
The Uber-ization of porn - Immortalin
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/act-four/wp/2015/05/29/the-uber-ization-of-porn/?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_1_na
======
bliti
I was lost trying to find the similarities of Uber and this "new" model of
pornography production. IMO, for it to be the Uber of pornography, the people
who want to act in the film must be able to book a "film crew" (probably
someone with an iPhone or a HERO), a place to film (pick airbnb and
synergize), and have the service deal with the paperwork. It would also host
the film for them and provide the actors/producers with tools to promote it.
Phew! So much work...

~~~
sandworm101
There are a couple "sell us your sextape" websites. I was involved in a couple
copyright actions against one. Free legal advice: Don't take footage of known
porn star, crank down the resolution/quality, and try to pass it off as your
own sextape. And if you are in the biz of buying such tapes, do some research
before sending the check.

------
sandworm101
Porn /= "Sex Work"

Porn stars are not prostitutes. Getting paid for sex on camera is not the same
as getting paid by johns any more than acting in a romantic film constitutes
being an escort.

The porn industry can be horrific on young girls, but it is an industry with
some experience. These amateurs going it on their own could learn a thing or
two from the pros. There are standards of behavior, codes of conduct, that
while not universal do exist for a reason. Top of the list: Don't sign
anything without a lawyer to explain copyright and contract law. Many girls
never get paid what they were told they would. At least phone the nearest
lawschool and ask about any free legal clinics.

Other top of list: Never go to any shoot, casting call or interview alone.
Bring someone sober and with their own vehicle.

~~~
peteretep

        > Getting paid for sex on camera is not the same as
        > getting paid by johns
    

I'm curious to know what your reasoning there is...

~~~
booruguru
With porn you get to choose/approve your partner based on attractiveness and
compatibility. Whereas prostitution involves total strangers... and they are
not really in a position where they get to say "no" (even though "technically"
they can).

 __*

Is Chloe Sevingy a prostitute because she had REAL sex in the movie, The Brown
Bunny? I'd say no.

~~~
nkozyra
"Sex worker" != prostitute

But either way, you could certainly make that argument. I think there are two
problems with the analogy, one specific and one general.

1\. I think the purpose of the medium defines the description of the job.
Narrative art that includes sex could be construed as a different "job" than
participating in sex for erotica.

2\. Sevigny and Gallo were dating at the time, which complicates the notion of
prostitution but not at all "sex work."

------
striking
Why would the Washington Post post this? This is pretty awful by any sort of
journalistic standard.

The film described sounds interesting, but it has absolutely nothing to do
with Uber.

~~~
Goladus
The film is OK. I watched it after my girlfriend told me about it. Most of the
interesting parts are mentioned in the article. The article doesn't mention
that Tressa's emergency room trip was almost certainly a consequence of all
the sex. Also, while the article mentions Belle Knox, the way she comes up in
the film is that Riley (the recuiter) and several of the girls are sitting
around a table watching her interview and commenting. It's one of the more
memorable scenes.

The film doesn't go into any greater detail about where all the money she
earned went. They allude to lingerie and birth control but there's never an
explicit breakdown of expenses. The film doesn't mention illicit drugs,
alcohol, or any other potential money sinks.

Certainly, comparisons to Uber are ridiculous. Yes, there are similarities--
the same similarities you can draw between virtually any company using new
business models enabled by new technology. I agree that the piece is terrible.

