By Lester Haines for The
Register.
This story has been reproduced with permission.
The HSUS action – filed last week in Superior Court of the
District of Columbia – specifically concerns "The Underground
Pitbull Breeders Association, StreetHeatDVD.com, and the publishers
of The Gamecock and The Feathered Warrior. HSUS has also
targeted DVDs Unleashed: The Realest Pitbull Action Caught on
Tape and Hood Fights Vol. 2, The Art of the Pit, both
"depicting illegal dogfighting".
The HSUS statement reads: "At issue in the case are four
items which the HSUS has repeatedly asked Amazon.com to drop from
its sales list because they depict and promote cruel dogfighting
and cockfighting events in violation of federal law."
Cockfighting is indeed illegal across most of the US, except in
Louisiana and New Mexico.
HSUS continues: "Amazon.com is the sole retailer of
subscriptions to the animal fighting magazines and the only outlet
for animal fighters to obtain subscriptions over the internet.
Similarly, Amazon.com is one of only three sellers of the
dogfighting DVD and the easiest seller to locate on the web."
HSUS backs its case with specific examples which it claims
constitute clear breaches of federal law:
An HSUS review of the last 12 months of The
Gamecock and The Feathered Warrior found that
more than 90 per cent of the magazines' advertisements are nothing
more than a solicitation to commit a crime. The HSUS has also
uncovered evidence that such magazines are published for the
express purpose of promoting unlawful animal fighting and are found
at more than 75 per cent of the animal fighting operations that
have been raided by law enforcement officers.
Regarding the DVDs, HSUS adds:
In the dogfighting DVD Unleashed, approximately 20 dogs
are wounded, tortured, or killed during the making of the movie.
The lawsuit alleges that Amazon's sale of the DVD violates a
federal law that makes it a crime to create, possess or sell a
depiction of animal cruelty for financial gain. Hood Fights
Vol. 2 includes some of the same footage.
Amazon declined to comment on the accusations, but the American
Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression's president Chris Finan
weighed in with: "In its zeal to eradicate conduct that it abhors,
the Humane Society is over-reaching by trying to suppress speech
that is protected by the First Amendment. Speech that advocates
hateful ideas is entitled to the same degree of First Amendment
protection as speech advocating popular views.
"If the courts accepted the Humane Society's argument, we can
only wonder what other kinds of controversial ideas in [books] and
magazines would come under attack next. This is why the Supreme
Court has declared that even the advocacy of illegal conduct is
protected by the First Amendment."
The HSUS statement counters: "There is no First Amendment
protection for speech that proposes unlawful commercial
transactions – let alone speech that is on its face criminal
because it promotes and incites criminal animal cruelty. Many legal
experts agree that there is no First Amendment protection for the
sale and distribution of the magazines."
It concludes: "It's hard to imagine the reasons behind Amazon's
allegiance to these vehicles of animal cruelty in an era when most
corporations make a concerted effort to dissociate themselves from
animal abuse. But one thing remains clear: if it won't be swayed by
simple ethics, Amazon.com may soon find itself being swayed by the
courts."
© The Register
2007
