# Would enforcing a contract for porn movies = rape? (very very sordid) **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [February 24, 2006, 7:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905 "2006-02-24T07:32:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2006, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/21 "2006-02-24T22:05:11Z")
> [@pravnik](#): > > Same thing here. A court can’t and won’t force someone to be a sex slave, but it can award damages and enjoin him from making such a film with any other company, assuming contracts for making adult films are valid and enforceable. This is in fact a part of the lawsuit. Corrigan has since started a self named blog/website on which he wants to have a for-pay photo and film gallery (and which I’m guessing would be his primary source of income). Cobra Video has prevented him from so doing until this matter is somehow resolved. Thanks for all answers, btw. I didn’t think he could be forced to do the movies (I know obviously he can’t be physically forced, but the judge can’t tell him “do this or you’re in contempt of court… ooh, and do that thing with your butt tattoo while you’re at it! And could you sign this picture… it’s for my son, whose name is also Judge…” sorry, off track- anyway, I knew he couldn’t be physically forced but I didn’t know if he could be court ordered to fulfill the contract. However, he could conceivably be faced with such a huge financial blo… detriment that it would be in his best interest to do so. (No, I don’t think that would be hot, so stop looking at me that way… alright, just a little… but it’s BECAUSE I CARE ABOUT JUSTICE IN THIS COUNTRY!) So, if it turns out that the producer can _prove_ beyond reasonable doubt that he had no reason to believe Corrigan was lying to him and that Corrigan did present him with false ID forms, would the producer still be in trouble for making a porn film with an underaged actor? (While Corrigan is gay, I understand that the “false ID” thing is a staple of straight porn as well.) ---
**Author:** ![Cliffy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/59ef9b/32.png) [@Cliffy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cliffy)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2006, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/22 "2006-02-24T22:15:48Z")
> [@Grossbottom](#): > > I’ve got a meeting in a moment, so no time to look it up, but if memory serves me correctly all contracts involving sexual activity are void \*ab initio \* and consequently unenforceable. I think that’s right under common law, but honestly I think that today the right judge on the right day with the right case would be willing to revise that proposition. Porn is a big business and despite its skeeve factor, it’s above board and legal. I’d be willing to enforce such contracts were I a judge as a general matter. Of course, enforcement != specific performance. –Cliffy ---
**Author:** ![Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otto)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2006, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/23 "2006-02-24T22:16:44Z")
> [@Gfactor](#): > > 1. Public policy (contract with sex as consideration). We’ve had a number of threads on why porn doesn’t equal prostitution, and the gist of them has always been that the actors aren’t being paid to have sex; they’re being paid to appear in a movie. Wouldn’t the same thing apply here in response to the above defense, that the sleazy producer isn’t contracting with Corrigan to have sex but to appear in a film? ---
**Author:** ![Quercus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/7ab992/32.png) [@Quercus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quercus)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2006, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/24 "2006-02-24T23:46:53Z")
> [@Otto](#): > > We’ve had a number of threads on why porn doesn’t equal prostitution, and the gist of them has always been that the actors aren’t being paid to have sex; they’re being paid to appear in a movie. Wouldn’t the same thing apply here in response to the above defense, that the sleazy producer isn’t contracting with Corrigan to have sex but to appear in a film? I would tend to agree. After all, murder is pretty much illegal, but if Al Pacino signed a contract for “Scarface II: Resurrection” , I think courts would find it enforceable, even if the contract called for him to depict murder in the movie. ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2006, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/25 "2006-02-25T00:18:27Z")
BTW, I don’t know whether to be delighted or disappointed that this thread has gone for all these posts and nobody has made any comment about it being an “oral contract”. ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2006, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/26 "2006-02-25T01:21:57Z")
> [@Sampiro](#): > > BTW, I don’t know whether to be delighted or disappointed that this thread has gone for all these posts and nobody has made any comment about it being an “oral contract”. Jeez – here we are, discussing principles of contract law, and someone has to come in and lower the tone … How about, the princple that an oral contract isn’t worth the paper that it’s written on? :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Random](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/57b2e6/32.png) [@Random](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Random)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2006, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/27 "2006-02-25T01:27:04Z")
**pravnik** has nailed it. No specific performance would be ordered here, for the reason he has stated. Same analysis would apply if it were a contract to mow the employer’s lawn - the sexual part of the issue is irrelevant to this analysis. Potentially, there are other defenses here, depending on the facts that are proven at trial. If the employee was underage, the subject of the contract was illegal, and therefore the contract is unenforceable. (that’s the public policy concept some others have mentioned.) If this legal principle is also ignored (_i.e_, it isassumed that there is no applicable law against underage sex, or child pornography), a minor is usually not considered to have the capacity to form a legal contract. (There are some exceptions, such as contracts for necessities of life, which don’t apply here. Also, as someone has said, the minor might be bound if he doesn’t promtly disavow the contract upon becoming an adult.) ---
**Author:** ![Random](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/57b2e6/32.png) [@Random](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Random)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2006, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/28 "2006-02-25T01:29:30Z")
Forgot the disclaimer: This is general information and not legal reliable legal advice. I’m not your attorney. State laws vary. If you are an actual underaged sex slave seeking to avoid a contract, see a lawyer licensed in your state for advice. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2006, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/29 "2006-02-25T03:16:41Z")
> [@Otto](#): > > We’ve had a number of threads on why porn doesn’t equal prostitution, and the gist of them has always been that the actors aren’t being paid to have sex; they’re being paid to appear in a movie. Wouldn’t the same thing apply here in response to the above defense, that the sleazy producer isn’t contracting with Corrigan to have sex but to appear in a film? I’m sure the defense would raise the issue. But here they aren’t prosecuting the producer for hiring people to have sex with each other. Instead, the producer is seeking to force the actor to have sex. Contracts in which sex is the consideration (in this case, for example, to perform :eek: his contract, Corrigan must have sex. Many courts will refuse to enforce such contracts. _Cf._ [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=352102](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=352102) > [@pravnik](#): > > Gotta disagree that it’s not constituionally barred. Specific performance for a personal services contract is generally considered unavailable due to both public policy and the 13th Amendment prohibition on involuntary servitude. For example, this case: > > “An unwilling employee cannot be compelled to continue to provide services to his employer either by ordering specific performance of his contract, or by injunction. To do so runs afoul of the Thirteenth Amendment’s prohibition against involuntary servitude.” Beverly Glen Music v. Warner Communications, Inc., 178 Cal.App.3d 1142, 224 Cal. Rptr. 260, Cal.App 2 Sist., 1986. Fair enough. I looked into the issue a while back, but I haven’t checked recently. Do you know of other cases? IIRC, I would say overall, a lot of courts hint that there might be 13th amendment problems and others, a few lower courts have made it the basis of their refusal to order specific performance, and commentators are all over the place. But I defer to you more recent research. Here is professor Randy Barnett’s read on the situation: > [@](#): > > Finally - these rules and presumptions notwithstanding - specific performance has traditionally been unavailable to enforce contracts for the provision of personal services, even if these services can be shown to be unique and damages therefore are in fact inadequate. > > Courts have given two reasons for their reluctance to award specific performance. First, they have sought to avoid the task of administering specific performance decrees. It is sometimes difficult for a court to monitor the quality of performance or to assess claims that performance is not being appropriately provided. Second, specific performance decrees for breaches of personal services contracts have been thought to pose moral problems as well, “because they are perceived to be substantively unacceptable limitations on personal freedom.” Forcing someone to perform a contract strikes courts as involuntary servitude and is said by judges to be against “public policy.” [http://randybarnett.com/4socphilpol179.html#6-8](http://randybarnett.com/4socphilpol179.html#6-8) The Beverly Glen Court notes: > [@](#): > > However, beginning with the English case of Lumley v. Wagner (1852) 42 Eng. Rep. 687, courts have recognized that, while they cannot directly enforce an affirmative promise (in the Lumley case, Miss Wagner’s promise to perform at the plaintiff’s opera house), they can enforce the negative promise implied therein (that the defendant would not perform for someone else that evening). Thus, while it is not possible to compel a defendant to perform his duties under a personal service contract, it is possible to prevent him from employing his talents anywhere else. \*\*The net effect is to pressure the defendant to return voluntarily to his employer by denying him the means {Page 178 Cal.App.3d 1145} of earning a living. \*\*Indeed, this is its only purpose, for, unless the defendant relents and honors the contract, the plaintiff gains nothing from having brought the injunction. (Emphasis added.) [BEVERLY GLEN MUSIC, INC. v. WARNER COMMUNICATIONS, INC. (1986) 178 CA3d 1142](http://online.ceb.com/calcases/CA3/178CA3d1142.htm) Many courts agree with this analysis. OTOH, Professor Barnett notes a little later on, “If a contract itself specifies that the party in breach should refrain from performing a given act - as it did in the famous injunction case of Lumley v. Wagner, 1 DeG. M. & G. 604, 42 Eng. Rep. 687 (Ch. 1852) - then an injunction is a form of specific performance. If there is no such term (either expressed or implied-in-fact) in the agreement then there is no consensual basis for such relief.” In other words, most courts think it is ok to force the defendant to complete the contract by barring him from doing something else, which somehow makes the completion voluntary. Under the Supreme Court’s 13th Amendment cases, either both qualify, or neither does. [US. V. Kozminski](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=487&invol=931#948) (scope of 13th Amendment limited to cases involving the compulsion of services by the use or threatened use of physical or legal coercion.); _but see_, [Robertson v. Baldwin](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=165&invol=275) (approving laws preventing sailors who contracted to work on vessels from deserting their ships as exceptional cases existing at the time of the Thirteenth Amendment). ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2006, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/30 "2006-02-25T03:30:42Z")
> [@Otto](#): > > We’ve had a number of threads on why porn doesn’t equal prostitution, and the gist of them has always been that the actors aren’t being paid to have sex; they’re being paid to appear in a movie. Wouldn’t the same thing apply here in response to the above defense, that the sleazy producer isn’t contracting with Corrigan to have sex but to appear in a film? Hmmm… so Corrigan could then settle the claim by aggreeing to appear in two videos in the role of “wacky neighbor offering clever insights from his front porch”, as opposed to in that of “bottom in scenes 1 and 3; third from the right in multiple-gloryhole scene”? That would be an interesting “pox on both” type of ruling: actor has to work with the team he can’t stand, team has to forego using actor in role they wanted. In any case, the producer must have some seriously airtight case here – if Corrigan could prove that he indeed WAS under 18 when he performed the first part of the contract, the producer risks losing BIG. ---
**Author:** ![Campion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@Campion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Campion)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2006, 5:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/31 "2006-02-25T05:32:38Z")
> [@Sampiro](#): > > So, if it turns out that the producer can _prove_ beyond reasonable doubt that he had no reason to believe Corrigan was lying to him and that Corrigan did present him with false ID forms, would the producer still be in trouble for making a porn film with an underaged actor? (While Corrigan is gay, I understand that the “false ID” thing is a staple of straight porn as well.) In general, child pornography is a strict liability offense. In other words, it doesn’t matter how badly (or well) Corrigan lied, or how sincerely the producer believed that Corrigan was legal. From a public policy perspective, of course, this makes sense: it puts the burden on the producer to ensure that s/he is working only with adults. Honestly, if the producer cared about this at all, s/he could have Corrigan’s birth certificate in a day. > [@Annie-Xmas](#): > > 1. Nobody can be forced to honor a contract. You cannot make a football player play or an opera singer sing. You can sue them for “punitive damages” but see #1 above. Punitive damages generally are not available for a breach of contract action. They are only available when the action complained of gives rise to a separate tort. Here, I don’t see a tort, but simply a breach of contract, so punitives aren’t available. ---
**Author:** ![Cerowyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/82dd89/32.png) [@Cerowyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cerowyn)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2006, 5:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/32 "2006-02-25T05:32:49Z")
> [@Sampiro](#): > > Thanks for all answers, btw. I didn’t think he could be forced to do the movies (I know obviously he can’t be physically forced, but the judge can’t tell him “do this or you’re in contempt of court… ooh, and do that thing with your butt tattoo while you’re at it! And could you sign this picture… it’s for my son, whose name is also Judge…” sorry, off track- Good gods, it’s court slash. My own practical experience with civil law is limited to a single case, but I wonder if the actor wouldn’t also be in legal jeopardy for asserting that he was underage in affadavids (assuming of course that he does in actual fact turn out not to have been underage when he signed the contract). Is there any particular reason that he wouldn’t be guilty of perjury (the crime, not just morally) in this case? ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2006, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/33 "2006-02-25T05:38:29Z")
So here’s another question: suppose Corrigan _was_ underage at the time he of his contract and further suppose that the producer _did not know_ it and had every reason to believe that Corrigan was 18. In this situation Corrigan’s actions most definitely caused demonstrable financial damage to the producer (legal fees, loss of revenue from video titles that were pulled upon learning Corrigan’s age, etc.)- $100,000 is not an inconceivable figure and he is most definitely guilty of fraud, _BUT AT THE SAME TIME_ he _was_ still a minor at the time of his contract and any illegal action (fraud, conspiracy, etc.) was also committed by a minor. Does this by itself still negate the contract and can he still be held liable for punitive/actual damages even though he was a minor both in terms of the contract and how he should be punished for illegality of his actions? Corrigan on his web site (which I really did go to because I think this case is interesting- he’s not my type [I prefer guys who went through puberty \*before\* I bought most of the clothes in my closet) states that he is considering suing his former producer for, among other things, libel (the producer has stated he is an escort, which Corrigan says is untrue [though I would be curious to know how an 18 year old from a poor family affords a house in the Arizona hills with a swimming pool and large fenced backyard]) and has repeatedly used Corrigan’s real name and location, which he says (and I honestly think he is perfectly reasonable in saying) is spiteful and endangers his safety. (Numerous Hollywood celebs [including people like Sharon Gless who you don’t tend to regard as a superstar or as a bombshell or controversial figure] have had dangerous stalkers but at least they usually have the money for security guards and well protected houses; a porn star is liable to have even more deranged fans because their appeal is totally and irrevocably connected to explicit sexuality [giving extra dementia material] and they can’t usually afford anything akin to a mainstream celebrity’s security measures.) Do you believe that Corrigan’s case has merit on the endangerment part, or that an 18 year old has been maligned by being called a prostitute even if he is not if he _has_, essentially, had sex for money (on camera)? Speaking of obsessed stalkers, I’m really not one, but I think this case is just interesting for a variety of reasons. ---
**Author:** ![Campion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@Campion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Campion)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2006, 5:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/34 "2006-02-25T05:49:21Z")
> [@Sampiro](#): > > So here’s another question: suppose Corrigan _was_ underage at the time he of his contract and further suppose that the producer _did not know_ it and had every reason to believe that Corrigan was 18. In this situation Corrigan’s actions most definitely caused demonstrable financial damage to the producer (legal fees, loss of revenue from video titles that were pulled upon learning Corrigan’s age, etc.)- $100,000 is not an inconceivable figure and he is most definitely guilty of fraud, _BUT AT THE SAME TIME_ he _was_ still a minor at the time of his contract and any illegal action (fraud, conspiracy, etc.) was also committed by a minor. Does this by itself still negate the contract and can he still be held liable for punitive/actual damages even though he was a minor both in terms of the contract and how he should be punished for illegality of his actions? A minor lacks capacity to enter into contracts. It’s irrelevant whether the contract at issue is for making movies, or whether it’s just a cell-phone contract. So most jurisdictions have a statute that lays out the rule that a minor can repudiate a contract [without being in breach of it](http://law.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclopedia/89895): > [@](#): > > A contract made by a minor is voidable at the minor’s discretion, meaning that the contract is valid and enforceable until the minor takes some affirmative act to disavow the contract. Minors who choose to disavow their contracts entered may not be held liable for breach. Generally, the minor has a certain amount of time after reaching majority to disavow the contract. The next and obvious question is whether he has to give back what he’s gotten under the contract (or at least the unfulfilled part of the contract). I defer to my learned brothers on that one; I’m tired and going to bed. > [@Sampiro](#): > > Do you believe that Corrigan’s case has merit on the endangerment part, or that an 18 year old has been maligned by being called a prostitute even if he is not if he _has_, essentially, had sex for money (on camera)? Generally, allegations that someone is a prostitute are considered slander per se. [Here](http://www.expertlaw.com/library/personal_injury/defamation.html) is a decent article about defamation. My personal opinion? I would not necessarily call it slander. I might, if pressed, call it “leverage.” > [@Sampiro](#): > > Speaking of obsessed stalkers, I’m really not one, but I think this case is just interesting for a variety of reasons. Uh huh. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otto)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2006, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/35 "2006-02-25T05:50:49Z")
> [@Campion](#): > > Honestly, if the producer cared about this at all, s/he could have Corrigan’s birth certificate in a day. Per one of Gfactor’s links: > [@Cobra Video's lawyer](#): > > …Cobra Video maintained a file on Mr. Lockhart that included color copies of three forms of identification he provided to Cobra Video, and by contract certified that wereunaltered orforged, including a birth certificate, which all indicated a 1985 date of birth…Since the September 13, 2005 announcement, Cobra Video LLC and its attorneys have made multiple requests for a state-certified copy of Mr. Lockhart’s birth certificate in order to compare it to the birth certificate that it has maintained in its file. However, each of these requests were either ignored or expressly rejected by Mr. Lockhart and his attorney. The state in which Mr. Lockhart was born, maintains state laws that deem birth certificates “confidential documents” that can only be supplied to the individual himself or to “immediate family.” Therefore, Cobra Video LLC has no way of determining the actual true date of birth of Mr. Lockhart or to verify the accuracy of the copy of the birth certificate that it has maintained in its file. > > The lawsuit that was recently filed has been filed for a number of purposes. First, Mr. Lockhart is in material breach of a contract that he voluntarily entered into on July 18, 2005. Secondly, with a lawsuit pending, Cobra Video will be able to use subpoena powers in order to officially determine the actual date of birth of Mr. Lockhart.It will also enable subpoena powers for other documents and certified personal correspondence between parties. Of course it’s self-serving but it appears the producer made a good faith effort to to determine young Mr Corrigan’s actual age (which is a good argument IMHO in favor of child pornography not being a strict liability offense; should everyone who relied on Corrigan’s alleged forgeries and bought a video in the belief that he was of legal age be convicted of possession?). If Corrigan did forge or alter three different documents, he could be looking at up to 45 years in prison, if I’m reading the [statute](http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00001028----000-.html) correctly. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2006, 8:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/36 "2006-02-25T08:10:45Z")
Here’s some good stuff on minors’ contracts: [Minors’ Contracts in the Entertainment Industry\*](http://www.gtlaw.com/pub/articles/1996/jacobsonm96a.asp) (discussing right to disaffirm) [http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/civil/charges/410n.htm](http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/civil/charges/410n.htm) (misrepresenting minor can disaffirm only if minor disgorges benefits) [http://www.lawreform.ie/publications/data/volume4/lrc\_34.html](http://www.lawreform.ie/publications/data/volume4/lrc_34.html) (See section on United States law) [http://cbanotes.utk.edu/ACCT/fischer.nsf/626e6035eadbb4cd85256499006b15a6/88e8471b848b8622852568c4007729c8?OpenDocument&Click=](http://cbanotes.utk.edu/ACCT/fischer.nsf/626e6035eadbb4cd85256499006b15a6/88e8471b848b8622852568c4007729c8?OpenDocument&Click=) [http://profj.us/wlac/capacity.htm](http://profj.us/wlac/capacity.htm) (on disaffirmance minor must return all consideration within control) ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2006, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/37 "2006-02-25T20:49:46Z")
> [@Giles](#): > > I should add that, even if the age of consent for gay sex is less than 18 in the relevant jurisdiction, there’s also the serious criminal offense of child pornography that the studio owner might be charged with, even if he seriously believed the actor to be over 18. Depending on what kind of proof of age documents Corrigann used the studio might be off the hook, at least criminally. Traci Lords got the US government to issue her a passport listing her age as 21 when she was 16. The Justice department had to drop all charges since the defendants could hide behind the government’s error. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2006, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/38 "2006-02-25T21:56:04Z")
> [@alphaboi867](#): > > Depending on what kind of proof of age documents Corrigann used the studio might be off the hook, at least criminally. Traci Lords got the US government to issue her a passport listing her age as 21 when she was 16. The Justice department had to drop all charges since the defendants could hide behind the government’s error. The feds responded to this by trying to fix the law: > [@](#): > > The attempt to raise the age of consent failed, but the U.S. criminal code was amended to impose stricter regulation of producers of explicit sexual conduct. President Reagan signed the legislation on Oct. 18, 1986–Traci’s Law, one might call it. > > The law, whose implementation was delayed until 1995 by legal challenges, holds porn producers accountable for hiring an underage performer, even if the producers did not know the actor was a minor. The law attempted to close the loophole that got Jim South off the criminal hook, since Traci Lords had showed a fake California driver’s license. [http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal\_mind/sexual\_assault/traci\_lords/9.html](http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal_mind/sexual_assault/traci_lords/9.html) _And see_, [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc\_sec\_18\_00002251----000-.html:](http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002251----000-.html:) > [@18 U.S.C. § 2251(a)](#): > > (a) Any person who employs, uses, persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any minor to engage in, or who has a minor assist any other person to engage in, or who transports any minor in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, with the intent that such minor engage in, any sexually explicit conduct for the purpose of producing any visual depiction of such conduct, shall be punished as provided under subsection (e), if such person knows or has reason to know that such visual depiction will be transported in interstate or foreign commerce or mailed, if that visual depiction was produced using materials that have been mailed, shipped, or transported in interstate or foreign commerce by any means, including by computer, or if such visual depiction has actually been transported in interstate or foreign commerce or mailed. [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=000&invol=u10337](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=000&invol=u10337) (SCOTUS notes legisltative intent to hold producers liable despite lack of knowledge of age under § 2251(a)). ---
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2006, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/39 "2006-02-25T22:15:39Z")
Even if it’s legal to produce porn, this contract is still unenforceable. Think about it: it’s legal to film consensual sex, but it’s not legal to inflict nonconsensual sex upon another person. Once Corrigan has rescinded his consent, the contracted act is illegal, and thereby unenforceable. It’s a catch-22 for the producer: enforcing it makes it unenforceable. ---
**Author:** ![Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otto)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2006, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905/40 "2006-02-26T00:10:11Z")
Out of curiosity, **lissener** , did you read the thread before posting? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-enforcing-a-contract-for-porn-movies-rape-very-very-sordid/345905.md?page=3)