She could have left me out in the cold on the story about the FSC being bribed by [...]]]> Anyone who reads my blog knows that I have been critical of the FSC in the past, but I want to take this opportunity to recognize the work that Diane Duke is doing on behalf of defeating .XXX.

She could have left me out in the cold on the story about the FSC being bribed by ICMRegistry, instead she confirmed it and she did it in public, even though Stuart Lawley said it never happened.

I believe she is on the right track on this one and I hope her efforts to defeat .XXX will succeed. She is approaching it from the right perspective, gathering proof that we, as an industry do NOT support .XXX and that the pre registrations that ICM Registry claims prove support are nothing more than domain squatters and a few defensive registrations.

Helmy you fucking sell out....take note.

(FWIW my sources close to Helmy tell me that my light of truth is making him furious with me....so be it! I won't sell out this industry for a kickback from a scum sucking cunt like Stuart Lawley)

Well lets break it down...Heres the cost:

upfront $450 for FSC members(limited time $250) first 10-19 Titles is $40 per title per [...]]]> In another half baked effort to bilk more money for this completely worthless organization the FSC has decided that it needs to battle content theft.  All you have to do is shell out money to them.

Well lets break it down...Heres the cost:

upfront $450 for FSC members(limited time $250)
first 10-19 Titles is $40 per title per month.

So in addition to your FSC membership fees you if you have just 100 videos you want them to watch for you can expect to pay 250.00(once) +4000.00 (40.00x100 titles)per month. . .about 48,000.00 per year.

And as you may have guessed the FSC isn't doing ANYTHING.  They are just reselling the services of a company called vobile, at a 50% rev share I might add.  So the FSC gets half the money.  Now that leads me to wonder if this arrangement doesn't remove them from not for profit status, making them subject to taxes.

But wait! According to Diane Duke, the head brigand at theFree Speech Cabal: "tube and torrent sites (referred to as user generated content, or UGC-sites) that steal content are being put on notice and will receive take down notices."

An inquiry to vobile indicates that they don't do anything with torrent sites, only tube sites.

48K a year to send take down notices to tube sites for just 100 videos.

Now if you REALLY want a service like this, allow me to send you to the right place.

www.removeyourcontent.com  has been around for quite a while.  Eric is the owner and he is the best at it targeting both tube sites and torrent sites.  he has a rock solid track record and he will treat you fairly.

What they do:

"Removeyourcontent offers adult content producers, webmasters and distributors a unique service to fight online media piracy. If you are frustrated with online content theft and file-sharing, please consider our service to help you take back your copyrights! We fight illegal piracy at the source, the host, and rigorously pursue all hosted pirated media content. What is removed? We remove illegal copies of member videos, zip sets, torrent trackers, archived picture sets, site zips and dvd rips. We maintain a 99.3% successful removal rate world-wide. Additionally we do all the work for you including both paper and electronic infringement notices. All encountered piracy is reconciled monthly to ensure removal compliance at the source. When you join as a Removeyourcontent client, we actively pursue your stolen media being made available online. "

Included in our removal campaigns are the following:

- Rapid removal from all free file hosts such as rapidshare.com, hotfile.com, megaupload.com, netload.in, etc.
- Ability to defeat stealth, encrypted, captcha and link masking services.
- Secure online reports detailing statistics and charts for your campaign.
- Forum, tube, torrent tracker, blog and image host removals.
- Custom removal requests, projects and online help desk submissions.
- Active Google and secondary pirate keyword serp removals.
- File sharing forum removal sweeps and automated monitoring.
- Additional forums and pirate sites added upon request.
- Pirate paysite infringement and processor take downs.
- Instant removal apis for the largest tube sites.
- All niches covered including mainstream, gay, bondage, and reality.
- European and Russian language zone pirate site coverage.
- Individual broadband torrent seeder targeting (Additional charge).
- Personal law enforcement contact with both the FBI and Interpol.
- Copyright registration agreement with Law Offices of Fattorosi & Associates.

Tell Eric Mike South Sent ya!

Well yesterday was the deadline for registering opposition to that bill.

Guess who didn't bother to register opposition?  If you guessed the good old worthless Free Speech Coalition....You guessed right.

This industry is beginning to make me sick Between AIM and the FSC and the rest [...]]]> Remeber the Porn Tax bill that the FSC is so vehemently against?

Well yesterday was the deadline for registering opposition to that bill.

Guess who didn't bother to register opposition?  If you guessed the good old worthless Free Speech Coalition....You guessed right.

This industry is beginning to make me sick Between AIM and the FSC and the rest of the money sinks and two bit con artists in this biz  we really are disgustingly fucking stupid.

A new porn tax was just introduced by Assemblywoman Mary Salas of Chula Vista.  Her bill, AB 847, copies much of last year’s AB 2914 (Calderon) and exclusively targets the adult entertainment industry [...]]]>

FSC’s Lies Catch Up to Them (Again)

A new porn tax was just introduced by Assemblywoman Mary Salas of Chula Vista.  Her bill, AB 847, copies much of last year’s AB 2914 (Calderon) and exclusively targets the adult entertainment industry by trying to tax 20% of its gross receipts.

Mary Salas is a member of the Assembly Health Committee, which FSC said they met with during their March lobby day in Sacramento.  In their typical self-aggrandizing manner, FSC even went so far as to claim they met with every member of the committee personally, and each member agreed with FSC that the idea of a porn tax was both stupid and not going to go anywhere.  And yet here we are with AB 847.

Members of the Assembly Health Committee are also considering mandatory condom legislation due to the recent outbreak of HIV infections amongst performers.

On March 23^rd, I provided the names and telephone numbers of some of the important lawmakers that FSC said the met with, but who reported that FSC either did not meet with anyone in that office at all, or that no such statements were made to FSC about the viability of any porn tax.

It is now clear that FSC flagrantly misled the industry with their false reports and has spent the last several months assuring people that no porn tax would happen this year based upon pure lies.

The industry now faces a very serious threat of 20% tax as California grapples with trying to close a $21 billion budget deficit. 

Labor unions, who wield great influence in the Capitol, are expected to support AB 847 because their members are the state employees that are going to face lay offs because of the budget.  Law enforcement, which is also facing severe budget cuts, is expected to support AB 847. 

If ever a sin tax were going to pass, then this would be the year.

Oh, and here is another juicy tidbit, on FSC lobby days their new lobbyist Ignacio didn’t even have a copy of the current legislation in the packets to be handed out to lawmakers.  He only had a copy of an outdated fact sheet on previous legislation from a different year… but FSC didn’t mention any of that while they were busy patting themselves on the back for doing such a great job of not actually meeting with the right lawmakers.

Up in Sacramento the Assembly Public Safety Committee just heard a bill that would fund a law enforcements task force to go after people who pirate products such as adult videos. 

Free Speech Coalition did not support the bill.  According to the author’s office FSC has [...]]]>

Up in Sacramento the Assembly Public Safety Committee just heard a bill that would fund a law enforcements task force to go after people who pirate products such as adult videos.  Free Speech Coalition did not support the bill.  According to the author’s office FSC has done nothing at all to help the bill along, even though we all know the industry has been severely victimized by piracy.   The anti-piracy bill is AB 819 and it was introduced by Assemblyman Chuck Calderon, who is the same lawmaker that keeps trying to get porn tax legislation passed each year.  One of my earlier stories predicted that Free Speech Coalition would do nothing to help this bill because their membership *includes* people that pirate these products and steal from the rest of us.   Every year around this time, Assemblyman Calderon has introduced his porn tax legislation.  Has anyone stopped to think about the ridiculous mixed message it sends, and what lawmakers are going to think about the validity of Free Speech Coalition’s claims, that a porn tax would hurt sales and reduce revenues for people who are already being victimized by piracy, when those same people have done nothing to help the anti-piracy legislation?  That is such a stupid contradiction.   This foolish lack of any strategy, or perhaps internal pandering to a pirating portion of their membership that actually hurts the rest of the legitimate membership, is precisely why Free Speech Coalition should be shunned and replaced with people who actually care about the future financial well-being of the adult entertainment industry.

Last year, Assemblyman Paul Krekorian (from Burbank), authored Assembly Bill 1394 which authorized the seizure of counterfeit products (such as [...]]]> Things like this seem to keep coming up with Free Speech Coalition people it's time to disband this thing and create something that actually has oversight and is responsible to it's membership and to the industry.

Last year, Assemblyman Paul Krekorian (from Burbank), authored Assembly Bill 1394 which authorized the seizure of counterfeit products (such as adult movies) which violated trademark protections.  An example of this would be when some counterfeiter bought an adult DVD and then made thousands of copies to sell without paying anything to the production company.

Free Speech Coalition told their Sacramento lobbyist not to support the legislation or help it in any way because while some of their members are the legitimate production companies, some of their other members are the counterfeiters.  That is an amazing conflict of interest.

This year Assemblyman Ted Lieu has authored AB 568 to require that every building or place used to manufacture or sell known counterfeits of a registered trademark is declared a public nuisance and fines are issued against the property owner that has been allowing the illegal activity to continue.

AB 568 would create a significant deterrent to would-be counterfeiters that would greatly help out the adult entertainment industry.  Every year our movies are pirated and either sold through unauthorized sources or given out for free by services which charge a subscription fee to their customers.  In the end the legitimate producers of adult films lose business and that translates to lost jobs for all of us.

So you would think the industry’s representatives would support AB 568, right?  But when adult entertainment industry representatives were up in Sacramento for their lobby days last week, they did nothing on this bill and did not even meet with anyone from Assemblyman Lieu’s office.  Assemblyman Lieu is the Chair of and controls the Assembly Rules Committee.  The Assembly Rules Committee controls the direction of every piece of legislation, such as the big Torrico bill (AB 1082) that wants to tax all products containing harmful matter relative to being viewed by a minor.

You can barely pick up any industry news source without some mention of how Free Speech Coalition met with every lawmaker who sits on the committees that AB 1082 is going to, and all of these lawmakers said the bill was stupid and wasn’t going to be successful.

Free Speech Coalition has now said in multiple venues that they met with “every lawmaker that the bill is going to” and “all of them said the bill is stupid and isn’t going anywhere.”

So who did Free Speech Coalition meet with on the Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee that will receive and vote upon AB 1082 first?  Here are responses from those offices, and their phone number to verify the information.

The committee Chair, Assemblyman Calderon?  According to Mr. Calderon’s office Free Speech Coalition didn’t meet with him or anyone from his office, 916-319-2058.

What about the Vice-Chair, Assemblyman DeVore?  No, and they didn’t even drop off any materials.  But supporters of AB 1082 dropped off their materials, 916-319-2070.

Okay, then, what about the other voting members of the committee:
Assemblyman Beall?  No, and his office didn’t even receive a meeting request, 916-319-2024;
Assemblyman Coto?  No, they met with staff who did not commit, 916-319-2023;
Assemblywoman Harkey?  No, they met with staff who did not commit, 916-319-2073;
Assemblywoman Ma?  Yes (finally), they did meet with the lawmaker, 916-319-2012;
Assemblyman Nielsen, awaiting reply… 916-319-2002;
Assemblyman Portantino?  No, they met with staff who did not commit, 916-319-2044;
Assemblywoman Saldaña?  No, they met with staff who did not commit, 916-319-2076;

Assuming there is no mass conspiracy and these 9 offices are telling the truth, then Free Speech Coalition is 1/9th accurate in their representation of what is going on in Sacramento, or 89% wrong.  Those are not odds I favor.

So let us move onto other issues.  Then there is AB 819, by Assemblyman Charles Calderon, which would create the Intellectual Property Piracy Prevention and Prosecution Act of 2009 to go after piracy of intellectual property theft of movies, music, software, and video games.  Another big one for the adult industry.  You guessed it, no effort exerted by Free Speech Coalition or their lobbyist.

How about AB 847, again by Assemblyman Charles Calderon, which wants California businesses to collect sales tax on all of their products sold to out-of-state consumers regardless of any contract in effect which requires shipment to a contact outside of the state in compliance with existing law.  Again, there has been no contact with that office, or the Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee staff on this legislation.

So all of this boils down to one question.  What is Free Speech Coalition really doing to protect the adult entertainment industry in California? And moreover what are they doing with the money they get from members?

Because MAK6 (Diane Duke) has mentioned our lobbying firm in a derogatory manner in this forum, I would like to set the record straight on a few things as I have personal knowledge on the below.

All testimony on behalf of a client, as in the AB 2914 (Calderon) testimony before the Assembly [...]]]>

Because MAK6 (Diane Duke) has mentioned our lobbying firm in a derogatory manner in this forum, I would like to set the record straight on a few things as I have personal knowledge on the below.

All testimony on behalf of a client, as in the AB 2914 (Calderon) testimony before the Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee, is always carefully scripted and approved by the client in advance. Accordingly, my testimony was approved by FSC. After the testimony Diane Duke personally congratulated me in front of many people and stated exactly "You were excellent." Other people overheard this congratulatory remark, and for anyone in FSC to now come back and say the testimony or strategy was objectionable clearly points to other motives.

I have met Diane Duke twice in San Francisco while on FSC business, and both times she was stayed at the W Hotel on 3rd Street. Each time in Sacramento she stayed at the Sheraton. I personally don't care where she stays, or how she spends FSC money, but to say she only stayed on couches and the Holiday Inn is simply inaccurate.

Mr. Calderon's relationship with me and Capital Alliance is fine, and just the other day I carded him off of the Assembly Floor and we again met. No lawmaker is required to come off of the Floor to meet with anyone, as it is entirely discretionary.
Mr. Calderon recognizes, as the rest of us do, the only attack made was specifically on the legislation as is done in the Capitol.

Capital Alliance continues to be influential in the Capitol and elsewhere. My efforts on AB 2914 has not harmed that. The successful strategy to defeat AB 2914 was lined up more than a year prior when AB 1551 was introduced, and AB 2914’s defeat proceeded exactly as planned and predicted. That we were able to initially block the legislation by the Chair (Calderon) in his own committee is no small feat, and was largely due to the competent efforts of Association of Club Executives (ACE) of California, thus providing the icing on the cake. This large mobilization gave free press and wide visibility to our movement, as it showed their ability to organize and bring mass quantities of people to the Capitol on short notice – something only large labor union have been able to do until that day.

The last FSC Celebrate Free Speech Lobbying Days kickoff was held in the Governor’s private Press Room, which Capital Alliance arranged. In the entire history of these lobbying days prior, this had never happened and was a favor to Capital Alliance. I don’t expect FSC to enjoy such access and success again.

FSC is now indeed ineligible for representation through Capital Alliance for reasons which are unimportant to this forum. Interestingly enough a review of the recently distributed FSC Ethics & Best Practices shows some glaring omissions including honoring agreements and follow-through on commitments. Capital Alliance notified FSC of its intent to terminate them as a client in the 2nd quarter of 2008, but then reconsidered and allowed the representation to continue on a probationary status after receiving an apology from Diane Duke and a commitment to change.

Those changes did not occur, but within the probationary period FSC themselves terminated due to the content of Capital Alliance’s bimonthly articles (which were free to the client as a courtesy), in which I defended the material misrepresentations of an actress who was being publicly defamed within the industry for alleged illegal act(s), and for which I had personally reviewed the documents and had personal knowledge as to her innocence. The point of the article was for the industry to not draw unnecessary negative attention to itself while lawmakers like Calderon were looking for any reason to attack (and tax) over negative secondary effects.

In addition to creating negative exposure for itself, the adult entertainment industry misses great opportunities, such as one which was agreed to but missed by FSC to have every adult business in California mark every dollar that came through their business with a pre-designated “FSC” or “1st” or something so that over a 3-month campaign during the busiest part of the year (October, November, December), it could be publicized in the following January. People watching the January news event could pull out their wallet to find one or more marked bills which once passed through the adult entertainment industry. How better to show the public the importance of adult entertainment to California’s economy? The ball was dropped by FSC on this one entirely.

When Shelley Lubben testified on behalf of AB 2914 and claimed everyone in the industry is hooking, using drugs, spreading disease, and more, FSC blocked efforts into researching her past and discrediting her claims.

When legislation to protect trademark infringements and copyright violations was presented, the legislative records will show that FSC remained absolutely silent. Aren’t legitimate adult businesses greatly harmed by those “free” sites that steal content?

Beyond that, FSC has on numerous occasions asserted that: 1) the adult entertainment industry is not controversial to society; 2) doing research on a lawmaker who continues to attack the industry to understand weaknesses is “unethical and immoral”; and 3) the industry can stave off attacks by simply educating people.

As a political strategist who has nearly 2 decades of experience the Capital, I respectfully disagree with the political ‘logic’ of FSC; and without fail, every single Capitol person (lawmakers, staff, and lobbyists), who have learned of FSC’s political vision has laughed heartily and shook their head in disbelief. This is not the 1980’s.

Logic and reason only go so far in the Capitol. Where logic and reason fail, politicians are certainly responsive to pain, and learning about one’s opponents is valuable. Information is powerful and can stop an opponent in their tracks. Research into opponents is essential, as common sense dictates.

There are plenty of groups made up of supporters which greatly outnumber all of the adult entertainment professionals, who do not care about being educated about the legitimacy of adult entertainment businesses. Education is not enough, and adult entertainment professionals would be well served to recognize this.

Capital Alliance was successful in stopping legislation from even being introduced to outlaw the paid nude performance of anyone under 21 years of age. It also successfully defeated legislation to require mandatory blinder racks on adult printed materials, the classification of adult businesses in the same category as sex offender housing, and orchestrated the defeat of all of the tax efforts against adult entertainment. All of those lawmakers and a significant portion of their constituents find adult entertainment to be extremely controversial. Again, some common sense here.

Right now the Legislature is in Special Session as California grapples with a $40 billion budget shortfall over the next 24 months. The official Secretary of State records still show Capital Alliance as the last representatives for FSC (months ago), and as of today FSC still has no representation. Not to suggest after all this that FSC needs a lot of help, but FSC still shows me as a contributing writer to their newsletter, and I clearly am not.

I do hope FSC can pull their act together, for the sake of the adult entertainment industry, and have strongly encouraged them to seek new representation for more than 2 months now in anticipation of the Special Session. While I greatly appreciate the purpose and efforts of the adult entertainment industry, cleaving ties with FSC was like removing a millstone from around my neck. When we first accepted FSC as a client we lost a client who specifically stated they want nothing to do with the adult entertainment industry in any way. After no longer representing FSC we have picked up new clients. Despite the best efforts to educate, controversy clearly remains.

The industry needs to stick together, but would be well served to have the best leadership in place. I wish everyone well and a prosperous new year.

I think MAK is Mark Kernes but in so far as the FSC goes they are the same person, Mark will go along with thatever Diane says.  The rest of it...Right on!

they are going after piracy because it sounds good, but are they really going after piracy? The answer is no What have they done to stop Pirate Bay or any tube site or any other form of piracy? The answer is nothing.

They crow about 2257 but truth [...]]]> Ok lets separate the wheat from the chaff here

they are going after piracy because it sounds good, but are they really going after piracy? The answer is no What have they done to stop Pirate Bay or any tube site or any other form of piracy? The answer is nothing.

They crow about 2257 but truth is it was Rondee Kamins who got 2257 overturned with her own money and the FSC didnt so much as file an amicus brief.

When you ask them where the money has gone you get one of two answers...the infamous we spend it protecting the industry or if you were a member we'd tell you. Both are lies. i was a member and they wouldn't tell me and I'm not the only one. And they can never come up with anything substantive that they have accomplished.

Me run for the board of directors? Fat chance because the first thing I would do is dissolve it. Its name is synonymous with waste and ineptitude and the damage has been done over so long a period of time that it could never be undone.

They say all the board members are volunteers but I know that to be bullshit, at least at the Executive Director level. I know the salaries of a few former members, I have also seen expense reports that included ten dollar a day room service tips in Sacramento.

The FSC has been little more than a hole for the industry to dump money into, where it goes is anyones guess, they love to tell you where it didn't go, or at least where they claim it didn't go. So I get this email that was from someone inside the FSC who would be in a position to know these things and yes I believe this person.

You should too.

Our industry needs a good organization and Dave Cummings and Mark kernes would both be valuable members but it has to be an organization with vision, leadership, objectives and dedication. the FSC is NOT that organization.

"I have contacted them a few times to ask exactly what they did with the money people send them and what cases they were working on and what progress had been made. I have never seen a reply.

NEVER

Same goes for the email I have send asacp.org

Those organisations exists only for their own sake, [...]]]> Mostly from GFY

"I have contacted them a few times to ask exactly what they did with the money people send them and what cases they were working on and what progress had been made. I have never seen a reply.

Those organisations exists only for their own sake, for companies to put a banner on their site that reads "we supported XXXXX"

"The only time I hear about them in the news is when they are losing some case."

 "/step onto soapbox...
//Begin Rant....

-Loki-"

 "The FSC doesn't just fail as it pertains to adult online. I once ran a company that had 20 adult stores that were each individually FSC members, one store which I'm sure that you are familiar with Mike since I believe you frequently go to Dayton, Ohio (although the store is now owned by Deja Vu).

The woman that owned the company also made some huge donations to the FSC over the years. When we started getting harassed by local law enforcement at several of our stores, mainly the store in Dayton, Ohio, we spent hundreds of thousands of dollars fighting them in court. When the city tried to shut us down for public indecency violations as a public nuisance, a tactic that cities all over the US are using to try and close adult businesses, we contacted the FSC for help and were denied. Of course when it came time to renew our memberships we still got the postcards in the mail, but we were done with them at that point..."

 "I believe IPORN will save the FSC.

LOL

After they anounce they bought AVN in January.
Mike do u still not believe that is happening?"

 "I've gone to Sacramento on just about all of their Lobbying Days (seems like for the last 8-9 years, at least). Although Wicked films and/or DejaVu and others have sponsored some of the attendee past breakfasts and cocktail events for Legislators and their staffers, we attendees appreciate FSC and pay our own "jetting"/air fares, Super Shuttles, hotel bill, dinner/lunch, airport parking fee, etc.

Other than this post, I will not be drawn into this thread any further; I support Diane Duke (last year's XBIZ "Woman of the Year") and FSC."

"I support the FSC and proud to do so.

Given the legal climate, 2257 Regs, FCC Regs, state laws, etc., in the USA, we will all either fly together or perish together......"

__________________

I make no bones about being disgusted with the [...]]]> Funny you should ask.  I have been sitting on this for a while to check some of it out and it does appear to check out. The source is impeccable. So without further ado Angel Eyes Writes:

I make no bones about being disgusted with the Free Speech Coalition.  This is due to a number of reasons, including fiscal mismanagement and questionable use of membership money in the past which seems to be every bit as true today.    Did I nearly forget to mention that FSC takes credit for everything while doing nothing?  Well let's give them some credit here, shall we?   The FSC has had 3 Executive Directors in 3 years, and at the end of 2008 recently issued its 2007 Annual Report.  The report was created by FSC International, an unfortunate choice in names but apparently an unaffiliated company out of San Gabriel.  While the exact cost of the 4 page report (including cover) is unclear, industry professionals estimate it to be between $12,000 and $18,000 for a whole lot of nothing.   According to the report, the FSC took in nearly $1 million ($968,245) in revenues and paid out 85% of that to a bunch of vaguely named expenses which smack of slush funding for personal pampering.   Take for example the $300,000 paid for "Lobbying and alliance."  Their Washington D.C. lobbying firm The Raben Group (which has yet to do one God Damned thing except for take Executive Director Diane Duke around to some offices to make introductions), was paid a whopping $100,000 just on retainer.  The FSC's California lobbying firm Capital Alliance was paid $40,000 for the same year and they actually killed several pieces of legislation which attacked the industry.   Keep in mind that California is the single largest location for the nation's adult entertainment industry.  At the same time, California lawmakers have been attacking the industry with attempts to tax them out of existence, censoring material, excluding adult films from state grant money, prohibiting anyone under the age of 21 from performing nude, and more.   But when the most important anti-piracy legislation came up, which would have protected the industry, the FSC did nothing.   On the federal level nothing has happened since 2257, and rumor has it that while the FSC is paying D.C. triple for doing nothing, it has lost the contract for its California lobbying firm and the FSC is ineligible for reconsideration.  I'm just guessing but that usually means something really bad had to go down between them.   What happened to the remaining $160,000 that didn't go towards lobbying?  That was paid to some "alliance" efforts, such as pampering the jetsetting FSC crew and putting them up at luxury hotels every time they had to visit D.C., Sacramento, or San Francisco.  Add to that the $114,180 spent on "Management and general" (a.k.a. staff retreats and luncheons) and we have at least 30% of their entire budget spent on nothing but fluff.   Then there is the payout of $114,180 for fundraising that brought in just $41,300 from fundraising events.  Anyone who is willing to pay $2.50 to get $1 in return is stupid.     Another $144,269 is totally unaccounted for in the report.  One thing is for sure, it isn't going towards defending any of the industry leaders who are giving up their life's saving in court to fight on behalf of all adult entertainers.  The total amount spent by the FSC on legal issues was just $74,904—or less than 8% of the overall budget.   What was the total amount the FSC spent on things which provided absolutely no benefit to any of its members?  About $700,000, or 2/3 of its entire budget.   No wonder the FSC membership numbers are in the toilet as people peel off and jump ship, because it is being driven into the ground by incompetence.  The FSC should be disbanded at once and its management forever banished.