lawsuits, outing, gay blog, gay news

Corbin Fishergate: We’re LIBERATING Gays By Suing Them

lawsuits, outing, gay blog, gay news
Corbin Fishergate: A massive clusterf**k

Another day, another episode in the ongoing Corbin Fishergate scandal. If you’re just joining the party, catch up here:

Good? Good. A UB reader sent us another ridiculous email from the porn company, telling us “This is an e-mail Corbin Fisher sent me when I told him my feelings about his current actions that could cause teen suicides.”

“Thank you for taking the time to write. We appreciate your concern over the issue at hand. The well-being of gay teens is an important issue to us, and one we take seriously enough to contribute significant amounts of money, time, resources and energy to non-profit organizations dedicated to anti-bullying and safe-schools campaigns, support groups and systems for gay teens, gay civil rights campaigns and efforts, and more.

Your concern is precisely why we’re disappointed that this issue has been manipulated and misdirected by bloggers who have chosen to create controversy where there is none. Who stands to gain from tying the serious issue of gay teen suicide to a company’s attempt to protect its content? The company itself? Or a blog that can now use a powerful brand name in conjunction with a hot-button issue to generate attention and traffic for themselves?

Um. We’re going to go with “The company itself,” seeing as how you’re the ones blackmailing people into give you $1900 to avoid being sued. Unicorn Booty doesn’t need the “cache” of being associated with a gay porn studio, thanks. We’re already one of the top gay blogs in the world, a trusted source of gay news, and followed by 40,000 people on Facebook. Check your hubris. We inform the gay community about news affecting them. You make porn.

When this issue first arose, we consulted with experts to determine if any risk actually existed to to closeted gay teens. After speaking to a number of mental health professionals, including a nationally-known expert on sexuality, sexual health, and mental health, we were assured of several things, including:

A) “Independent events” are virtually never responsible for suicides. Suicides take place when long-term conditions and suffering (in 90% of cases, combined with a mental health issue such as severe depression or mental illness) exist.

B) “Being outed” more often than not, serves to actually RELIEVE individuals of the stresses, anxieties, and fears that might contribute to someone’s being at risk.

It is the proverbial Closet that is toxic, not the process of coming out of it. Among our gay employees are many stories of individuals who greatly feared disastrous consequences if they were outed. Regardless of the circumstances behind their coming out, (which, in some cases were quite unpleasant or involuntary), it proved to be a fully liberating, reaffirming moment and changed their lives for the better. This is an aspect of coming out that the blogs have chosen not to focus on.

Correct. We are choosing to instead focus on the fact that you are threatening lawsuits and blackmail upon people; including at-risk gay teens, closeted gays, and straight women falsely accused of stealing your content because IP addresses are not a legal or accurate identifier. The fact that you are spinning your company’s PR catastrophe as a “liberating, reaffirming” experience for the people you are suing does little to change our focus. Jeez.

Of course, it is not our role or duty to out anyone. It is our duty to protect our content and ensure that the material we produce is protected. That protection extends beyond simple piracy. It is our duty to keep our content out of the hands of minors. Piracy takes that ability away from us. Corbin Fisher goes out of its way to ensure that no underage individual can access its content legally. We employ numerous age-verification solutions and technologies to make sure that any individual who accesses our material legally is an adult. If not for the illegal reproduction and distribution of our videos – the precise crimes being committed by those 40,000 targets of our suit – not a single underage, closeted individual could possibly be at risk.

Hi. Me again. Just a straight up “no” to all that rubbish. While it’s nice to see the company admit it’s putting underage, closeted individuals at risk, if Corbin Fisher wanted to truly eliminate that risk, they would simply enhance the security measures employed to keep content from being shared. Like say, watermarking digital copies of their films with each individual downloader’s account number or name. They would then know exactly who is sharing what, and would be able to put the kibosh on that practice immediately.

Perhaps the title of these blog entries should be, “Do content thieves and those stealing and illegally distributing adult material put closeted, gay teenagers at risk?” That you wrote to us is evidence of your concern for the plight of closeted young people everywhere. We appreciate your concern and hope our response alleviates that concern. We are quite confident in saying that there is no cause for such concern in this particular situation. We wonder if the bloggers who are manipulating peoples’ sensitivities and stirring up controversy where the facts, statistics and evidence quite clearly state there is none, can say the same.

All the best, and regards, The employees of Corbin Fisher

Let’s just get right into this. I would argue that file-sharing is not what’s putting teens at risk here. I think I’ve belabored the point now that it is predominantly those without access to credit cards or checking accounts that appear most likely to get their porn from file-sharing. Likewise, file-sharing also allows underage users to skirt around adding gay porn url’s to the browsing history of shared family computers that mom and pop may check. A torrent can be safely downloaded to a USB drive without ever setting off “child protection” alarms many parents employ.

Like it or not, the torrents that are already out there and are being passed around on the internet are there forever. There’s no taking something back from the internet. Corbin Fisher will bankrupt itself through legal counsel bills before it successfully eliminates the sharing of its films that are already available online.

This isn’t “blog controversy.” This is simply acknowledgement of the digital age we live in. With that said, it’s remarkable that Corbin Fisher is painting gay blogs and file-sharers as the assailants draining the company of profits, rather than the overwhelming amount of free porn available on the internet. “Amateur” porn is the most viewed and searched for type in the industry. The days of porn studio juggernauts peaked long ago. The fact that we are witnessing these lawsuits is proof. If the company were still making money hand-over-fist like it used to, there would be little need to begin prosecuting file-sharers.

Lawsuits are time consuming, a drain on resources, and clearly subject to massive criticism that companies are unable to spin in their own favor. Suing your fans in order to meet financial projections is hardly the route a company prefers to go. It’s like blowing up entire mountains in order to access dirty coal inside when all of the easy to access oil has been drilled out of the ground already. Corbin Fisher isn’t suing users because they want to stay on top. The golden age of porn has already ended and they just don’t realize it yet.

But hey, at least they are using a PR-friendly form response and have stopped cursing at their concerned fans. Progress is a process, I hear.

For what it’s worth, the reader who sent us this email wasn’t buying it either.

It’s nice that he will be “liberating” these teens, right?

My biggest issue is with this is he doesn’t take into account that MANY gay teenagers are already suffering from depression and many already have suicidal thoughts. All they need is something…oh…like a lawsuit to push them over the edge.

This is no ordinary outing. This is an outting with a lawsuit. Even the most liberal parent will not react calmly.


  • “We inform the gay community about news affecting them. You make porn.” favorite quote.

  • Thank you kindly!

  • Anonymous

    “Regardless of the circumstances behind their coming out, (which, in some cases were quite unpleasant or involuntary), it proved to be a fully liberating, reaffirming moment and changed their lives for the better.”

    Your “data” is obviously skewed by the fact that they all *survived* the ordeal, Mr. Fisher. How many families of suicide victims have you talked to, sir, to get the other side of the story?

    Tyler Clementi, remember him? He killed himself after being outed by his roommate at Rutgers. Clearly, he had not found it to be a liberating experience. There are many other names I could list here, the gay community knows these kids by heart now, kids who killed themselves either because they were outed or because they were bullied afterward. No liberation, for any of them.

    And you must know about the many teens who are homeless either because they ran away from a violent home or were forced out. If you contribute to that, all you’ll be liberating those kids from is clothing, food and shelter.

    It’s easy to listen only to the happy stories, Mr. Fisher. But they do not represent everyone, and I believe you know it.

  • Anonymous

    Are we really supposed to believe that CF is going to sue 40,000 simultaneously? Even if CF goes to an ISP with an IP address and then demands they divulge the owner of the address, don’t most ISPs require court orders before complying? That’s an awful lot of court orders.

    I don’t doubt that CF has 40,000 IP addresses. What I doubt is that they have the time or resources to launch a full-scale attack on torrent users. They’re waving around this massive number just to scare people. The 20 or so people who have paid up probably saw the 40,000 number and said, “Holy shit! 40,000? They’ve got me!”

    This smells like extortion.

  • Well said !

  • m

    i dunno. if we’re talking about “hubris” i think you need to include yourself in that, unicornbooty. you consider yourself as presenting news and such but it’s obvious you’re not capable of objectivity or full honesty. i find this whole issue as interesting as many others, which is why i like keeping up with what goes on and how i ended up at this site in the first place (and actually it was from doing a search for “corbin fisher” on twitter). but the way in which u misrepresent things in your titles and take quotes and words out of context? i’d have less of a problem with it if you just out and said “its his my personal blog where i rant and rave about this and that” but that you repeatedly try and call yourself pretty much a journalist and doing investigating and blah blah blah is kinda lame.

    and you say they’re misdirecting their efforts by not going after the free porn on the net. THEY ARE! lol. this whole deal is precisely that! but then people like you freak out about it.

    just looking at some of the stuff you say…
    “We are choosing to instead focus on the fact that you are threatening lawsuits and blackmail upon people; including at-risk gay teens, closeted gays, and straight women falsely accused of stealing your content because IP addresses are not a legal or accurate identifier.” you dunno of any of those people are involved. you SUSPECT they MIGHT be, which is the basis for all this. but you cant say for sure there are.

    “Corbin Fisher wanted to truly eliminate that risk, they would simply enhance the security measures employed to keep content from being shared.”
    i just got a quick question for you… do you think the people stealing the vids are AT ALL responsible?! even sharing just a lil of it?! or not at all? sorta a “well if its there then of course people gotta right to take it!” kinda deal?

    “I think I’ve belabored the point now that it is predominantly those without access to credit cards or checking accounts that appear most likely to get their porn from file-sharing.” again u dunno that. thats an assumption you’re making. i got plenty of friends who have credit cards, r out, got money, etc who download stuff on torrents or wherever else. so u really have to basis for that assumption

    i love lots of your other posts where you stick to being more of a writer rather than someone who considers themselves a journalist. but i think u should at least admit that what u r operating off is ur own opinions and assumptions.

  • Sonic

    This isn’t a news site. It’s a blog which presents news that the blogger wants to blog about in the way the blogger wants to blog about. It’s what blogs are.

  • Amen!

  • M’s Yahoo profile is even registered from Tampa, Florida, where the Corbin Fisher videos are filmed. I just can’t get over how completely obvious and lacking in sophistication this company is. Jeez.

  • Anonymous

    Douchebags. Pure and simple.

  • m

    then unicornbooty should quit using phrases like “our article” and “ongoing coverage” and “our reporting” and “trusted resource for news”. its kinda obvious to me unicornbooty likes to think of themselves as a journalist. “trusted resource for our own opinions about news” maybe.

  • Liz Cohen

    First off, might I suggest a grammer class. Just reading your response with it’s substitution of common words such as ‘you’ makes you seem less intelligent.
    Second off, if you don’t like what you are reading, then don’t read it. Quit being a jerk.
    Third, Unicorn Booty’s points are quite valid. The chances that Corbin Fisher is going to out a gay teen or adult is so outrageously high that it must be addressed. The possibility that some one could end their own life because it became public that they were being sued for watching gay porn illegally is horrifying.

    By the way, way to be hypocritical by telling them to stop operating off their own opinions. And in reference to the people who were down loading the material illegally. I can pretty much guarantee you that you have at sometime in your life, broken a copy write, so get down from your high horse and stop acting like you are better then anyone else.

  • Ellizabeth

    Honestly, it’s the same for any other news source. There is no such thing as objective journalism anymore.

  • m

    That doesn’t make it right.

  • m

    hm… see personally i think CF tried to be a little too nice and warm fuzzy with that. i think they shoulda just said “eff you!” lol. cuz really how is it their fault at all if someone gets outed? first someone had to break the law by taking the vids and posting em online. then someone had to break the law by illegally downloading em. all CF is doing is enforcing the law yet getting hit with a sh*storm cuz of it. And I think that e-mail they sent is great and all and has some good points but if i was the i woulda just said “screw you” lol.

    because it’s really a lose-lose for them. they are a popular porn company who cares about PR. everyone else is just random commenters or bloggers who can say anything they want. a blogger can be like “kids will die kids will die!!!” how do you argue against that?! its impossible. even tho the blogger doesn’t actually have to prove anyones gonna die. “well, proof means someone died!! AHHH!!!” ok see that’s not too fair either. I can say “gay porn causes AIDS!!!” and i don’t have to prove it. “Show me the proof! you’ll ask. “It’s coming! You’ll see!”, i’ll respond. “But you have no evidence!”, you’ll say. “The evidence will be person with AIDS! is that what you want?! Do you want that?!?!”, I’ll respond. “No, i don’t want it. I just don’t think it’ll happen”. “But the only way to be *sure* is to get rid of all gay porn!” i say. Winner winner chicken dinner!

    “Gay marriage will lead to people marrying robots and animals!” I’ll say. “That’s not true! That’s absurd!” you’ll respond. “It’ll happen!” I’ll say. “Prove it!” you’ll say. “The proof will come when it’s too late!!!” I can respond. yay me. I don’t have to prove it, i just gotta say it’ll happen. If it doesn’t happen tomorrow? well I can say it *will* happen sometime. Not this year? “Next year! the year after! all it takes is one person marrying a robot at any time in the future! and then it’s too late!”. “But that’s not fair” you say. “So?! the only way we can be 100% sure gay marriage doesn’t lead to robot animal marriage is by not allowing gay marriage!!”

    “That gay teacher is gonna rape his students!!” I’ll say. “What!? That’s silly. How do you know that?!” you’ll respond. “It’ll happen!” I’ll say. “But you can’t prove that!”, you’ll respond. “My proof will be when a little kid gets raped! Is that what you want?! Do you WANT kids to get raped?! the only way we can be sure that gay teacher doesn’t rape his students is by not allowing him to teach!” I can respond.

    “Teenagers are gonna kill themselves cuz of this lawsuit!!” you say. “I don’t think they will”, I respond. “Oh, they will! any risk is too much!” you’ll say. “But… how do we know there’s any risk?!” i ask. “We’ll know when a kid kills himself! And then it’s your fault!” you say back at me. “that don’t make sense” i say, while looking confused. “the only way to be sure a gay kid doesn’t kill himself for begin sued is to not sue him!” you say. hrmmm..

    it’s an impossible argument. lol. same kinda argument right wing nuts use when they say we’ll give their kids AIDS or rape em or gay marriage leads to bestiality or gay adoption makes kids gay yada yada. cuz you get to play that pity card of “once it happens it’s too late!!!”. So CF has to prove they won’t kill any gay kids, and unicornbooty gets to say they will. and when no kid dies today? unicornbooty says it’ll happen tomorrow. when it doesn’t happen tomorrow? there’s always the day after! if we wake up 20 years from now and it never happened? “2032!! or maybe we just haven’t heard of it! and it already has!! AHHH!”. “But I still don’t think it will” CF says. “But it *might*! and *might* is too horrible, so that means you’re evil!!”.

    so ya, if i was CF i woulda saved myself the hassle of that big fancy email and just said, to quote unicornbooty, “Ex-skyoooze me?!” lol

  • m

    OK firstly, the proper spelling is “grammar”. And there is no apostrophe in the possessive form of “its”. And your second sentence in the second paragraph isn’t an actually sentence. We’ll let starting it with a conjunction slide because that’s an archaic rule anyways. But where’s the rest of it? You know what’s even more prolific on the internet than illegal downloads? People focusing on grammar to refute someone’s arguments, while using bad grammar themselves. CF would have 40,000,000 IPs if they were suing people for that. lol.

    That the chances are “outrageously” high is what is up for debate, I think. We dunno if those chances are high. If I broke a copyright, and got caught, I’d not blame the person who caught me. It’d be my own fault. If you get arrested for committing a crime, it’s not the cop’s fault you were arrested, nor is it the cop’s fault you go to court. It’s not the court’s fault you went to jail. It’s not the guard’s fault you didn’t like jail.

  • Sonic

    “even tho the blogger doesn’t actually have to prove anyones gonna die”

    How do you prove something that hasn’t happened? I can quote you statistics and I can show you stories, such as Tyler Clementi who killed himself after being outted. Out of 40,000 people, some of them are teenagers. Some of them are closeted. And some of them are suffering from depression. The likelyhood of this NOT being true is slimm

  • Sonic

    Corbin’s own lawyer admits himself that there are a number of people in this group of 40,000 who are closeted teenagers who are likely to do harm to themselves. His attitude is that he simply doesn’t care. So stop bashing bloggers for bringing this up when Marc Randazza admits to it

  • m

    thats precisely the point. You can’t prove it. So it’s super convenient for the person who says it’s gonna happen. How can we prove gay marriage isn’t going to lead to people marrying animals? How can we prove gay porn itself doesn’t kill people? Or that gay teachers aren’t gonna molest kids? How can unicornbooty prove there are “at-risk gay teens, closeted gays, and straight women” on that list? Do they have the list but haven’t shared it with the rest of us? How can unicornbooty prove it’s “predominantly those without access to credit cards or checking accounts that appear most likely to get their porn from file-sharing”? they can assume it and guess it. and i’ll admit it’s not totally unreasonable. but they can’t prove it. they have no evidence of that. i could say “it’s predominantly those who simply choose not to pay!”. reasonable.

    So you’re 100% fully convinced some teenager is gonna die here… but how?!? Cuz you get to make that statement with no support and if someone tries to dispute it you just go “Murderer!!! Careless heartless teen-killer!!!”.

  • Sonic

    “How can unicornbooty prove there are “at-risk gay teens, closeted gays, and straight women” on that list?”

    Take a child psychology class. It is not at all uncommon for teenagers to have suicidal thought. The number of teenagers who are likely to actually attempt suicide are MUCH higher among gay teens. Nobody is saying “suicides WILL happen!!!” They are going by statistics and their own experiences as people who were once gay teens and knowing the difficulty that can bring WITHOUT the threat of law suits or being outted in such a way.

  • Sonic

    So it’s not that “SUICIDES WILL HAPPEN!!!” It is “The likelihood of suicides happening dramatically increase if such outtings occur.”

  • m

    BTW i’m not disputing there’s a *chance*. there’s a chance of a lot of things. there’s a chance something happens and a chance nothing happens. there’s a chance all 40,000 of those IPs belong to old rich men. there’s a chance they all belong to lesbian women (anyone seen “The Kids Are Alright”? apparently lesbians like gay porn!). There’s a chance unicornbooty stole a buncha CF videos from torrents and so is making all this controversy up in hopes they drop their suits so they don’t get busted lol. i didn’t say they did! i said there’s a chance. there’s a chance you stole a ton and so are only saying all this stuff cuz you want them to drop their suits. there’s a chance I have a 10” penis. “Prove it!” you say. “I don’t have to. But until I show anyone, it might be true!”. There’s always “a chance”. If unicornbooty wasn’t so definitive in their statements i wouldn’t mind. But they make some pretty definitive statements with no support. apparently unicornbooty has like superhuman powers and so knows its “predominantly those without credit cards or checking accounts”. if they said “there’s probably some” that’s one thing. but to say they have any grounds to say “predominantly”?! they’re so convinced of that they even think they’ve “belabored” the point and have no obligation to support it. “i said it over and over again so it must be true!” in other words lol.

    oh and btw unicornbooty says its easier to download than view it on a website. personally i think its easier to view it on a website and then just reset your browser. cuz if you download it may show up in the download history list, in your download folder, and if you view it on a player like WMP or Quicktime it shows up in that program’s history. and if you view it in itunes it imports the file to itunes. So IMO it’s way harder to hide downloads. plus you gotta explain why you got the torrent client on your computer in the first place, and make sure you clear the history there and hide your upload/download directory.

  • Sonic

    Do you know what the definition of an “article” is? I didn’t know only journalists who work for actual news organizations (such as CNN or New York Times) could write articles. There is nothing on this BLOG that misleads anybody to believe it is anything more than a BLOG. And just because it is a BLOG doesn’t mean information found here can’t be true.

  • Sonic

    Then why don’t you blog about it?

  • Sonic

    Then why don’t you blog about it?

  • Sonic

    Then why don’t you blog about it?

  • Adam Kuglin

    Who wants to bet that “m” works for Corbin Fisher or a company they’ve hired to comment-bomb Unicorn Booty and make it seem like there’s public support for this nonsense? Who wants to bet that “m” will vehemently deny this?

  • m

    lol lots of people are saying it WILL happen. You said it. You told everyone to email Equality FL to say they and CF “will be adding to the gay teen suicide rate”. You also said, “But you can BET a suicide WILL happen!” I didn’t even add the ALL CAPS to the “BET” there. that was you.

    So… yeah. lol.

    “But you can BET a suicide WILL happen!” > “Nobody is saying “suicides WILL happen!!!”

    And that was just yesterday.

  • Sonic

    I would say that “m” is probably Marc Randazza but his language isn’t filthy enough

  • Sonic

    Or does “m” stand for Marc…..oooooooooo

  • Sonic

    Hey, “m” is from Tampa, Florida.

    CorbinFisher’s house is 7015 Lithia Woods Court, Tampa, Florida

  • Look, isn’t the solution to this mess for CF to pledge to discreetly check each defendant prior to filing suit, and to not proceed with a suit against any gay youth who are closeted or in a vulnerable position?

    Right now, all CF has is some IPs. It will have to subpoena the downloaders’ ISPs to get the names and addresses of the account holders. Assuming CF gets that far, it could at that point run a search in specialized databases like Intelius and determine if there are any teenage males at the address provided by the ISP. If not, it can proceed to sue.

    But if there are male teens in the house, then it should make discreet contact with them to determine if they are the downloaders (which is likely to be the case) and what their circumstances are. At that point, these teens could be given a stern warning or perhaps asked to settle for a small amount like $100, just to make a point. But no suits against vulnerable youth.

    It seems to me this would let CF protect its content, avoid wasting time suing teens who have no money, and would honor the obligation of all gay people, including CF, to protect gay youth from unnecessary harm. If they handle this properly, they can turn an annoying controversy into a PR bonanza.

  • Sonic

    Should we just refer to “m” as Marc?

  • m

    lol. so you can say the 40,000 downloaders are “predominantly” gay teens and be convinced that’s true, but in a city of millions of people anyone from tampa must be corbin fisher. mmhmm. convenient for you!

  • m

    who’s to say unicornbooty didn’t just steal a buncha CF videos so wants to get em to drop the suits by stirring up controversy? who’s to say anything? or oh sorry are we all supposed to drink the unicornbooty koolaid? if anyone disagrees they must be a plant?

  • Sonic

    Well you just seem to make the same arguments as what has been coming from CF and Marc Randazza AND you come from the same city AND you share the same first initial as Marc Randazza. Sooo….maybe you on CF’s payroll. Maybe you’re not. But it does raise an eyebrow

  • m

    ohh ok so you’re from CA which is where is AND u ur name starts with an “S” and ends in a “C” like SC for seancody so OMG youre a plant from one of their competitors who is just here to make em look bad and talk trash! lol. Or your s/n is “sonic” like “Sonic the Hedgehog” and “Hedgehog” is a nickname for the pornstar Ron Jeremy (who lives in CA) who has been accused of being a homophobe so u must be Ron Jeremy and ur just on here to make gay porn companies look bad!

  • Sonic

    That is something Marc Randazza would TOTALLY say!

  • m

    Here is something you might say: “Nobody is saying “suicides WILL happen!!!”

    One day after you said: “But you can BET a suicide WILL happen!”


  • Sonic

    Marc, what I meant to say is “But you can BET a suicide WILL likely happen!”

  • Adam Kuglin

    Ahem… toldjya.

  • m

    UnicornBooty… I have to ask… are you familiar with “suicide contagion”? Or “copycat suicide”?

    It suggests that when depressed youth read about others committing suicide (or see reports on the media), it might encourage them to commit suicide as well.

    Queerty posts about it here:

    Given the existence of such a phenomenon, there is a chance your blog posts about gay teen suicides might actually encourage another gay teen to kill themselves. Is it a big chance? Who knows. But there definitely is, to use your own words, “ANY CHANCE. Any chance is too high.”

    Your post here: did not follow the CDC’s recommended guidelines on reporting teen suicides. It’s possible to assume such a post would create “any chance”.

    Your post here: didn’t follow the CDC’s recommended format. What’s more, you prematurely and incorrectly blamed Lundsten’s death on suicide (and yes, you did retract it). But you did blame an unrelated death on “unbearable bullying”, when it turned out to be a heart condition instead (tragic nonetheless, but not suicide).

    The CDC has suggestions on how to prevent suicide contagion.

    It suggests avoiding “presenting simplistic explanations for suicide”. It also suggests that “engaging in repetitive, ongoing, or excessive reporting of suicide” might actually encourage suicides (such as repeated – and even erroneous – articles about every teen suicide you hear about). It says it is bad to “present suicide as a tool for accomplishing certain ends” – such as a tool for getting out of a lawsuit or to avoid being outed. It also cautions against “glorifying suicide or persons who commit suicide” – such as one is doing by claiming they are martyrs and what not.

    I certainly don’t expect you to avoid any articles about suicide, and the recent cases of gay teen suicides were tragic and should get some attention.

    But, given the above… would you not agree that there is “ANY CHANCE” each article you post about a teen’s suicide might lead to the suicide of another teen? The CDC seems to think so. Suicide contagion/copycat suicide is an acknowledge phenomenon. And yet you still post about it. You even make what turn out to be erroneous posts about suicide, when in fact the young person died of totally different causes.

    Beyond just theory, every single post you’ve made about a teen’s tragic suicide had the chance to cause another suicide by contributing to the suicide contagion phenomenon. It could have led to another teenager killing themselves.

    Big chance it’d happen? Who knows. The CDC and many experts say that chance is very real. Huge chance? Likely? I dunno. “ANY CHANCE”? Most definitely. And, as you say, “any chance is too high”.

    Will you apply the same standard to yourself as you do to Corbin Fisher? Will you not report on future teen suicides? Do you accept that there is even the slightest chance you have contributed to a past suicide? Do you apply the “ANY CHANCE” standard to yourself, just as you would assign it to others?

    Somehow, I doubt it. And Queerty clearly doesn’t, either. Much easier to dish it out than take it.

  • m

    hm dunno how a porn company could “make discreet contact” with teen males in the house without that raising a whole new mess. plus how do they even ask for a small amount to settle? with a teen?
    plus everyones saying “go after the uploaders!” im curious what people would propose if it turned out there was some closeted teen who was actually the most active of all the infringers and doing the most damage. are they still just the innocent victim? what determines how someone is really at fault? just a few downloads here and there? or the source of tons of files? or just their age or whether they’re out or not?

  • These are all fair questions. Let me take a crack at answering them. Before I do that, I just wanna say that if it is true that you are actually CF or a CF employee, I think your latest 60K donation to Equality Florida is really awesome. You deserve much praise for this and other donations. Other gay porn companies should be following your example.

    Now the questions. Sorry this is so long. It just got away from me.

    An effort to screen out vulnerable teens would be a voluntary, humanitarian gesture on CF’s part, not formally a part of the litigation, so there is no special rulebook to follow. CF would make discreet contact the same way one would do so if no legal action were pending. If Intelius or another database can provide the email address or cellphone number of the teen, CF could email or call his cell. If that isn’t an option, then CF could simply place an informal call to the house, without identifying itself or divulging the purpose of the call to anyone but the teen. Just a thought: CF might have one of its younger employees handle this.

    Might this carry some risk of raising suspicion on the part of a parent? Perhaps, but if the alternative is filing the lawsuit – which carries a 100% chance of outing the teen and publicly linking his name to a gay sex tape – then the slight risk of raising suspicion in some cases should not be a deterrent.

    As far as your questions about degree of culpability, “innocent victims” etc., I think the answer is pretty simple. Assuming these teens really did download illegally, then none are innocent victims and they are all culpable, regardless of the number of videos downloaded.

    If CF were to choose not to sue, it would NOT be b/c it is endorsing the idea that a few downloads are OK. It would refrain from suing vulnerable teens not in acquiescence to the downloading, but as an act of compassion and grace for gay youth in perilous circumstances. I think the gay media and gay porn consumers would see that as a fundamentally decent approach, and CF would garner well-earned good will and avoid the long-term public relations nightmare that plagued the RIAA. And, of course, CF could still pursue all of its suits against the grown-ups.

    Finally, would it matter if a closeted teen also turned out to be a big uploader? I think reasonable people could disagree on this, and this interesting hypothetical, which may not exist in any of the 40000 cases, should not be a reason to reject the overall approach of screening out vulnerable teens.

    But if I had to answer directly, I would say that IMO he kid’s status as a big uploader would be relevant to the extent that it might cast some doubt on his claim to be closeted. I would think that a closeted kid would be less likely to leave numerous gay vids in an open, shared folder over a long period of time. So I would think CF would question that kid more closely about his circumstances. But other than that, I don’t think it would be relevant. The uploader would be culpable just as the infrequent downloaders are culpable. He would have caused more harm to CF and be on the hook for greater damages, but CF has said that collection of damages is not what this is all about and in any event, the teen wouldn’t be able to pay them. I think CF could read him the riot act, get an assurance that all sharing will end and all videos taken down immediately, and warn him that if he is found to be sharing again, CF will sue w/ no mercy.

  • Anonymous

    Brian – What are the legal implications of ANY business, gay porn or otherwise, initiating contact with a minor child without their parents consent? As a mother, I’d hit the roof if I found out representatives of any company, like Apple or Sony, anybody, were calling or emailing my child, unsolicited, for any reason.

  • m posts as BJ and bj85 on Queerty.

  • m

    And still no response to this one. And here I made it a point to check and double-check my “grammer” and everything.

    Suicide contagion is a proven fact, to the point the CDC even has recommendations on how stories of suicides should be covered to minimize potential harm to young people – recommendations unicornbooty did not follow in their dramatic posts about suicides (well, actually, their dramatic post about suicides and what turned out to not be a suicide, but yet was falsely and dramatically presented as such when unicornbooty chose to jump to conclusions).

    We don’t need to speculate on the numbers here. Suicide contagious exists and is very real. And yet clearly that doesn’t dissuade unicornbooty from adding their voice to sensationalist media coverage, not does it encourage them to be mindful of how they cover it.

    “ANY CHANCE”, unicornbooty. Any chance.

  • I am not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV. 🙂 But I have never heard that there is some sort of generic prohibition on communicating with a minor, unless the communication is for some illegal purpose. So I suppose of CF were calling minors in order to sell them porn, that would raise an issue. But of course, that is not what we are talking about.

    In the scenario we are talking about, CF would be on the verge of sending a communication in the form of a complaint, which it unquestionably has the right to do w/o first checking with the defendant’s parents. So it seems fairly obvious that if CF can sue Minor X, then CF can communicate with Minor X to determine if it wants to give Minor X a break. As I say, I am not a lawyer, but if there are any further wrinkles to communicating with minor downloaders, I have no doubt that Marc Randazza can promptly identify them for CF and instruct them accordingly.

    I don’t know how old your kid is, but if he is a teen and he goes on the net or he has a cell phone or he shops in stores w/o you present, then he is likely receiving communications of all sorts. That really shouldn’t make you hit the roof. IMHO, you should hit the roof if someone contacts your child to harm or exploit him in some way. But if Apple emails him to tell him about the latest iPhone features or if Sony sends him unsolicited information about the Playstation 3, I wouldn’t see that as a roof-hitting event, so long as he knows the rules about buying things w/o your permission.

  • Can you send us a link to this, Sonic?

  • m

    Still no response from unicornbooty on how their own (in one instance false and later disproven) posts about gay teen suicides risk contributing to or creating the very real risk – studied, researched, acknowledged and outlined by many experts and the Centers for Disease Control – of suicide contagion. “ANY CHANCE”, unicornbooty. “Any chance is too high”. You see others generating “any chance”, but won’t acknowledge your own doing the same.

  • That’s deflection, it doesn’t work. Insisting that someone else is in the wrong when your company’s actions are called into question does not address the fundamental complaint and is little more than a cynical attempt at removing a growing burden that’s drawn the ire of the LGBT community. If your goal, Mr. Randazza, is to heap blame on someone else, you should not do so in the course of digging your own hole deeper.

    Word to the wise.

  • “blaming CF for the entire situation instead”? You seem to be pushing hard on this meme that criticism of tactics is the same as criticizing the entire company. “We don’t like your tactics” isn’t the same as this notion you have of the UB staff saying “why, EVERY porn clip should be free!”

  • Sonic

    Even Logo is calling on people to boycott Corbin Fisher

  • Sonic

    Even Logo is calling on people to boycott Corbin Fisher

  • Anonymous

    Well this is going off topic, but since you went there, I have a huge problem with companies seeking my child out by phone or email for marketing purposes that he did not request. Just like I don’t want unsolicited emails or phone calls from marketers myself. If he wants something from a company, he can seek out their services himself. Goodness knows kids are already bombarded by marketing just making their way around in the world – they don’t need it pursuing them into their homes. But that’s just me, I have no issue with your disagreement.

  • Anonymous

    Sonic, is there a link? I’d love to read about it!

  • Suggestion, then: contact the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention and ask them if UB violates their guidelines for reporting on suicide risk. — click “contact us” at the bottom. You’re presenting this as a sweeping violation of pretty clear and well-studied guidelines for reporting on suicide risk, so clearly they should be able to arbitrate this considering the relative visibility of both sides, right?

    For reference, here is their page describing reporting on suicides and risk:

  • m

    Doesn’t change the fact that, despite their throwing the “ANY CHANCE!!!” argument at others, they continue to post about suicides in a way that creates “ANY CHANCE!!!” teens who read their pieces will kill themselves also.

    Pure hypocrisy. Must be nice to be unicornbooty, and consider yourself free to wantonly judge others while never looking inward at your own behavior.

  • m

    It’s no defleciton, Alex. It points out unicornbooty’s hypocrisy, and their complete insincerity when it comes to attempting to protect gay teens. They are pushing this idea that CF’s actions are endangering teens, using rationale and arguments completely contradicted by their own actions. You can take apart unicornbooty’s arguments, piece by piece, when viewing them within the context of their own actions.

    Oh, I’m sure they love trying to present themselves as some champion of vulnerable gay teens, defending them against some evil company and their lawsuits (and, incidentally, the law any of the individuals facing a potential suit violated).

    I find it interesting that unicornbooty would come along and “like” your comment, while completely ignoring those which point out their double standard.

    They want everyone else to look at CF through “ANY CHANCE. Any chance is too high” goggles. Are they willing to look at themselves the same way? Clearly not.

    They “see the potential for harm within the LGBT community”, and want to blast another company for creating the harm they see. But refuse to acknowledge their own harmful actions.

    It’s obviously unicornbooty has an agenda, and their words are not endorsed by their own actions.

    Here’s an attention-seeking blogger who wants us to believe they’re simply dutifully calling out another company for putting kids at risk, and yet pretends like their own actions in doing so could not have resulted in the same outcome.

    The assumption that CF is putting kids at risk requires a whole lot more assumptions – UB’s assumption that it’s predominantly gay kids who pirate content (no evidence); UB’s assumption CF must not be doing anything to prevent their content from getting stolen in the first place (no evidence); UBs assumption any potential kids targeted are one traumatic event away from suicide (no evidence); UB’s assumption that there’s no more likely a candidate to be a digital content pirate than a gay teen (no evidence).

    They’ve been presented with very clear evidence their own actions are capable of suicide contagion. And what response are they willing to give? To hide from that.

    “It’s not about UnicornBooty! It’s about the person we are trying to demonize here through our baseless accusations, blanket statements, faulty assumptions and double standards!”

    It’s quite transparent, really. And pretty sad. But, while UB’s theories regarding CF require a whole lot of wild assumptions and crazy speculation and convenient conclusions, UB’s own action that threatens the well being of vulnerable gay teens is right there and if your faces and plain and obvious to see.

    If UB wants to propagate a controversy they are guilty of, they should be prepared to get called out on it and defend it. After all, UB is more than willing to forgive those that CF accuses of copyright infringement because, according to UB, it’s CF’s own fault and they’re doing bad things also.

    Or… are you suggesting that UB’s entire “Any chance! The kids!” is one big piece of deflection? That’s an argument I’d agree with. They attempt to deflect from infringers own guilt, inappropriate actions, and responsibility for whatever consequences they face by blaming the copyright holder, instead. Precisely the kind of deflection you seem to be so opposed to.

  • m

    Again, let’s point out your own hypocrisy here…

    “That’s deflection, it doesn’t work.”

    Insisting that someone else is in the wrong [such as the owner of the copyrights you violated] when your company’s [or own personal ] actions [such as illegally downloading copyrighted material] are called into question does not address the fundamental complaint…”

    This entire sequence of posts by UB is deflection, Alex. It’s an attempt to excuse individuals who committed improper acts and violated the law by blaming CF for the entire situation instead.

  • Anonymous

    That’s why I find it impossible to feel the least bit sorry for CF. They paid the performers (mostly very young men) relatively small amounts for their performances. Then then they own the footage FOREVER. The performers profit once, the site profist over and over and over. These guys are not upstanding citizens they are porn producers. The expression “what goes around, comes around’ comes to mind.

    It’s very hard to feel the least bit sorry for them.

  • Sonic

    AfterElton is owned by Logo

  • Sonic

    Corbin Fisher is suing a bunch of file sharers for torrenting its … films. While we’re against piracy here, there is legitimate concern that some teenagers may get outed unsafely by the mass lawsuits. To which Corbin Fisher responds “Liberty Media produces straight content too. So any thieving little shit who gets caught can very easily lie to his parents that he was looking at straight porn.” Maybe it’s time for the gay community to cancel their accounts with Liberty Media?

  • Chris Marshall

    Any death caused from this fiasco on your corporations behalf will not only be the death-knell of your company, but a nice grounds to start a lawsuit that your companies actions, Mr. Radazzo, lead to the death of a teen. No other corporation will ever support you, and you think the economy is bad, try saying that from prison bars, for tax evasion that finally caught up with you. The people you pay off, gone, and when you do get out of prison, your ass will be so boycotted by the people you once try to screw, that your only option is to off yourself, or be another statistic collecting from people you never put a dime into just so you could get by. However you could save us all the trouble and stop this mess, or do us an even bigger favor, stop sending your dogs into our blogs, and newsrooms, and make like banna and kill yourself. Tootles!

  • Chris Marshall

    Brian According to EQ FL, they never received any donation, nor did they even have contact at anytime with this company. So your praise is interesting at best, and makes me wonder if you too are a corporate dog for these monsters.

  • Chris Marshall

    Sorry but there is better rubbish to fap too than the crap this company puts out and calls porn!

  • this was actually addressed already by someone… the way it usually works is that the company files suit against a john doe at *this* IP address and then the court kicks the ISP and they have to cough up a name attatched to the IP. And, since virtually none of the gay teens with no access to credit cards have an IP in their name… mom or dad will be the ones on the receiving end of that law suit in all actuality.

  • oooo… see now…. if sean cody started suing i could be in trouble. lol. i had a major thing for one of his guys from way back in the day…. zack…. i think i pirated every video he ever did…

  • and that’s pure puffery. you know that your argument is weak, and only continue to make it because no one has called you on it. so here is the call: tell me one time, ever, in the history of… however long you want to make it… when someone has killed themselves because someone wrote that there were suicides.
    now, look back at the dozen or so suicides in the past few months that were caused by rude or reckless outings.
    stop being obtuse.

  • and just in case you are thinking of pointing out those two links to support your “writing them into suicide” schtick, don’t bother. copycat suicide is not what you are talking about, and that queerty post… well, lets just say that its almost as much puffery as your posts. As is firmly illustrate in the CDC-provided “right way” they not only mention his method of death, but mention that it was self-inflicted. IN this instance UB is merely pointing out the possibilities of at risk youths being put at more risk thru reckless and greedy capitalism. (i know that’s redundant) the most you could really accuse UB of is furthering the “possibility” of suicide, not creating the suicide.

  • oh, and there is also a chance that CF is a failing venture due to their inability to adapt in a rapidly changing market-place and they are grasping at straws to make money regardless of whom they hurt in the process. i think mine sounds like the most likely of all of the above…

  • Wow… Because every teenage boy wants mom and dad to learn his sexuality with A LAWSUIT. C’mon, you’re a glorified slab of meat, not a humanitarian.

  • Steve The Man

    My IPS got such an order its no joke