egafd.com

Oi HiWatt be careful, your appearing to have a sense of humor, and I thought you legal folks didn't have a sense of humor, unless paid enough to express one.

I think the worst thing a producer of adult movies can do is play up to the stereotype of not giving a toss about the girls who will ultimately earn him more money than he paid them.

There are also producers and performers on here who could have their idea of bluebird changed or enforced by this thread. How many potential CG's could read this thread and be put off ever working for BB? Could a Tabloid journalist turn it into an scathing article about the industry? It is worth remembering that there are far more readers than posters.

I don't think I have questioned your grasp of the law. I think I have questioned your ethics and the way in which you put yourself and through that the image of BB across. Yes you hold the contract and you enforce it as you see fit. I have not questioned that. What I question is just because you can does that mean you should.

You can't look soft because otherwise some girls will walk all over you and take the p*ss, which is what I assume posted such a blunt first post. But you do not need to appear the corporate monster either.

If a girl was on a 30k contract would it not be better to pay 20 in the first year and then 10 in the year after the contract ran out so she is not left in a situation where she had plenty of money then none, with the royalties you have mentioned the girls would have less need to break the contract. Or other methods.....but I am not telling you all my ideas lol.

This whole thread could have been much more positive if you had explained that:

Girls are still allowed to shoot, with your permission, without demanding and threatening.
Girls were receiving royalties so were not being left high and dry.


And not tried to be such a smart arse because both times you have replied to my posts you have made an inane comment and both times it has been incorrect or inappropriate. (5 replies is by no means a record for an off topic reply and I didn't question liability or your grasp of law.)

I believe Bluebird want to move away from old ideas and stereotypes about Britporn but that has to start with attitudes changing and not just the budget for a production. Move away from the sleazy, exploitative image of porn and become a company known for it's positives rather than a heavy handed corporate creature.

1 point, this isnt a producers forum per se, its a fan site

I agree with you Keiran insofar that if certain producers "lock off" certain models from working with the rest of the industry and that those girls have done so in agreement that is all fine in my books. BB wouldnt be the first and certainly not the last and I think for the most part it has been honoured by most.

From the posts I dont think that in itself is the problem.

The problem is in girls who have left their employ or out of contract not being able to work for a whole year after and producers (not me btw) having a problem with being told by another company what not to do.

I'm just merely commenting (as I usually do) because I find this thread very interesting. Ive never heard anyone lay down the law so blatantly before and I can only imagine what must have precipitated it must be circumstances arising from the girls listed. I've never even heard Private fire off in this way.

Where there is smoke there is usally fire. I'm just concerned that a girl cant work in the industry up to a year after her contract. I therefore assume BB must pay well for the girls to not work for a whole year but then I still see some of their girls working on the satellite channels. Thats lkike a girl whois loaded already with sports cars and apartment and all the other fringe benefits paid for getting a part time job in a supermarket.

One thing I know about girls is that making lots of money means they dont want to work unnecessarily if they dont have to.

Oh and before the BB anti-post patrol accuse me of commenting because I am jealous of BB or something, understand this....I am not.

I have worked hard my end to where I have got and dont have time to envy another company getting on with their own business.

Besides, they posted on a forum and people have a right to respond.


[Edited by moderator]

Im not looking to be a arse with you be seen mate...

But im just comparing to what happens here and what happens in UK...

Im prob still living the american dream, but its so different here...

In the world of porn a contract is a contract, it means something and girls respect them here....

BB are trying to protect the investment just like wicked, DP, club jenna do, there is no difference at all...

If you was to put say a club jenna contract and a bluebird contract you would prob find then not worlds apart

Spoken from the words of a true professional...

Keep flying the UK flag hi mate, i salute you...

I have posted another reply but I was chatting and in that time it got left all the way up ther^ Well that or I clicked the wrong reply. either way I I am enjoying Mr watt lol.

My guess is Miss Delta White is what caused this Terry, as she's the only of their girls, I have seen post on here about work.

I also have to say, she is probably one of the only girls, I would like to shoot as well, the rest are of no interest and many are of the same view.

"If you are making images for purely private use, then you are not in breach in the first place."

You didnt say that to begin with you said....

"Be aware that under their contracts, they are not allowed to shoot for anyone else for 1 year after their contract ends, without our prior permission"