MONROE, LA -- Ouachita Parish Sheriff's Deputies have arrested 70-year-old Alvena Johnson, owner of the Fun Depot in Monroe, an adult novelty store, on two felony counts of the promotion of obscene devices. Also arrested on four counts under the same law were Bobby and Lori Tremaine, owners of the Red Door stores in West Monroe and in the Swartz area of Quachita Parish. KNOE Channel 8 News teams were alerted in advance so they could be on hand to video Johnson and the Tremaines being escorted away in handcuffs. Must be an election coming up.

The crimes involved have to do with selling “obscene” sex toys, erotic videos, novelty items, and gag gifts, according to Assistant District Attorney Neal Johnson. Ouachita Parish authorities started receiving complaints from neighbors after the West Monroe Red Door adult novelty shop opened up, according to Major Jay Russel of the Sheriff’s office. The charges carry the possibility of between six months to three years in prison and a fine of as much as $2,500. Bond has been set at $3,500 for each count.

Is this surrealistically absurd, or what? Here we are in the Twenty-First Century, with vibrators and sex toys of all kinds almost ubiquitous in American bedrooms -- according to the 2005 Durex Global Sex Survey, 43% of Americans own vibrators used for sexual enhancement -- and on the evening news we see Sheriff’s Deputies putting handcuffs on grandmothers and married couples for selling the toys.

Last year, First Amendment attorney J.D. Obenberger brought a constitutional challenge to the Louisiana obscenity law on behalf of Emmette Jacob Jr., the owner of Le Video Store in St. Martin’s Parish. However, Obenberger was not successful in the challenge. In October, State Judge Charles Porter ruled that the Louisiana obscenity law was not unconstitutional by virtue of being overbroad or vague. (See X-Press Report, “Community Standards Test Upheld,” 10/7/05) In May, the Louisiana Supreme Court refused to hear the challenge. (See X-Press report, “State High Court Will Not Hear Challenge,” 5/12/06)

Some information is from Darklady, Ynot.com, 8/25/06
See also, Melissa Clark, KNOE-TV, Channel 8 News, 8/24/06

MOBILE PHONE RESTRICTIONS PLANNED IN OZ

AUSTRALIA -- Communications Minister Helen Coonan has announced that she will introduce legislation in Parliament to extend the current safeguards that apply to content delivered over the Internet or television to content delivered to cell phones.

“Like the Internet, increasingly sophisticated hardware such as mobile phones can be a vital communications tool, but in inexperienced hands they can become a pipeline for perversion,” said Coonan.

“Recognizing the challenge that next generation mobile phones pose for regulating content which may be offensive or illegal, I will shortly put in place new safeguards to protect consumers when they are using 3G mobile phones and subscription based Internet portals.”

Included in Coonan’s proposal are requirements for consumer advice and age-restrictions on access to content suited only to adults. The prohibitions will be backed by strong sanctions for non-compliance with the new regulatory framework, including criminal penalties for serious offences.

At present there are no U.S. laws regulating the transmission of explicit materials on wireless phones, although the Federal Communications Commission has asked for responsible action by wireless carriers and content providers. Some European wireless networks bar adult services to new cell phones by default and lift the restrictions only after receiving proof that the user is 18 or over.

Information from Senator Coonan is from her press release, 8/22/06 (URL not available)
And from Kelvin Bissett and Stephen Fenech, News.com, 8/22/06

COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS INDECENCY RULINGS

ASPEN, CO -- In a speech to the Progress & Freedom Foundation, Democratic FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein warned that the FCC majority has gone too far in its recent broadcast indecency decisions, and that the agency risked having the courts take away the ability of the FCC to prevent the airing of indecent material.

"I believe that the Commission’s last batch of decisions dangerously expands the scope of indecency and profanity law," he told his audience, "without first attempting to determine whether we are applying the appropriate contemporary community standards."

"The Commission’s authority to regulate indecent content over the public airwaves was narrowly upheld by the Supreme Court with the admonition that we should exercise that authority with the utmost restraint,” said Adelstein. “Given the Court’s guidance in Pacifica, the Commission has repeatedly stated that we would judiciously walk a “tightrope” in exercising our regulatory authority. To put it simply, I believe that a rational and principled ‘restrained enforcement policy’ is not a matter of mere regulatory convenience; it is a constitutional requirement.”

Adelstein particularly objected to the FCC decision in which the acclaimed Martin Scorsese documentary “The Blues: Godfathers and Sons” was found to be indecent.

“It was clear from a commonsense viewing of the program that coarse language is a part of the culture of blues musicians and performers,” said Adelstein. “To accurately reflect their viewpoint and emotion for blues music requires the airing of certain material that, if prohibited, would undercut the ability of the filmmaker to convey the reality of the subject of the documentary.”

As a result of that FCC decision, PBS must now decide what to do about documentarian Ken Burns’s, “The War,” a soldier’s-eye view of World War II. According to New York Times reporter Elizabeth Jensen, those who have seen parts of the 14-plus hours documentary, which took Burns six years to produce, say they are replete with salty language appropriate to discussions of the horrors of war. What viewers will see and hear when the series is broadcast in September 2007 is now an open question.

In addition to Commissioner Adelstein, numerous Constitutional scholars have suggested that the FCC is on thin ice in its approach to regulation of broadcast indecency. That view is reinforced by reading the words of Justice Stevens, capping the FCC v. Pacifica (1978) Supreme Court opinion which is the basis for the FCC broadcast indecency regulation authority:

“It is appropriate, in conclusion, to emphasize the narrowness of our holding. This case does not involve a two-way radio conversation between a cab driver and a dispatcher, or a telecast of an Elizabethan comedy. We have not decided that an occasional expletive in either setting would justify any sanction….”

Adelstein’s comments and text of the broadcast indecency part of his speech are from: John Eggerton, Broadcasting & Cable, 8/24/06