Indicted Porn Producer Plans Challenge to Obscenity Law

Stagliano commissioned but did not direct the films, he said at a sparsely attended news conference outside the courthouse after his arraignment. He was joined by local supporters, including Reason Editor Nick Gillespie. Stagliano is a longtime contributor to the libertarian Reason Foundation, the magazine’s publisher. “I love these movies” but wouldn’t subject other people to watching them, as the Justice Department has by convening a grand jury to indict him, said Stagliano, standing beside his wife and publicist, Karen Stagliano. “I shall endeavor not to disappoint” DoJ, by fighting the case all the way, he said.

Though he pleaded not guilty, Stagliano hinted that the law was broad enough to convict him. The “whole spirit and idea” of the 1973 Supreme Court ruling in Miller v. California - issued when filmed porn was viewed only in theaters and community standards made sense for judging obscenity -- “has completely changed” with the Internet, he said. Karen Stagliano told us later that her husband and the company will challenge both the obscenity allegations and the Miller test’s validity. His legal team includes veteran porn attorneys Allan Gelbard, Louis Sirkin and Paul Cambria, as well as Washington attorney Robert Corn-Revere, who was involved in Communications Decency Act litigation. A status hearing is scheduled for June 12. John Stagliano’s only experience in court was last year when Evil Angel sued successfully for copyright infringement in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, he said.

Stagliano said he was surprised to learn from us that the films in the case were available at EvilAngel.com without first going through a clean page warning visitors that the material is graphic and telling under-18s to leave the site. Such a page greets visitors to EvilAngel.com’s home page, but we reached sales pages for the films and their free trailers directly through Internet searches Sunday and Monday. The voluntary ratings system developed by the Family Online Safety Institute, formerly the Internet Content Rating Association, has been the adult industry’s major riposte to government claims that the industry needs tighter controls. EvilAngel.com and DefendOurPorn.com, created by Stagliano to give updates on his case, were down all Monday afternoon, after our midday visits.

The Staglianos were disappointed that the Free Speech Coalition declined to assist the defense, saying it wanted to focus on legislation, Karen Stagliano said. In 2005 the group led efforts to keep porn webmasters from falling under federal record-keeping requirements. We couldn’t reach anyone at the group right away. A spokeswoman for the Association of Sites Advocating Child Protection -- an adult- industry group against child porn, whose chief sits on the coalition’s board -- told us many activists were in Sacramento for the industry’s annual California lobbying day. A spokeswoman for the ACLU, which led a successful industry challenge of the Child Online Protection Act, told us its First Amendment attorneys in New York had passed on the case but didn’t know whether the Washington chapter would get involved.

It’s a little early for anyone to join Stagliano’s defense, First Amendment lawyer Lawrence Walters told us. Any obscenity case might reach the Supreme Court, he said, citing his ongoing defense of a Pennsylvania woman who published “graphic fictional tales” about torture on her Web site. Walters said other lawyers may decide to join in some capacity when he updates the First Amendment Lawyers Association on Internet-law developments at the group’s next meeting. Trade groups are likely waiting for a ruling before jumping in, he said. “There’s not much opportunity for an amicus brief” in a criminal trial, Walters said. Stagliano’s best chance to challenge the law without first going to jail is to win a motion to dismiss or suppress, followed by a government appeal, he said.