital contact, and there's some suggestion that genital display might fall under the definition. I hope someone else posts the excerpt from the code...

• Where Have All The Pictures Gone? 6/12/2005 3:01 PM
  
  Drew Black wrote: Scott Kinney wrote: I was thinking more along the lines of calling the image from another server and opening it up in a separate window, which is how I read RonK's comment. I don't get the distinction. Are you talking about someone doing a href=http://somedomain.com/someimagename.jpg target="_new"? In my comments above I indicate that this may indeed be a problem. Doing a href=http://somedomain.com/someimagename.html target="_new" should be OK because it's the HTML of the page linked to that loads the image. Scott Kinney also wrote: How are you fixed for pygmy ponies? I don't get this part. Your first html snippet is what I was referring to, and I think we're thrashing even though we agree. I unders...