ATVOD/Clips4Sale

[AdultFilmServices]

Exactly, thats why it needs challenging.

I had to let my 2 staff go as we had some jobs with mainly adult websites in editing and one in particular from the UK - which happened to be our biggest source of work - has had to move out of this country recently.

I worked with them for 7 years but now that work is gone from them plus 2 of my staff so it has a knock on effect to others as well.

Aside from my loss, said company liquidated as they obviously could not work from the UK anymore and HMRC are without a 6 figure yearly tax income plus a 5 figure VAT amount every quarter.

[Fordcortina]

The way to respond to this is to reply to any letter ATVOD sends disputing that you are "providing a television on-demand service or an ODPS within the meaning of the Communications Act 2003". You only need to say that. Use those words. Let them make a determination that you are. Then if they do determine that you are in breach of their rules, appeal to Ofcom. Until someone does this, nothing will stop them from continuing.

Regarding registering companies abroad. The person responsible is the person with editorial responsibility. That is the person who calls the shots. The person who decides what will be shown and what will not. If that person can convincingly be demonstrated to live in another jurisdiction then ATVOD would have to concede. But you would have to provide a lot of evidence, it cannot be a mere device or sham. ATVOD would always try to dispute it. Playboy Television only got them to concede that their editorial control had moved to Canada after an appeal to Ofcom.

ATVOD is not even a Government body. It is a 'quango', it will try to do anything in which it sees some advantage for itself. The only appropriate response is always to appeal to Ofcom.

[Paul Taylor]

and how did they get your address Morph? Did the Clips 4 sale people hand it over to them?

[AdultFilmServices]

Paul Taylor wrote:

> and how did they get your address Morph? Did the Clips 4 sale
> people hand it over to them?
>

Thats a good point and would they (ATVOD) be in breach of the data protection act if they are asking for personal info on the 'off chance' of aquiring information?

[videokim]

CFS & AW have to give any details over to UK authorities if they ask, as both of these companies are based off shore its a wonder why they chance ruining the solid businesses they have by selling people out.

I can imagine someone walking into the job centre & saying ATVOD have put me out of work & is there anything i can do about it lol!

[andy at handiwork]

Perhaps someone could compile an annual estimate of lost VAT/income tax/NI revenue and pass it on to HMRC.

In addition, as atvod was set up I feel as an over enthusiastic response to an EU directive that wasnt intended to cover porn particularly, can I ask what other country has felt it necessary to have a similar bureaucratic organisation closing down or forcing abroad legal companies? Is it just a case of the usual British (Labour and Tory) obsession with control and regulation?

[Fordcortina]

> Thats a good point and would they (ATVOD) be in breach of the
> data protection act if they are asking for personal info on the
> 'off chance' of aquiring information?

No. (Short answer)

Data Protection Act imposes duties on those holding information acquired for one purpose not to disclose it for another. It is possible for that person to disclose it to another in connection with for instance law enforcement though they are not obliged to. It wouldn't apply to a person in another jurisdiction. (longer answer)

Sounds to me anyway like they had Morph's address on file. Morph has the right under the DPA to write to ATVOD requesting to know what data is held about him and to have a copy subject to paying a fee which cannot be greater than ?10

[Peter]

hutchv wrote:

> Morph. It is irrelevant as to whether or not you lived here.
> The person who is carrying out the act is the company. A
> registered company is a legal person in the eyes of the law.

It seems to be based on where the 'editorial control' lies. If the person with editorial control resides in the UK, they come under ATVODs reach, regardless of where the company is registered.

At least that seems to be one of ATVODs arguments in the Playboy TV case.

[videokim]

If we film then edit in the UK we are within ATVOD's reach to regulate our we work but what is we filmed & done each others editing barring our own...would this still come under ATVOD regulations?

[AdultFilmServices]

videokim wrote:

> If we film then edit in the UK we are within ATVOD's reach to
> regulate our we work but what is we filmed & done each others
> editing barring our own...would this still come under ATVOD
> regulations?
>

That would be like employing a company or person to do work for you. Surely ATVOD can't stop that as that really would be restricting trade and illegal.
Where would it end, web designers being forced out of work, server admins, graphic designers etc etc.