I was disappointed to read that Vivid Entertainment, an adult film company, is challenging the new Los Angeles law that requires condom use in porn. They claim that the measure, which is designed to do a better job of protecting adult film stars from STDs than the current 30 day testing regimen, is a violation of free speech. It's an interesting argument, although I think it's pushing things a bit when you see quotes like this one, from an L.A. Times Article:
Paul Cambria Jr., the lead attorney on the case, said Measure B infringes upon how directors make films. "Let's assume that we're filming an adult movie and it was taking place in the swashbuckler times. All of a sudden, Capt. Jack slips on a condom."
"Obviously, that would basically destroy the movie, because it would be fake. Obviously, people would know that couldn't have happened then," Cambria said.
Not only is that bad history, as condoms have been around for a very long time (since at least the 1500s), it's also patently ridiculous. Anyone who is watching a pornographic swashbuckling movie and needs the use of a condom to be the clue that the movie is "fake" needs some serious psychiatric help. Particularly since it's perfectly feasible that condoms might have been used during that time. They would have looked very different the ones we used today, but the average adult film viewer is unlikely to know that... and anyone who does know that is probably going to be thrilled to see condoms used at all.