Internet
Internet

California Judges Rule Free Online Porn Legal

| by CEI

By Michelle Minton

 

A three panel judge in California concluded that adult websites that “give it away for free” are not engaging in predatory pricing. According to the ruling, websites such as Redtube – the free porn site defendant in the case — simply have a more efficient profit model and as such are not liable for the loss of revenue or customers experienced by sites that charge for adult content.

The suit, which was brought by Kevin Cammarata of Los Angeles against multiple websites providing free pornography, asserted that Redtube and other sites charged less than the product is worth, in an attempt to eliminate competition with pay sites, in violation of California’s Unfair Practices Act.

Luckily, the judges on the panel did not agree with Cammarata’s assertion.

The undisputed evidence showed that Bright obtains most of the videos it shows on Redtube free of charge from advertisers who pay Bright to display their videos containing their ads. Fundamentally, there is no difference between Redtube and a radio station in the early 1900s that broadcasted records it obtained for free from a music store and, in return, told its listeners where the records could be purchased. (See www.oldradio.com/current/bc_spots.htm; last visited Dec. 7, 2010.) In both cases the broadcaster’s purpose is not to destroy competition or a competitor but to attract patrons to its broadcast site where they will, hopefully, respond to its advertisers’ messages.


Not only did the judges find the free porn business model was fair and competitive, but they also defended free online pornography by categorizing it as protected speech.

The publication of a video on the Internet, whether it depicts teenagers playing football or adult entertainment qualifies as ‘conduct in furtherance of… free speech,” the court ruled last week. “…All of Cammarata’s causes of action arise from Bright’s conduct of placing speech on the Internet where it can be viewed for free by the public. This is the ‘predatory pricing’ that Cammarata complains of.”