Monday, Jun 21, 2010    Text size: 

Hall’s company, G Media, last month pleaded guilty to possessing a commercial quantity of objectionable films it intended on selling and exhibiting.

The company also pleaded guilty to producing sex films that were too graphic to be legally made or sold in Victoria. Hall said the company could have spent thousands of dollars trying to define Australia’s adult laws, but that would have been too disruptive and costly. Therefore, the company pleaded guilty to the charges.

During court proceedings, G Media’s attorney told the judge in the case that the company’s policy is to remove images of models if those models made a request they be removed.

But now, several models are claiming that G Media is refusing to remove these images.

According to Australia’s Herald Sun, former nude model Bella recently asked the company to remove every image of her. She was told in writing that wouldn’t be possible as removing content from the site is not company policy.

Bella said that she has contacted about 30 other models who also plan on asking the company to remove their images. She says several of the models have already been told removing the images wouldn’t be possible.

“We were not made aware what we were doing was illegal,” Bella said.

Hall told XBIZ that the company does have a content removal process and that the company’s attorney did tell the judge if models ask for their content to be removed, it will be removed.

“This was referring to the five-day cooling off period we have where, for five days after a shoot, a model can choose to return her modeling fees, and we'll destroy the shoot, if she changes her mind,” Hall said.

“There is also a process where a model, under duress of some sort, can contact us and have her content removed under some circumstances. Depending on the facts, we may immediately but temporarily remove her content from the site, while her application for permanent removal is run through the regular removal process.”

Hall said that the small group of models have been encouraged by a tabloid journalist and a disgruntled former employee and have chosen to misinterpret this process.

“We take care to ensure all our models are extremely well informed as to the nature of the work, and there are 16 specific, identifiable, documented events in the model recruitment and shooting process for models to opt-out, or change their mind.” Hall said. “Of course, all our models sign a contract that indicates we own the rights to the content we have produced in perpetuity.”

Hall adds the company has a comprehensive inquisitorial process for models who want their content removed, run by a rotating committee of models and staff.

“We are stepping models who have requested her content being removed through this process currently. Some models are choosing to not participate, and instead communicate with the press, others are embracing the process, others appear to have dropped their request,” Hall said.

Meanwhile, the company’s move from Australia to Amsterdam is full steam ahead and Hall said he will make the transition as smooth as possible.

“We run our business to always be at least four months ahead of our actual content requirements, just in case we need to stop production for any reason, so the site itself (and our DVD's) will continue being updated on their usual schedules.”

Hall added that Dutch laws tend to be more favorable than Australian laws when it comes to running an adult business.

Additionally, Hall said the company has launched new branding and updated its content management system, with new advanced searching and filtering features.

The company should be up and running September 1 with contingency plans slated for Nov. 1.