FSC All-Star Anti-Piracy PSA (texted version)

Adult film stars and directors take a stand against internet piracy of adult content. Cast (in order of appearance): Lisa Ann, Julie Meadows, Kaylani Lei, Sinnamon Love, Axel Braun, Nicki Hunter, Ron Jeremy, Alektra Blue, Kimberly Kane, Will Ryder, Cousin Stevie, Joanna Angel, and Charlie Laine. Illegal downloads = stealing

This is the full-length, retail-use version. Safe for work.

Directed by Michael Whiteacre. Produced by Joanne Cachapero. Alektra Blue and Kaylani Lei appear courtesy Wicked Pictures. Copyright 2010 Free Speech Coalition. www.freespeechcoalition.com

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• FSC
• Free Speech Coalition
• piracy
• Lisa Ann
• Julie Meadows
• Kaylani Lei
• Alektra Blue
• Ron Jeremy
• Nicki Hunter
• girl
• Kimberly Kane
• Joanna Angel
• Sinnamon Love
• Charlie Laine
• Cousin Stevie
• Michael Whiteacre
• free
• porn
• XXX
• adult
• sexy
• anti-piracy
• internet piracy
• APAP
• content
• movies
• PSA
• Public Service Announcement
• copyright infringement
• adult industry
• adult entertainment
• tube sites
• pornstars
• BitTorrent
• ad
• sex
• adult video
• Avatar
• campaign
• spot
• theft

[anchorbuildings]

oh please. telling us to behave morally while you're fucking someone for money on camera and taking it in the ass... i don't think so.

[TronicLa]

185 people were stupid enough to pay for porn.

[kortan222]

And btw. "performer" Alektra Blue is pornoactress. ;)

[kortan222]

Normal man/woman can not download film, or is arrest for it, or is appeled by this and other like-this demagogic video, but bankers can stole hundreds millions or billions dollars and no one do anything. Where is video against bankers stealing our money?!

[anchorbuildings]

@Spartacus1859 you are a fool and i'm not going to discuss any further with you. You say i make sweeping attacks and generalise and in the same breath you say 'obeying the law... [is] a moral code these people generally follow'. You know nothing about these people and the laws they follow or don't follow and i think it unlikely they are very legally upright people. You are blind, and stupid and try to hide your lack of smarts behind an intellectual facade. you have no common sense. goodbye.

[Spartacus1859]

@anchorbuildings If words are worth using, they 're worth using right, so no I don't acknowledge that you were on base at all. If obeying the law is a moral code, then it's a moral code these people generally follow. Ergo them asking that others do as well can't be hypocrisy. You can't make sweeping attacks on people based on your emotional response then justify it with "you know what I mean."

[anchorbuildings]

@Spartacus1859 living your life according to the law is a certain moral code is it not? even if you don't agree with me, you get my point don't you? why are you splitting hairs? you're missing my point by trying to argue with me over semantics. you know what i mean essentially. you are hung up on logic. i hope you don't apply this intellectual rigor to your interpersonal relationships cause if you do you must be a real pain in the ass to be around.

[Spartacus1859]

@anchorbuildings I'm not saying that's how the world works. I'm just saying that the nature of their argument was based on the law, not morality or ethics. If you want to argue that they're not entitled to protection under the law, that's another matter. However, accusing them of making a moral argument when they didn't is blatantly false.

[anchorbuildings]

@Spartacus1859 viewing society as a logical entity that functions solely within legal guidelines is a very reductionist and simplistic way of viewing the world... do you think the lawmakers care about the law? no. it exists to serve them, not you. and if you think to live your life caring about the law as your moral arbiter then i would not care to live in your vision of the world. Yes, logically and legally their standpoint makes sense but by any other common sense view it is an absurdity.

[Spartacus1859]

@anchorbuildings I get what you're attempting to say, but it doesn't hold up. They act within the law and they ask that we do as well. That's not hypocrisy. They make the claim that piracy reduces the production capabilities of its victims, which is obvious. No conflict. No hypocrisy. On the other hand, your attitude suggests that you see victimization of those who choose a different lifestyle than yourself to be acceptable. You're being a social bigot. This is a matter of laws, not mores.

[anchorbuildings]

@Spartacus1859 only on the surface is it a debate about intellectual property. the REAL cultural aspect that is of any interest, that is out of the norm, is people who obviously have no regard for cultural norms and 'respectable society'asking us to adopt a set of rules for behaviour and to respect them. can i explain it any more clearly? if i say 'mores' meaning a set of cultural behaviours, do you get it then? perhaps not.

[Spartacus1859]

@anchorbuildings It IS an intellectual property debate, you fool. I'll clarify my earlier expression by saying that logic is very important to me. Your guy, by the way, is not a logical basis for discussion. You're also basing your perspective on a cultural view of sexuality that isn't self-evident. That's why you have to refer to your gut to talk about it. They're not claiming any morals, nor are they necessarily immoral, depending on what arbitrary moral system you follow. You have no grounds.