The Baltimore Sun ran an article this week which quoted a Justice Department official as calling pornographers the “bad guys,” and suggesting that efforts to put adult industry professionals behind bars made his days at work worthwhile.The Baltimore Sun ran an article this week which quoted a Justice Department official as calling pornographers the “bad guys,” and suggesting that efforts to put adult industry professionals behind bars made his days at work worthwhile. Here’s the kicker: The official was referring to those who sell adult porn, not child porn! The article claimed that “32 prosecutors, investigators and a handful of FBI agents” were spending millions of taxpayer dollars to target legitimate adult companies with obscenity prosecutions in an attempt to control what consenting adults in America can see and hear in the privacy of their own homes. Connor Young spoke with First Amendment attorney Larry Walters about the obscenity threat and what adult Webmasters can do to defend themselves… and perhaps even fight back.

CY: Hi Larry, and as always, thank you for taking the time to talk with us. I assume you saw the article published by the Baltimore Sun detailing the Justice Department’s new campaign against adult pornography. What is your reaction to this article?

LGW: This confirms what I’ve been saying for over a year now. The Justice Department is just finally admitting what they’re doing. Importantly, this admission may give the industry standing to take on the government in several ways. I’ll have to withhold any additional comment on that until a future date.

CY: It seems to me that the Justice Department has gone into PR mode, leaking details of their war on pornography to the mainstream press in a calculated manner. What’s their motivation? Is this designed to possibly intimidate adult industry professionals into censoring or perhaps giving up early if they are targeted? Or do you think this has more to do with the Justice Department trying to win over public support for their campaign? And does this signal the immediacy of the threat?

LGW: I would not be surprised if Justice is trying to get as much bang for their buck as possible by leaking these details. If these leaks will scare Webmasters out of the industry without the need for expensive prosecution, so much the better from the government’s perspective. This is exactly what the government did in the online gambling advertising field. It sent out a bunch of warning letters and subpoenas, to scare media outlets away from carrying ads for online casinos and sports books, without ever prosecuting anybody. That seemed to have worked, as evidenced by yesterday’s report that Google and Yahoo have stopped carrying ads for online gambling.

CY: So I’ve heard from several sources that you are planning some sort of “top secret” strategy planning session to discuss possible responses to the federal government’s aggression towards the adult industry, especially in regard to obscenity prosecutions against adult Webmasters. Can you confirm this?

LGW: I cannot specifically confirm nor deny anything like that, but I can tell you that our firm is taking various steps to prepare for this anticipated government action and to protect our clients in any way possible.

CY: What kind of steps are you suggesting to your clients?

LGW: To answer that question would require me to get into matters protected by the attorney-client privilege, so all I can say is that we are evaluating all defensive and offensive options at this point so that our clients are informed and advised of all their options.

CY: Offensive options? Now that’s music to my ears; it seems the adult industry is always on the defensive. Are you suggesting that there is something we can do before Webmasters are hit with obscenity charges?

LGW: There are all kinds of things that Webmasters can do to lower their risk of prosecution, and build in some defenses in the event that they are prosecuted. And yes, there may also be some preemptive actions that should be evaluated at this point.

CY: Can you give us any hints?

LGW: I would prefer not to get into any of those details. At this point I can only say that the adult industry should look at what other industries have done when they’re in the crosshairs of government prosecution, and evaluate all their options.

CY: I certainly understand the need to be discreet at this point. Do you plan to release any of this information in the near future?

LGW: The attorney-client privilege ensures that all strategy discussions and communications are kept confidential and thus I cannot ethically reveal any such information at this point. In the event formal action is taken in the future, news will likely spread like wildfire as it usually does in this industry.

CY: What about this reported meeting of all the First Amendment lawyers in Chicago later this month, what can you tell us about that? What do you guys talk about at these things?

LGW: That’s also something I would prefer not to comment about.

CY: Okay, so clearly you can’t talk very much about any industry plans to fight back legally, and that makes perfect sense… but a lot of smaller Webmasters are feeling pretty powerless right now, so I’m looking for anything positive to tell them. Is there something that Webmasters can do to help the industry fight back against the Justice Department’s witch hunt?

LGW: Get politically active. Join groups or form one. Support candidates that support Free Speech. Oppose legislation that infringes on First Amendment rights. Sign petitions: E.g., www.StopFCC.com. Hire competent counsel. Have your content reviewed. Incorporate age verification devices. Watch your links. Comply with 2257 to the letter. Post a good set of terms & conditions. Set aside some money for legal defense.

CY: How urgent is the current political climate? Any other ideas Webmasters can incorporate to protect themselves from obscenity charges… perhaps types of content to avoid?

LGW: As much as I would like to, I cannot give legal advice in this forum. That being said, I would suggest that all Webmasters place a renewed emphasis on legal compliance issues, and make sure that they have their Web sites reviewed by a competent First Amendment attorney. War is upon us.

CY: It certainly looks that way. Thanks again Larry for your time and for your commitment to the adult industry. We’re all better off for having you in our corner.

Interview conducted by Connor Young. Connor is Editor in Chief of YNOT News and TheAdultWebmaster.com. Attorney Larry Walters can be reached at larry@lawrencewalters.com.