Privacy considerations aside for a moment, if the government really wanted to track whether any underage performers have managed to sneak into the industry and are performing sex on camera, it would seem as if that's a pretty easy thing to do.
Privacy considerations aside for a moment, if the government really wanted to track whether any underage performers have managed to sneak into the industry and are performing sex on camera, it would seem as if that's a pretty easy thing to do.
Here's one suggestion:
1) All existing performers and anyone wishing to enter the industry as a performer would be required to submit their government-issued photo identification to the manager of one central (registered and bonded) databank, where photocopies of all such identifications will be kept on file. That (registered and bonded) manager would be trained to spot phony IDs, and if there were any question regarding the authenticity of the ID, the performer would not be allowed to perform until the ID question was settled. The simplest method would be to obtain this information by funneling all talent to one central testing facility, where they could be screened for STDs and entered into the databank at the same time.
2) When the photo ID is scanned for entry into the database, the performer will be required to give a thumbprint which will be filed along with the photo ID and linked to that ID.
3) Each performer on a set will be required to input his/her thumbprint, using a thumbprint scanner similar to those found in banks, before being permitted to perform any sexual act on camera. The thumbprint scanner will be connected to an on-site computer, and the scanned thumbprint will be checked against the performer's documentation in the database, which the producer/director will be able to see on the computer screen. If the thumbprint ID does not match the photo ID on the screen, the performer will not be permitted to perform.
4) Each production will be assigned a unique production number (it could easily be a bar code) in a separate but linked database dedicated to sexually explicit productions, and all scanned thumbprints, together with a link to the performer's photo ID, will be saved to a file identified with that production number. The production number will also appear on all packaging materials, disks, websites, magazines or other media where footage or still photos from that shoot appear.
5) If the government suspects that a particular performer is underage, a warrant could be issued for the photo ID in the databank, and a list of all movies and other works in which the performer has appeared. If, upon checking the sexually explicit content of any of the works in the databank, it is discovered that the performer appearing in the content is not the performer identified in the databank, and that that performer appears to be underage, an arrest warrant could be issued for the producer and/or director and for the performer who committed the fraud. Also, an automatic warning could be generated to recall the work(s) in question from stores, VOD sites and other outlets.
6) The costs of maintaining the databanks could be assessed to each production company, either at a flat rate or perhaps prorated depending on the number of performers involved in the production.
cruisemaster (12/25/2008)
There is one fundamental flaw is this idea (besides the fact it is NOT simple): it goes along with the government assumption that the Constitution doesn't apply to our businesses. That we are guilty of child porn until proven guilty. We should not promote any system that helps the government harass our industry.
asling (12/21/2008)
This doesn't work for the amateur or gonzo producer who finds his talent and shoot almost immideatly. IAnd it makes a mountin out of a molehill. All that should be required is the date of the first shoot and age verification at that point. If they are legal then, they are legal there after. Keeping the verification and a shooting schedule should be sufficient. Age verification could be notarized. Anything else is harassment and takesfunding and focus away from their stated goal of child protection.
bevybabe (12/19/2008)
Simpler for the large US producers yes, but I see some gaping holes in this system for independent amateurs producing their own content and for content produced outside the US.
marcius69 (12/19/2008)
This premise seems to take the assumption that everyone who participates in adult videos resides in beautiful sunny California. Where would this manager in point 1. be located? Would there be one in Phoenix, or Indy or Des Moines or Olando or any number of cities and towns that might have a production going on. Same thing with this "central" testing facility. Central to whom? The thumbprint mentioned in point 2. besides the Orwellian overtones wouldn't go over very well with amatuer talent with varying degrees of police involvement (anything from parking tickets to full blown warrents). Who would have access to this database? We have performers who even though they are out there to the porn buying public try to maintain some annonimity with the general public and this would definitely be a deterrent if anyone at anytime could look up every person who has ever (or at least since this proposal went into effect) been in a production is suddenly out on front street. There are some good ideas in this piece but mostly overkill and the method of who pays for it definitely needs worked out better.
Please log in to comment. Don't have a free account? Register now!
By participating you agree to our Privacy Policy & the AVN "Be Kind Policy" and represent that you are not under the age of 18.
There is one fundamental flaw is this idea (besides the fact it is NOT simple): it goes along with the government assumption that the Constitution doesn't apply to our businesses. That we are guilty of child porn until proven guilty. We should not promote any system that helps the government harass our industry.
This doesn't work for the amateur or gonzo producer who finds his talent and shoot almost immideatly. IAnd it makes a mountin out of a molehill. All that should be required is the date of the first shoot and age verification at that point. If they are legal then, they are legal there after. Keeping the verification and a shooting schedule should be sufficient. Age verification could be notarized. Anything else is harassment and takesfunding and focus away from their stated goal of child protection.
Simpler for the large US producers yes, but I see some gaping holes in this system for independent amateurs producing their own content and for content produced outside the US.
This premise seems to take the assumption that everyone who participates in adult videos resides in beautiful sunny California. Where would this manager in point 1. be located? Would there be one in Phoenix, or Indy or Des Moines or Olando or any number of cities and towns that might have a production going on. Same thing with this "central" testing facility. Central to whom? The thumbprint mentioned in point 2. besides the Orwellian overtones wouldn't go over very well with amatuer talent with varying degrees of police involvement (anything from parking tickets to full blown warrents). Who would have access to this database? We have performers who even though they are out there to the porn buying public try to maintain some annonimity with the general public and this would definitely be a deterrent if anyone at anytime could look up every person who has ever (or at least since this proposal went into effect) been in a production is suddenly out on front street. There are some good ideas in this piece but mostly overkill and the method of who pays for it definitely needs worked out better.