The outspoken Black came to this decision as the result of current economic marketplace conditions and outside pressures like his still-pending obscenity trial and what he calls the “poisonous” distribution system for getting DVDs onto retail store shelves. Always considered a maverick, Black thought the time was right to turn exclusively to digital distribution.

Partnering to bring Extreme online is HotMovies.com, which will provide the backend technology to drive ExtremeVOD.com.

“By going online-only, I took out the most bullshit element out of this business — kowtowing to distributors,” Black told XBIZ. “I hated playing the price game, I hated waiting six months to get paid from these cocksuckers. It’s been very liberating to me to be free of those chains. In fact, it’s the happiest I’ve been since I started Extreme.

“I’m creating the most direct line to consumers. That’s where the future of this business is headed. This is a groundbreaking move; basically, I’m saying ‘fuck the DVD.’

Black specifically cited the industry-wide downturn of DVD sales as the driving force behind his decision because he couldn’t survive in the current business model.

“Turning a profit from selling pieces these days is a ludicrous proposition,” Black said. “With today’s sales, even if I sell 1,000 units at $10 a pop wholesale, that’s only $10,000. I would lose my ass! I know gonzo movies are cheap these days, but not that cheap.”

ExtremeVOD.com launches on Oct. 1, and will feature “webisodes” that are available via pay-per-minute, streaming rental and HotMovies.com’s proprietary Download 2 Own program.

Each webisode runs 90 minutes or less and will be updated every two weeks eventually ramping up to once a week. Online series’ include “My Mom’s a Porn Star,” “Spoon Fed Cum” and “1,001 Ways to Eat My Jizz.” Extreme’s first VOD exclusive movie, “This Is Extreme,” features a sampling from each of the company’s web-only lines.

Black reasoned that Extreme’s fan base hasn’t dissipated over the years when his legal issues slowed production, so the launch of ExtremeVOD.com would seek to reinvigorate the company by creating one centralized hub for Extreme fans to access the content they’ve been seeking.

“For a few years now, it’s been hard to find our product because some distributors wouldn’t carry it,” Black said. “They’ve prevented consumers from buying legal adult entertainment. Going to the Internet is the way to circumvent all the politics. I’m not kissing anyone’s ass anymore, except my own.

“We are the first heavyweight company to abandon the DVD, throw our middle finger to the establishment once again and say ‘this is how we’re going to kick your asses in the marketplace of the future. It takes balls to say this is how I’m gonna do it and if you don’t like it, fuck you.”

Background ...

Most in Porn Business Not Supporting Defendants

Wired News, 6/13/06 - Obscenity prosecutions are taking a toll on the porn industry as publishers embrace an every-man-for-himself approach under relentless Bush administration attacks.

The annual Cybernet Expo on Sunday here was overshadowed by a big question: Whether to stand united with producers of "extreme" material bearing the brunt of the assault in order to preempt attacks on milder content, or get some distance and hope to avoid being targeted?

Tara, webmaster of freepornstarpix.com, prefers the latter approach. "It would be better to sacrifice some people … so everybody else can get on with it," said Tara, who declined to give her last name because her family doesn't know about her job. Extreme content producers, she said, "need to cool it, pull back a little bit" instead of "asking for it" during a right-wing administration.

A lightning rod in the debate is the 2003 obscenity prosecution of production company Extreme Associates for videos that feature urination, adults portrayed as children and simulated rape. The case, which has been bouncing around the court system for three years, is expected to go to trial in Pittsburgh next year.

Extreme Associates owner Rob Black blasted the porn industry this weekend for breaking ranks, rather than standing united.

"You hear all this solidarity. Bullshit," he said. "This industry except for about five people has hung me out to dry. Everybody wants to make a fucking compromise."

Pressure against the industry increased last month with a landmark lawsuit that appears to target a somewhat milder grade of porn. The Justice Department issued an obscenity indictment against JM Productions and Five Star Video over four porn DVDs, one featuring bukkake and another that reportedly simulates torturous oral sex to satirize the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. The defendants face a maximum sentence of five years for each of several obscenity counts.

In the new prosecution, the government is "getting closer to the center" and moving away from the most extreme content, said Connor Young, president of the porn webmaster resource site YNOT.com. He thinks all porn should be allowed except material that features children or involuntary violence.

Porn industry attorney Greg Piccionelli believes in the solidarity approach. "If we don't defend the people they start with, sooner or later they'll work their way down," he told the webmasters.

The Extreme Associates case could set a precedent that tiny clips of video or even individual photos could be declared obscene even if they're part of a larger piece of work. "It is absolutely critical that (the defendants) prevail, that the work be taken as a whole," Piccionelli said.

The court cases will also determine if "regressive fiefdoms of conservatism" can apply their own local standards about obscenity to the internet, he said.

What's next? As the extreme content cases are heading to trial, there's no resolution yet over proposed federal rules that threaten to shut down some porn sites.

Piccionelli acknowledged that industry attorneys have developed a reputation as "Chicken Littles" who always say the sky is falling.

Even so, he predicted that if another Republican enters the White House, "the whole industry will be in the same position as Extreme Associates four years from now."

Appeals Court Reinstates Obscenity Charges

Associated Press, 12/9/05 - An appeals court has reinstated federal obscenity charges against a couple who sold pornographic videos depicting simulated rape and murder.

The decision Thursday by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a January ruling by a federal judge who threw out the 10-count indictment on the grounds that the defendants had a right to distribute obscene materials under constitutional privacy protections.

A defense attorney pledged Friday to appeal the decision.

Federal prosecutors had been trying to salvage the case, arguing that an individual's right to possess obscenity did not mean they have a right to receive or distribute it.

"The courts have consistently held that the right to free expression does not extend to material which is obscene," U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan said in a statement. "We're pleased with the Third Circuit's decision."

Robert Zicari and Janet Romano, both of Northridge, Calif., and their company, Extreme Associates Inc., were charged in 2003 with distributing three videos through the mail and six images over the Internet to western Pennsylvania. They were also charged with conspiracy.

A grand jury found the company's video and Internet images met the U.S. Supreme Court's test for obscenity. Pornographers must adhere to the community standards of where products are made and anywhere they might be seen, prosecutors said.

But U.S. District Judge Gary L. Lancaster ruled that prosecutors had overstepped their bounds by trying to block the material from children and adults who did not want to see it inadvertently.

The Justice Department appealed the decision, with Buchanan citing U.S. Supreme Court decisions over the past several decades that she said showed there was no right to distribute obscenity.

H. Louis Sirkin, an attorney for the couple and their company, said he was disappointed but not disheartened by the decision.

"We're prepared to go forward with the appeal," he said. "We think Judge Lancaster was correct and that his analysis was correct and we disagree with the panel."

Sirkin said he and his clients expected the case to go through the appeal process and "ultimately probably land in the Supreme Court."

Sirkin had said earlier that the Internet has changed notions of privacy and commerce, and that the people who ordered Extreme Associates' products used a private, members-only section of the company's Web site. Such electronic features, he said, prevented minors and unwilling viewers from seeing obscene images.

The federal government has stepped up obscenity prosecutions under the Bush administration, with dozens of people indicted since 2001. That number far exceeds the number of cases pursued under former President Bill Clinton.

The indictment was announced by Buchanan in August 2003, when she said a lack of such prosecutions in the mid- to late-1990s had "led to a proliferation of obscenity throughout the United States."

The charges carry a maximum penalty of 50 years in prison and a $2.5 million fine for Zicari and Romano, and probation and a $5 million fine for the company.

Court Hears Online Porn Case

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, October 20, 2005 - The U.S. Attorney believes it's a decision that should be left to the community -- more specifically a jury -- as to whether violent and graphic pornography depicting rape and murder is acceptable.

The opposition does not, claiming that an individual's guaranteed right to liberty under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution allows them to not only view such pornography but also gives them the right to purchase it.

The two sides squared off in federal court yesterday, arguing to a three-judge panel of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. A decision is not expected for several months.

The appeal was brought by Mary Beth Buchanan, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania. Her office indicted California-based Extreme Associates Inc., as well as its owners, Robert Zicari and his wife, Janet Romano, for violating federal obscenity laws by distributing videos through the mail and online which depict women being defecated on and having their throats slit.

Under federal law, an individual has the right to view obscenity in private at home, but it is illegal to distribute it across state lines.

U.S. District Judge Gary L. Lancaster in January dismissed the indictment, saying that federal obscenity laws violate the Constitution.

Citing the Supreme Court case of Lawrence v. Texas, in which the court ruled that laws prohibiting same-sex sodomy are unconstitutional, Judge Lancaster wrote: "the government can no longer rely on the advancement of a moral code, preventing consenting adults from entertaining lewd or lascivious thoughts, as a legitimate, let alone compelling, state interest."

But Ms. Buchanan told the three-judge panel that reading of Lawrence is simply wrong.

The government's interest in prosecuting Extreme Associates is in "protecting adults, children, morality, the order of society and the proliferation of obscenity," Ms. Buchanan argued.

Both sides stipulated for the oral argument that what Extreme Associates produces is obscene under the law.

During her 25-minutes before the bench, Ms. Buchanan said the right to view obscenity is restricted. "The right is one that exists in the home," she said. "It doesn't go anywhere else."

But H. Louis Sirkin, a Cincinnati attorney representing Extreme Associates, disagreed. He told the court that if people have the right under the law to possess obscenity in their homes, then they must be able to buy it.

"In order for me to exercise my right to liberty, I have to be able to get it," Mr. Sirkin said .

He also agreed with Judge Lancaster's opinion that morality is not a legitimate state interest, based on the Lawrence decision.

Because it's considered a national test case, several organizations filed friend of the court briefs on the matter. Eight were filed in support of the U.S. Attorney's position, and seven were filed on behalf of Extreme Associates.

Patrick Trueman, senior legal counsel for the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C., called the lower court's ruling that dismissed the indictment "ridiculous," and "silly."

"The lower court judge seems to be an activist judge," said Mr. Trueman, the former head of the Justice Department's Child Exploitation and Obscenity section from 1987 through 1992. "It's not this judge's freedom to decide cases differently than the Supreme Court."

He said there have already been Supreme Court cases that have found the laws that prohibit interstate distribution of obscene materials to be constitutional, including the 1973 case, Miller v. California. He does not believe the Lawrence case strikes down any obscenity laws.

Reed Lee, filed friend of the court briefs in support of Extreme Associates on behalf of the First Amendment Lawyers Association; Free Speech Coalition and Association of Club Executives -- three organizations he said that work to protect sexually oriented expression.

Mr. Lee argued the indictment against Extreme Associates is improper based on the First Amendment right to freedom of expression.

Though obscene materials are not protected by the First Amendment, Mr. Lee believes they should be. All obscenity, he argues, is an expression, whether it's through movies, photographs or literature, and therefore should be protected.

"We can't forget, this is a case about movies," Mr. Lee said.

Also ...

Porn world eyes Pittsburgh

TRIBUNE-REVIEW, 10/20/05 - Even by American adult film industry standards, Rob Zicari has long turned stomachs and generated disgust for his filmed depictions of rape and violence against women and also the desecration of the Bible.

"He makes the vilest of products and has long violated taboos in the adult industry," said Luke Ford, a Los Angles-based journalist who has covered the industry and has known Zicari, 31 -- who works under the name "Rob Black" -- for a decade.

U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan on Wednesday asked the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn a judge's decision to dismiss a 2003 indictment against Zicari, his wife Janet Romano, and their production company, Extreme Associates, on charges of violating federal obscenity laws.

The couple and their company were accused of selling tapes and downloadable video clips -- with titles like "Forced Entry" and "Extreme Teen #24" -- to an undercover U.S. postal inspector and others in the Pittsburgh area.

If Buchanan wins, the case could have far-reaching implications for the multibillion-dollar American porn industry, which is centered in the San Fernando Valley near Los Angeles.

"If Mary Beth is successful, and the conviction is upheld, it will open up a can of worms for the government to work their way through the food chain to Larry Flynt and others," said Mike South, an adult film director based in Atlanta.

"It means the government will be going after more people," he said.

For that reason, many eyes in Southern California are on Pittsburgh, Ford said.

"This will definitely have an inhibiting effect on the industry if (Zicari) is convicted of obscenity," Ford said.

Zicari has long pushed the adult film genre to extremes with depictions of women being choked, punched and slapped while having sex in coffins and Dumpsters. He has angered religious people by having actors rip up Bibles in the name of sex.

" 'Nervous' is a mild term to describe how many in the industry look at (Zicari), and many outright hate him for bringing unwanted attention from the government," Ford said.

Nina Hartley, an adult video performer who has been involved in the industry since 1984, is not a fan of Black's work, which she says is all about shock value, not eroticism. But that is his First Amendment right, she said.

"He told me years ago that it's like filming a train wreck," Hartley said. "People want to look at it even though it's terrible. But it's important to keep in mind that this is a free society, and people need to be able to say and read whatever they want, even if it makes people upset."

Zicari has had a long association with the pornography industry, beginning when his father, Dominic Zicari, of Rochester, N.Y., opened a string of adult bookstores on the East Coast in the 1960s. The younger Zicari told an interviewer for the PBS program "Frontline," which aired a segment about the industry, that his mother is a nurse who condones what he does.

"Extreme Productions are the filthiest of filth," Zicari said in a 1998 magazine interview. "There's the drug dealer, and we're just a little above that."

Government Argues Against Violent Porn In Pittsburgh

Action News 4 Pittsburgh, 10/19/05 - The Justice Department argued in federal court in Pittsburgh Wednesday for reinstatement of federal obscenity charges, which a judge dismissed against a California pornography business.

U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan said the case is not about banning all sexually explicit materials, just reining in obscenity. She argued Wednesday that no one has the right to send obscenity through the mail or Internet, though they can do what they want in their own homes.

Robert "Rob Black" Zicari and Janet "Lizzie Borden" Romano, both of Northridge, Calif., and their company, Extreme Associates, were charged in 2003 with distributing three videos to Pittsburgh through the mail and six images over the Internet.

In January, U.S. District Court Judge Gary Lancaster ruled obscenity statutes unconstitutional in the case.

Lancaster said prosecutors overstepped their bounds while trying to block the material from children and from adults who didn't want to see such material inadvertently.

Lancaster also found that the state can't ban material simply because it finds it objectionable, based on the U.S. Supreme Court's June 2003 ruling that struck down a state ban on gay sex.

Government Targets 'Extreme' Porn Couple

Action News 4 Pittsburgh, 2/16/05 - The federal obscenity case against a husband-wife pornography business is moving to the next level.

U.S. Department of Justice officials said Wednesday that the government will appeal a recent Pittsburgh ruling that dismissed obscenity charges against Robert Zicari and Janet Romano, both of Northridge, Calif., and their company, Extreme Associates.

Zicari and Romano, also known by the stage names "Rob Black" and "Lizzie Borden," were charged in August 2003 with distributing obscene videos to Pittsburgh addresses through the mail and transmitting obscene images over the Internet.

At the time, U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan said Extreme's videos showed "violent, brutal, degrading" material that depicted rape and murder of women.

Last month, U.S. District Court Judge Gary Lancaster threw out the charges, saying that people have a right to view such material in the privacy of their homes and Extreme has the right to market it.

If upheld, Lancaster's ruling "would undermine not only the federal obscenity laws, but all laws based on shared view of public morality, such as laws against prostitution, bestiality and bigamy," according to a Justice Department press release.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said the sale and distribution of obscene materials are not protected under the First Amendment.

"The Department of Justice remains strongly committed to the investigation and prosecution of adult obscenity cases," Gonzales said.

Hollywood Porn Couple Arraigned Downtown
Trial Could Test Federal Obscenity Laws

Action News 4 Pittsburgh, 8/7/03 - In a case that has begun drawing national attention, a couple pleaded not guilty to obscenity charges for allegedly distributing pornographic material that depicts murder, rape and other violent acts against women.

Robert Zicari, 29, and Janet Romano, 26, of North Hollywood-based Extreme Associates Inc., are accused of mailing obscene tapes and DVDs to an address and a wholesaler in the Pittsburgh area and transmitting obscene images via the Extreme Associates Web site.

Zicari, also known as Rob Black, and Romano, also known as Lizzie Borden, surrendered their passports when they were indicted earlier this month. They entered their pleas Wednesday at the federal courthouse in downtown Pittsburgh and remain free pending trial.

The U.S. Justice Department says this case is part of what will be an ongoing crackdown on lax enforcement of obscenity laws. A trial has the potential to become a test of how the Supreme Court defines "obscene."

While the movies themselves are not illegal, U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan said it is against the law to send them through the mail or, in the case of the Web site, display them via an Internet connection that crosses state lines.

Buchanan said the Extreme videos are "certainly not the type of thing that someone would think of when they think of pornography. This material is violent, it's brutal, it's degrading to women."

But Zicari said he's merely in the entertainment business.

"We make movies," he said. "It's no different than Hollywood, except that our movies involve adults engaged in sex."

Zicari's attorney, Warner Mariani, said the material in question may be pornographic, but it's not obscene.

Only Zicari and Romano have been charged. The wholesaler and others who allegedly bought the movies have not been identified.

Zicari and Romano, both of Northridge, Calif., could face a maximum of 50 years in prison and a $5 million fine if they are convicted.

This page contains copyrighted material and is made available to better understand pornography, e.g., its effect on society. It is distributed without profit to those who have an interest in receiving the information for research and educational purposes.