Lawyers
representing
the
adult
sex
industry
appeared
in
a
Colorado
federal
court
Aug.
2
to
argue
for
a
preliminary
injunction
against
the
enforcement
of
new
federal
rules
they
say
could
remove
sexual
images
on
Web
sites,
including
nude
photos
that
are
a
staple
of
gay
male
cruising
sites.
U.S.
District
Court
Judge
Walker
D.
Miller
may
take
up
to
three
weeks
to
make
a
ruling
on
the
injunction,
according
to
Tom
Hymes,
spokesperson
for
the
Free
Speech
Coalition.
The
Free
Speech
Coalition
is
suing
U.S.
Attorney
General
Alberto
Gonzales
to
prevent
the
Department
of
Justice
from
enforcing
new
regulations
to
U.S.C.
2257,
dubbed
“2257,”
which
mandates
producers
verify
the
ages
of
models,
actors
and
others
appearing
in
sexually
explicit
content
and
keep
thorough
records
on
them,
including
address,
photo
identification
and
their
legal
names.
The
Aug.
2
injunction
hearing
took
approximately
three
hours
and
Miller
told
attorneys
for
the
FSC
and
U.S.
government
he
wanted
to
make
a
decision
“relatively
soon,”
Hymes
said
Wednesday.
The
actual
lawsuit
may
not
go
to
court
for
another
six
months
to
a
year,
he
added.
The
Free
Speech
Coalition,
which
says
it
has
gay
businesses
among
its
3,625
members,
believes
the
new
federal
guidelines
are
unconstitutional,
violate
privacy
laws
and
would
place
an
undue
burden
on
“secondary
producers,”
such
as
owners
of
personals
Web
sites
with
sexually
explicit
photos,
including
Gay.com,
Bigmuscle.com,
men4now.com
and
adam4adam.com.
Officials
with
the
popular
Craigslist.com,
an
online
classified
site
that
also
posts
some
sexually
explicit
photos,
are
aware
of
the
new
guidelines
and
are
“working
on
this
with
our
lawyers,”
said
owner
Craig
Newmark.
He
declined
further
comment.
The
government
defines
“sexually
explicit
conduct”
as
actual
or
simulated
“sexual
intercourse,
including
genital-genital,
oral-genital,
anal-genital,
or
oral-anal,
whether
between
persons
of
the
same
or
opposite
sex;
bestiality;
masturbation;
sadistic
or
masochistic
abuse;
or
lascivious
exhibition
of
the
genitals
or
pubic
area
of
any
person.”
Revisions
to
the
law,
which
were
set
to
take
effect
June
24,
were
put
on
hold
when
the
FSC
and
federal
officials
agreed
to
delay
enforcement
until
Sept.
7.
In
a
brief
filed
Aug.
1,
Assistant
U.S.
Attorney
Kurt
Bohn
argued
that
the
newly
revised
law
must
be
enforced
due
to
the
widespread
proliferation
of
child
pornography
on
the
Internet
and
that
the
new
provisions
do
not
violate
the
right
to
privacy.
“There
is
a
sizable
market
for
sexually
explicit
depictions
of
‘teens’
and
individuals
with
less
mature
physical
characteristics,”
Bohn
argues.
“In
addition
to
heterosexual
sex
and
lesbian
and
homosexual
sex
between
young-looking
performers,
these
Web
sites
included
depictions
of
[what’s]
purported
to
be
incest.”
BigMuscleBears.com
and
BigMuscle.com,
Web
sites
for
gay
men,
recently
asked
members
not
to
post
images
depicting
sexual
fluids
or
any
kind
of
anal
penetration
on
the
sites
due
to
the
revisions
in
the
federal
regulations.
Nudity
was
still
allowed,
according
to
the
statement
posted
on
the
sites,
but
members
were
advised
to
post
only
solo
images
as
part
of
a
self-policing
effort.
Adam4adam.com
includes
a
“2257”
link
allowing
members
to
report
violations
of
the
federal
regulations.
In
June,
Gay.com,
a
member
of
the
Free
Speech
Coalition,
temporarily
removed
nude
photos
but
re-posted
them
when
the
agreement
was
reached
to
delay
enforcement
until
Sept.
7.
Steven
Alexander,
Web
site
director
for
gay
male
site
m4m-usa.com
—
also
known
as
m4m4sex.com
—
said
it
would
not
remove
any
photos
despite
facing
possible
federal
prosecution.
“Sometimes
things
are
just
plain
wrong
and
someone
has
to
stand
up
and
say
no,”
Alexander
said
in
a
statement
issued
in
June.
