CLEANFLIX AT FILM FESTIVAL IN TORONTO

BY SPENCER SUTHERLAND / September 22, 2009
In This Week

Looking for all the action, adventure, and comedy of Hollywood's biggest hits -- without the pesky sex, swearing, or violence? For no-R-rated-movie-abiding Mormons, CleanFlicks and its edited films were a godsend. The only problem was that the films' copyright holders weren't happy with the idea of someone else chopping up their intellectual property.

In their new documentary, "CleanFlix," Utah filmmakers Andrew James and Joshua Ligairi tell the story of the rental chain -- and the culture that spawned its success -- while following founder Daniel Thompson through a bitter lawsuit and public sex scandal. Throughout the film, the directors refuse to take sides (even they seem to have different opinions on the matter), but certainly raise plenty of questions about censorship, religion and Hollywood.

IN recently caught up with the two filmmakers as "CleanFlix" made its debut at the Toronto International Film Festival.

Why was this was an important story to tell?

James » It is a topic that is widely misunderstood. We also wanted to ask questions about art, censorship, religion and sex, and I think the film brings up a lot of ideas that are worth talking about.

Ligairi » I'm interested in art that expands understanding of the human experience. We're showing the world this specific cross-section of American culture that many people have no idea even exists. But the film is even fresh for those that think they know the culture and the topic.

You are heavily ingrained in both the art of film and Utah culture. Is there a clear-cut right and wrong in this story from either side?

James » Yes and no. It's clearly wrong to make money by altering and selling copyrighted material that doesn't belong to you. That's as clear-cut as it gets, at least for me. However, if there were legal ways to do it, I think that question becomes much more difficult to answer.

Ligairi » The movie answers a lot of questions, but it also challenges the audience to ask some questions of themselves. There are a lot of gray areas here. I have varying opinions on the issue depending on what angle I am looking at it from. The idea of censorship is very troubling, and that is key here, but if we look beyond that for a moment, there are all kinds of other issues at play. Making the film has helped me realize how nuanced the potentially polarizing discussion actually is. The film is full of information (and hopefully insight), but it also requires some work on the part of the viewer. I'm more proud of that than anything else.

As a filmmaker, what would be your response if you found that edited copies of "CleanFlix" were floating around?

James » I would be upset, especially considering the fact that we've talked about doing our own "clean" version of the film. We've spent three years making it and labored over every little decision. It would be frustrating to see a lot of that work being arbitrarily changed by a third party.

Ligairi » Personally, I could care less. I don't believe in auteurs. Art belongs to the world. While there is great meaning for me personally in the act of creation, I can't deny that the film changes depending on the viewer. Each audience member brings something different to the table and what they bring literally has the power to change the meaning of the film -- if only to them.

The end user has some rights. I'm not talking about this in the capitalistic sort of way that the sanitizers often do -- the 'I bought it and I can do what I want' argument. I'm speaking from the theoretical standpoint that, as a filmmaker, my transmission hasn't served its full purpose until it is decoded by a receiver, and try as I might, I can never control the way it is received. If that answer is pretentious or over-intellectualized, the shorter answer is that we are toying with doing our own clean version anyway, so it probably won't come up."

If clean movies were ever able given a legal green light, do you think there is a market for edited films outside of Utah?

James » "People often talk about this large market for sanitized films outside of Utah, and I suspect that there probably is, but one can only speculate. People tend to point at polls or cultural identity as a way to identify such a market, but CleanFlicks and companies like CleanFlicks never really took off in other places, so it's difficult to say."

Ligairi » "Time will tell. All indicators point to a considerably large market. My guess is that it is as big as the market for unrated films, for instance. CleanFlicks had about 70 locations across the United States and was substantially bigger online. In the end, 80 percent of their business was online and outside of the state. We focus on Utah because it took Mormon culture to create CleanFlicks, but it was spreading everywhere and they were still growing at a rapid rate when they were shut down."

Because Walmart refuses to sell CDs with an Explicit Lyrics label, any artist who wants to sell records puts out a clean version. Would filmmakers be willing to do the same if a big retailer said 'No more R-rated movies'?

James » Filmmakers edit their films for airlines and television, so I imagine that they probably would, but again, that is just speculation. I guess it depends on the studios that own the films in question.

Ligairi » The music industry is probably the best comparison, yet it almost never comes up. Mainstream artists like Eminem, or whoever, don't complain about doing their clean versions because it is just part of the industry -- the same way television and airline edits are part of the movie industry. A lot of cooler independent musicians opt out and decide that they would rather leave their music intact than have it play on the radio or be sold at Walmart. That is a financial sacrifice that they make for their art. You don't see a lot of filmmakers willing to do that.

Though James and Ligairi are busy showing the film off at foreign festivals, they hope to have their U.S. debut at Sundance in January. Until then, Utah audiences can follow the movie's journeys at www.cleanflixthemovie.com.

Direct Link to In This Week

TIFF MOVIE REVIEW: CLEANFLIX

BY PETER SCIRETTA / September 19, 2009
/Film

When I first found out that a documentary about Cleanflix was playing at the Toronto International Film Festival, I immediately added it to my must-see list. I’ve always been interested and outraged at the concept of Cleanflix.

For those of you who don’t know, Mormons are advised not to watch R-rated movies because the language, sex and violence will contaminate and pervert your brain. The modern day prophets say the best solution is to avoid these things at all costs. A video rental store was opened in Utah to cater to to the sanitized beliefs. Cleanflix would take Hollywood movies and professionally edit them in final cut, removing most of the “bad parts.”

The film features a number of comparisons between original theatrical cut and CleanFlix re-edits, most of which are both hilarious and appalling. Swear words aren’t bleeped, scenes are suddenly cut, the cleanflix edits are actually remarkably well done, at least technically. But deleted shots, sequences, or conversations, often results in a completely different intention in the dialogue or moments of a film.

The sanitized versions could be rented at the CleanFlix store, or even be made available for purchase to the paying public (they did this using a 1:1 ratio, including an original purchased copy with each cleanflix copy). At one point the company was operating 10 corporate stores, in addition to almost 70 franchised dealerships. The documentary CleanFlix tells the story of the rise and fall of Cleanflix and other edited movie dealerships in Utah, with a primary focus on Daniel Thompson, a Cleanflix franchisee who became the de facto leader of Utah’s the edited movie revival. And Daniel’s story has just as many twists and turns as the headline story.

If I have any complaint about the documentary, it is that at one point it becomes too focused on Thompson’s story, and misses opportunities to talk about the ethics, present and future of the sanitized movie business. I would have loved to learn more about how and why Hollywood creates TV and airplane edits of films, but refuses to provide these edits to the Mormon audience. I would’ve liked to see a follow-up on the DVD players being created today that allow parents (or whomever) to selectively edit adult content out of a movie. This story doesn’t end with Daniel, and the movie shouldn’t end with him either.

But that said, Cleanflix is easily the most interesting topical documentary about movies since This Film Is Not Yet Rated. Cleanflix is a movie which continues hours after the credits, in the conversations and debates you will have with your friends and family. It creates a discussion about art, censorship, rights, religion, and technology. With popularized art, what are the rights of the creator (director), copyright owner/distributor (studio), and the art buyer (moviewatcher). And as technology grows, will Hollywood be able to contain the demand for sanitized movie edits?

Interestingly enough, the directors have said they would like to give the film a big premiere in Mormon country…Sundance, make this happen!

Direct Link to /Film

TIFF DAY FOUR - CLEANFLIX

BY CARTUNA / September 14, 2009
Ain't It Cool News


The short version:
Very compelling, if somewhat slanted documentary. I really enjoyed it, and would watch it again, or maybe even buy the dvd at some point.

The long version:
In Utah, where Mormons have been explicitly told that they are not to watch R-rated films by their prophet, enterprising entrepreneurs start businesses where they edit people’s videos of blockbuster Hollywood films to remove any ‘objectionable’ content.

This documentary follows a few of these businesses, as they bump into copyright law and the wrath of the artists whose work they are nipping and tucking.

As you might expect, the ‘choir’ was definitely in the house for this particular bit of preaching. This is a documentary that has chosen sides - from its opening frames, it paints the Church of Latter Day Saints as horrifying and maniacal (by simply showing one of their prophets, preaching, on a distorted grainy videotape) and I wouldn’t want to be the one to argue against this stance.

The documentarians were either very wise or very lucky to concentrate their narrative around Daniel Thompson, owner and operator of a small edited-video rental and retail business as their lead subject in the film, as the guy simply loves the attention of the media, and shows an incredible degree of hubris, which ends up coming back to bite him on the ass, multiple times. He rivals King of Kong’s Billy Mitchell in being one of those ideal documentary subjects, who you can’t quite believe is a real guy.

We follow him through his emergence as a national spokesman for the concept of edited videos up to and beyond a shocking sex-scandal.

I doubt edited-video supporters will really enjoy the film, but the rest of us should have a pretty darn good time.

Direct Link to Ain't It Cool News

UTAH MORALITY TALE PREMIERES AT TORONTO

BY SEAN MEANS / September 11, 2009
Salt Lake Tribune

Considering the three years it took to get from Utah County to North America's largest film festival, it's understandable that filmmaker Andrew James was getting teary-eyed.

"It's really emotional -- it's been a great journey," James said, standing next to his co-director, Joshua Ligairi, in front of the audience Friday at the Toronto International Film Festival before the world premiere of their documentary "Cleanflix."

The 90-minute documentary examines the cottage industry that sprung up in Utah in 2000, when a company named CleanFlicks started offering DVD and VHS rentals of Hollywood movies -- edited to remove violence, profanity and sexual content -- to a predominantly Mormon clientele.

Thom Powers, the festival's documentary programmer, introduced the movie with a joking nod to the Sundance Film Festival. "Every year the film industry goes to Utah for 10 days," Powers said, "and the rest of the year we don't think much about the place."

As the movie rolled, the movie-savvy Toronto festival audience learned about the once-thriving business of CleanFlicks and its imitators, and the conditions that prompted that success -- namely, the prohibition by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' leaders against Mormons viewing R-rated movies.

The movie also details how CleanFlicks went out of business when a federal judge in 2006 ruled the edited movies violated copyright laws, while some offshoot companies tried to keep going in spite of the ruling.

After the screening, James and Ligairi fielded questions about the morality of the edited-movie business and how owners of that business justified breaking the law. One owner, Robert Perry, a former CleanFlicks dealer, did not. He shut down his business after the court ruling. "You can't break the law and consider yourself a moral person," Perry told the festival audience.

James said that if someone tried to edit his movie, "I'd absolutely be upset about it. They're censoring copyrighted pieces of art they don't own, and they're making a buck off of it."

Both Perry and Utah Valley University communications professor Philip Sherman Gordon, who were interviewed in the film and attended its Toronto premiere, were pleased with the results.

Gordon argued the CleanFlicks side has won, in a way, because recent federal law allows software like ClearPlay, which edits objectionable material from DVDs. Perry said he's happy his side of the story is being told. "I had a good feeling when I first met them that they would do a good job."

Powers, the festival's documentary programmer, said Toronto, with its concentration of movie press and industry, is "a huge launching pad" for "Cleanflix."

Having the premiere on neutral territory may be a plus as well, Perry said. "If this was at Sundance," he said, "we'd probably have picketing and riots."

Direct Link to Salt Lake Tribune

THOM POWERS PREVIEWS TIFF DOC LINE-UP

BY AJ SCHNACK AND THOM POWERS / August 21, 2009
All These Wonderful Things

This morning, Toronto announced most of their line-up (there's always room for a few stragglers as we move closer to the September festival) - and we'll have a look at this year's nonfiction titles in the coming days. But we asked our colleague Thom Powers to talk about some of the titles that were unveiled this AM and he was kind enough to offer a preview:

ATWT: The CLEANFLIX story is really interesting to me, because it deals with so many of the ownership issues that we talk about and that, as documentary filmmakers, we wrestle with. On the one hand, as artists, we want and believe that our work should be protected and seen the way we intended, but on the other hand, we want and need to have access to others' material in order to reflect the reality of what happens in a given situation.

TP: Films about film always have a strong place at TIFF. CLEANFLIX looks at a phenomenon in Utah where the Mormon religion discourages its followers from watching R-rated content. Several companies sprung up that re-edited Hollywood films to remove the sex, violence and vulgarity that Mormons find offensive. The “clean” dvd movement turned into a thriving video rental business – until it ran into legal problems and a sex scandal involving one of its proponents. The film raises all kinds of provocative questions and delivers a powerful ending. It’s noteworthy that the co-directors Andrew James and Joshua Ligairi both come from the Mormon community.

Direct Link to Full Article at All These Wonderful Things

CLEANFLIX DOCUMENTARY TICKETS NOW AVAILIBLE

BY THOM POWERS / August 21, 2009
TIFF Blogs

Mormons can be movie lovers too. The problem is that their religious leaders strongly discourage R-rated content. As one Mormon prophet explained, “The mind through which this filth passes is never the same afterwards.” In order to better serve their Mormon clientele, enterprising video stores in Utah started to offer “clean” versions of popular titles like The Matrix and Titanic. Using digital editing software, self-appointed censors removed nudity, gratuitous violence and profanity, then mass duplicated the clean versions for DVD rental. Soon the idea took off, and multiple franchises sought to capitalize on brands like Clean Flicks and Flick's Club. For a brief spell, it seemed like the perfect business.

Unfortunately, no one consulted the copyright holders. Hollywood figures such as Steven Soderbergh, Curtis Hanson and Michael Mann became vocal opponents of having their work re-edited. As quickly as the clean movement blossomed, it started to unravel, with legal threats from Hollywood, accusations among rivals and even a sex scandal in the backroom of a clean video store.

In Cleanflix, directors Andrew James and Joshua Ligairi chronicle the rise and fall of the clean movement. Having grown up in the Mormon community, the duo gained close access to the main players that outsiders might never have achieved. The controversy over cleaning films raises further questions: Who gets to set cultural standards? Does what we watch affect how we behave?

The film gives a broader context for understanding the Mormon institution (known as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) by talking to its adherents and those who have dropped out, most notably the playwright and filmmaker Neil LaBute, known for the dark themes in scripts like In the Company of Men and Bash.

As events unfold, one thing becomes clear: in movies, you can skip over the parts you don't like. But in real life, you can't.

Thom Powers

Tickets Now Available Directly From TIFF

DOC PICS: DAVE COURIER OF SUNDANCE FILM FESTIVAL

BY DAVE COURIER / August 21, 2009
TIFF Blogs

I'm a total film buff. I fiercely oppose censorship. I'm a film festival programmer and my festival happens to be smack dab in the middle of Utah. These are just some of the reasons that I find the subject matter of Cleanflix absolutely irresistible.

Direct Link to TIFF Blog

CLEANFLIX: THE MOVIE

BY KYNAN GRIFFIN / July 28, 2009
The Examiner

Those who follow the film industry will remember the much publicized battle between the Directors Guild of America (DGA) and purveyors of self-edited Hollywood films, most notably CleanFlicks, a Utah-based company.

Through a series of perceived intellectual property rights loopholes, these companies edited content they deemed offensive from R and PG-13 rated films, and then sold or rented them to consumers. The DGA took offense, launched a lawsuit, and in 2006 the US District Court ordered the fledgling industry shut down.

However, dozens of sanitized-movie retailers defied the judgment and remained open well into 2007 and beyond, supported by their largely Mormon customer base, who saw the Hollywood filmmakers behind the suit as self-important and morally bankrupt.

During the time these stores were operating illegally, documentary filmmakers Andrew James and Joshua Ligairi had unprecedented access to dozens of renegade stores and their owners, including the infamous Daniel Thompson, who was arrested for statutory rape after supposedly paying underage girls for sexual favors in his edited movie store (at least he had a screenwriters sense of irony). James and Ligairi have now finished their film, and it has been accepted into the Toronto International Film Festival, one of the world’s most prestigious film venues.

The film is called CleanFlix and follows the publicly open but privately conflicted Daniel Thompson through the legal and moral battles he would face, while offering a revealing look behind the scenes of the sanitized movie industry and the Mormon culture that spawned it.

I sat down with Joshua Ligairi and Andrew James to discuss their film, their careers, and documentary filmmaking in general.

Examiner: How did you get into documentary film making?

Joshua Ligairi: I had been interested in film for a long time, taken some film classes, and interned on some sets when I started my first documentary. The subject just fell into my lap. It was largely a case of being in the right place at the right time, but I was also ready to capitalize on that opportunity. I had a camera, I had some training, and I realized very quickly that instead of getting people coffee or driving actors around (which is the kind of stuff you start out doing on a film set), I could be making my own movie.

Andrew James: My first documentary project was Cleanflix. Before that, I had been shooting short films. A friend suggested that I make a documentary about CleanFlicks and it seemed like a great idea. So I jumped in head first, and figured it out along the way. It just so happened that this friend knew Josh as well and paired us together for the project. When we started shooting Cleanflix, I was busy with another film, Una Vida Mejor. That film is now complete and has since played festivals and won an award.

Examiner: And what were your roles on the film?

Joshua: Not sure if you mean this film or that first documentary film.

That first one was called This Divided State (you can find the DVD online) and my credit was "Key Videographer." Basically, I was there everyday of production with a camera in hand, directing, producing, and shooting all of my own footage, paying for tapes and other materials out of pocket, that kind of thing. I was deep in the trenches and I shot about a quarter of what became the final film.

On the Cleanflix film, I'm the co-director with Andrew James. We also share producing, cinematography, editing, and writing responsibilities, which basically means that we argue a lot.

Examiner: What first attracted you to this subject matter?

Joshua: I had been interested in the cleaned-up movie industry for a long time. It was just one of those cultural phenomena that brought up so many interesting questions about ethics, morality, and film as art or commodity. And then, of course, there were the religious underpinnings which made the topic really personally appealing to me.

I had actually been debating the idea of doing this film for several months when a friend (Xavier Gutirrez, who is now a co-producer on Cleanflix) approached me about doing it together. I struggled with answering him because I wasn't sure how interesting the topic would be to people outside of Utah. Then, a few days later I was in Salt Lake watching This Film Is Not Yet Rated at the Broadway, and I thought to myself, "We could make a Cleanflicks documentary easily as good as this one." No offense to the makers of that film whatsoever. I love it and Eddie Schmidt (the producer of This Film Is Not Yet Rated) has been a big help with Cleanflix. I just realized in that moment that we had a topic equally as charged and complex. I drove straight back to Provo and told my friend that I was in. By the way, for the record, it turns out that the topic of Cleanflix is actually far more interesting to people outside of Utah than inside the state.

Andrew: To be honest, I just really hated edited movies and thought it would be fun. I never imagined this project becoming what it is now. I think back then, I envisioned a short film about the lawsuit or something. Now my view on the matter is much more nuanced, having gone on this journey.

Examiner: You’ve been involved with this film for a really long time now. Has it been a fun journey?

Joshua: For the most part, this film was not fun to make. We shot for two years and edited for another year on an almost non-existent budget. That said, we rarely had a day where we wrapped and weren't very pleased with the days work. We were really fortunate to get some great material.

The most interesting thing to me is that we set out to make a kind of historical document, like, "This is what Cleanflicks was." They had just lost the court case with the DGA and we were going to film the aftermath. On our first day of production, however, we realized that many of these guys were staying in operation, defying the court judgment. CleanFlicks the corporation was shutting down, but there were all of these former dealers and competitors that decided they were going to take their chances and stay open. The movie changed on day one. The story became, "How did these guys that were ostensibly breaking the law feel justified in taking a moral stance? And how long could they get away with it?"

Andrew: Well, like Josh said, the film took 3 years to make. We met lots of interesting people along the way and new surprises popped up every day. As mentioned earlier, when we first started this, the lawsuit with the DGA had just happened and there were quite a few stores that were defying the judgement. Because of this, people were scared to talk to us. As such, it took us a long time to get all the information that we needed. There are lots of facts in the film that seem very matter-of-fact, but in actuality were big mysteries to us for years.

Examiner: What does getting into a prestigious festival like Toronto mean to an indie filmmaker like yourself?

Joshua: It means a lot.

Practically, it means that that we have a good chance of selling the film which, in this economy, I wouldn't complain about.

Emotionally, it is also very gratifying. You work so hard on something for so long and you live in this bubble. It feels really good to finally show your work to someone in the industry like Thom Powers (the TIFF Documentary Programmer) who has so much experience and sees so many films. For a guy like that to show such interest and support for our little movie when he is usually dealing with projects from the likes of Werner Herzog and Michael Moore, well, it is very humbling.

It also brings up this question of validation. On one level you feel kind of validated, but you also kind of resist that. At least I do. If someone didn't like our film before we got into Toronto, I don't want them to like it now. The film industry is funny that way. Our film would be just as good or just as bad whether we got into Toronto or not. I am not a different filmmaker now. I don't have any more or less talent. But in the industry everything changes. I tend to want to resist that.

Ultimately, though, I'm just pleased to be playing alongside such amazing films as the other documentaries in the Real to Reel category. There is some wonderful work being showcased in Toronto this year. I can't wait to be a part of it. I'm also looking forward to my first visit to Tim Hortons. That's a joke.

Andrew: Getting into Toronto means everything. We have sacrificed all kinds of time, energy, and money to make this film. Playing Toronto makes it all worth it. You feel validated and you feel relieved, knowing that all your hard work has been appreciated and recognized.

Examiner: What else are you working on?

Joshua: I'm shopping two fictional feature film scripts around; one that I want to sell and another that I want to direct. I'm also beginning production on my next documentary, with the working title Gay and Mormon.

Andrew: I'm working on several projects, including a documentary about a Peruvian drug smuggler who for years, smuggled cocaine into the US disguised as a Mormon missionary. Its a great story and its true. This project is in its early stages, but hopefully any success we have with Cleanflix, will help me get it off the ground.

Examiner: Any tips for aspiring documentary filmmakers?

Joshua: My main tip is: Do not begin a documentary unless you are extremely interested in the subject. I'm the kind of guy that gets an idea for a documentary every time I listen to This American Life. You can't think that way. If you are serious about making a film, and actually follow through, you are going to be living with this topic for the rest of your life. Never mind the year you spend shooting it and the hundreds of hours you spend editing it. Next there are festivals, press, and this film becomes your calling card. People only know you from your previous work. Think long and hard before choosing a topic and make sure you are passionate about whatever it is. Otherwise, you could find yourself pontificating about something like edited movies at every opportunity and really start to annoy your friends.

Andrew: You need to know how to tell a good story. Read a lot and study. I'm still doing this and I know Josh is as well.

Direct Link to the Examiner

CLEANFLIX GOING TO TORONTO

BY SEAN MEANS / July 22, 2009
The Salt Lake Tribune (Blog)
Two Provo filmmakers will premiere their first documentary at the biggest film event in North America: The Toronto International Film Festival.

"Cleanflix," a documentary by Provo's Andrew James (pictured at far left) and Joshua Ligairi, is among 17 documentaries selected for Toronto, according to IndieWire.

The movie tells of Utah's once-thriving industry in selling and renting sanitized home-video copies of Hollywood movies, and the court battle these stores faced when the Directors Guild of America successfully sued them for violating the studios' copyrights.

The Provo filmmakers will be in heady company. Other documentaries at Toronto include new works by Chris Smith ("American Movie"), Mark Levin ("Slam") and Michael Tucker and Petra Epperlein ("Gunner Palace"). Also, at least one of the DGA members involved in the Cleanflix lawsuit, Steven Soderbergh, will be in Toronto with a new movie ("The Informant!").

Direct Link to Salt Lake Tribune Blog

GOING TO JAIL, FLIX CLUB OWNER ASKS MEDIA TO STOP USING MUG SHOT

BY CALEB FUCKNOCK / August 29, 2008
The Daily Herald

Daniel Dean Thompson, the owner of the now-defunct Flix Club edited movie store, was sentenced on Friday to serve 44 days in jail and 119 days with an ankle monitor.

The sentence stems from an incident in which he and an employee were accused of paying two 14-year-old girls for oral sex.

As he heard the sentence, Thompson's hands, clasped behind his back, shook violently.

In an impromptu press conference held in the courthouse hallway after Friday's hearing, Thompson, 31, said he was shocked by the judge's decision to send him to jail.

"I don't want to go to jail," he said, teary-eyed, calling the sentence "severe." "I was surprised. But I also accept the judge's decision."

Thompson said he had never before had a chance to tell his side of the story. He said his co-defendant, Isaac R. Lifferth, was never a co-owner of the Flix Club, though Lifferth claimed to be, that the store was never a front for producing porn, and that Thompson himself had never solicited anyone for sex.

"I never propositioned anyone for anything, contrary to every report. I am sorry because I failed in doing what is right," he said to reporters, his voice emotional. "I am going to jail, which is very difficult for me. If I could change what happened I would, but I can't."

Thompson then pleaded with reporters to never use his jail mug shot again. When asked why, he said because "it is a bad photo."

Thompson's attorney had asked that the entire sentence be served on an ankle monitor, foregoing any time in jail, saying his client had been with the girls for less than 60 seconds before deciding to leave because he felt what he was doing was wrong. The attorney, Mike Petro, said monitoring would allow his client to continue to have shared physical custody of his two sons and to continue to pay restitution of up to $1,000 a month.

But Judge David Mortensen of American Fork's 4th District Court said Thompson had asked the underage girls their age and that Thompson must have known he was getting into "dangerous territory."

In his press conference, Thompson said he had come to know Lifferth because "he was a boyfriend of my ex-wife's sister and he needed a job." Thompson said he hired Lifferth, who soon thereafter "began living vicariously through me. He told people he owned my cars and my company."

When he closed the company, Thompson said he left Lifferth in charge "to finish last minute business. He turned my office into his own personal private party pad."

When police searched the business, they found drugs and porn in Lifferth's desk, Thompson said. A keg of beer accompanied by a receipt for the beer in Lifferth's name was also found.

"I had no idea, but because I owned the place, it was automatically mine," Thompson said.

A search of Thompson's own house netted nothing, he said.

"I have become a recluse and my life was on hold until today," Thompson said. "People have asked me if I will bounce back from this. It will be difficult but I will try. Contrary to every news report, I genuinely love people and I have gotten a ton of support. It just happens to be from people who are not as boisterous."

Asked several times why he had become involved in the oral sex, Thompson said he would like to know himself.

"If I could answer that I would," he said. "It was a bad judgment call, not a deliberate act of malice. I found myself in a situation that within one minute I became uncomfortable with and left, and less than a minute destroys my life. ... Everyone makes mistakes. The only difference is that mine are published."

In July, Thompson pleaded no contest to reduced charges stemming from the oral sex incident. Thompson pleaded no contest to two counts of sexual battery, a class A misdemeanor. The charges were reduced from unlawful sexual activity with a minor, a third-degree felony. Prosecutors also agreed to drop a misdemeanor charge of patronizing a prostitute as part of the plea deal.

On Friday, Mortensen agreed there was no evidence that Thompson knew that the girls had been paid.

In June, Thompson's co-defendant, Lifferth, was sentenced after pleading guilty to two counts of unlawful sexual activity with a minor, one count of patronizing a prostitute and one count of possession of a controlled substance. Mortensen sentenced Lifferth to 270 days in jail and 36 months of probation.

Thompson and Lifferth were arrested in January after a 14-year-old girl told her mother that an older man paid her and a friend $20 for oral sex. According to Orem police, the two girls asked a friend if she knew anyone who would be willing to pay for sex, and the friend put them in contact with Lifferth, who paid them each for oral sex and later took them to the Flix Club store in Orem and paid them another $20 to perform oral sex on Thompson. Thompson told police that he asked the girls if they were 18, and they said yes.

When police searched the store, they also found dozens of pornographic movies, and the girls told police that Thompson told them that Flix Club was a front for producing pornography.