Friday, April 16, 2010

Cocodorm case heard by 11th Circuit

You remember this case, right? It's the one where Judge Cooke ruled that operating a porn site from inside one's home is permitted in a residential area. The 11th Circuit heard argument yesterday, and John Pacenti covered it here. Judge Pryor wasn't sympathetic:

In 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel indicated Thursday that the keyhole should be closed on Internet porn sites broadcasting from private residences, saying the sites constitute a business and could violate municipal zoning ordinances. “We live in the world of reality TV. People will watch anything,” said Judge William H. Pyror, one of three judges hearing the city’s appeal. His comments came during oral arguments in the city of Miami’s appeal to enforce municipal codes at a two-story colonial home north of downtown Miami used by cocodorm.com, a gay sex site that provides in-home camera feeds to subscribers. The house at 503 NE 27th St. is essentially a production studio because independent contractors provide a service for a salary, room and board, the appellate judge said. But U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke ruled last year in favor of cocodorm’s parent company, Flava Works, citing a 2001 ruling by the 11th Circuit that concluded such homes did not constitute adult entertainment business because the product was essentially in cyberspace.
***
Benjamin told the panel, which included 11th Circuit Judge Peter Fay and Senior U.S. District Judge Jordan J. Quist, visiting from Michigan, that neighbors were undisturbed by the residents. The only difference is cameras were set up in every nook and cranny to record their daily lives, which happened to include lots of sex. The red house’s windows are whited out. There was only one vehicle parked there Thursday.

I was with Judge Cooke on this one, but it looks like it might get sent back for additional hearings:

Benjamin repeatedly referred to the 2001 decision when a panel ruled a home transmitting online images of copulating college co-eds did not violate Tampa’s zoning ordinance banning adult businesses in residential areas.
***
The court indicated it most likely would send the case back to Cooke with instructions that the Tampa case is not controlling.

1 comment:

David said...

David,

Are you ever opposed to your mentor? Should this surprise you? How many times has she been overturned since making her debut on the bench?

Stop sucking up it is nauseating!