Should a license be kept ot or ignored?

Don't know.

fuck licenses, give surfers full ftp access to all your content

its what they want goddamitttttttttttttttttttt

I think licences should state if they belong to a company/url /person and all licences should have terms such as transferable for 20 percent of the original cost (or whatever fee) as this problem occurs regular with so many sites changing hands nowadays and finally a VERY clear description on how the content can and cant be used.

For example a small number of avs systems took advantage of the terms of some licences in the past as the contract stated the content could be used on one url ,so they simply kept it all in one place and let webmasters attach front ends.You could argue thats legal or not but it shows how much fine detail and thought has to go into contracts in this ever changing industry to avoid problems.

Good point Claire, but what happens when people don't read a license, when they know the terms ignore them, then when they are told to fix it, they tell you to license it to suit them and not the original license?

But yes we should have 10 page licenses that people who don't read 1 page can ignore. Forgive my lame attempt at irony.

You could be right. If it's right for us to ignore licenses we should not get upset when surfers do it should we? Or tube sites or Torrents. Glad to see you're not in the "You should stick to them and I should ignore them." camp.

Its a tough call Paul,the net covers the globe so suing is really out of the question in many cases and as you mentioned its great having a 10-20 page contract but if it gets ignored what can you do ?

If I come up with a answer to that I will let you know

What if someone buys content from say YOU Paul and they request a signed copy so that the licensee knows that they actually have a contract and for which sets and that say such a company never gets around to mailing you a signed copy either hard or digital?

In that instance would it not be true that a content company such as yours would have gotten cash and sent the licensee some pictures without a valid license to use them dispite the terms of the purchase?

What then Paul?

Although you have a point After Shock Media I think the bigger issue is this.

On a global scale such as the internet even if you do everything correct how can you protect you licence and contract rights as its almost impossible to proceed with legal action worldwide.

For example I have seen xpays defend its rights to the paris hilton video in a very aggressive manner but still its copied everywhere and still sold all over ebay and on sites,they must be losing millions even with a tough approach

No there is not a bigger issue really, I wish there was in this case.

What we have is Paul complaining because he was right on another board yet very wrong at the same time. Apparently they finally banned him over it, though this originally started long ago. Paul was being Paul and just being an overall prick about it in public. Yes he was right about his very old and antiquated license agreement that 100 other providers used to use word for word a decade ago, however they have made it compatible with the times. Hell there are clauses in such licenses that make them nearly unusable. I am rambling though.

So back to what the issue. Paul does have the right to enforce his license. Paul also has the rights to have his license say what ever the fuck he want. However Paul never needed to be a douche about it and use the arguments that he did in regards to show him a license crap when such issues like I posted happens all of the time. Then with the person who bought the site surrenders (keep in mind they had no damn idea though that's their fault also) and in essence asked what is it we need to license and Paul kept just yelling and refusing to say what is what and just that you do not even have a license to use the content. He was just like a pug on PCP yapping the words license over and over again.

That is what this thread is about, that and that Paul did not care that he was banned over there despite two threads now. If by chance it was actually about enforcing copyrights and not some other debate perhaps I would be saying something entirely different, actually I know I would be.

Damn it I forgot to mention that is insistence on seeing a signed copy and yapping that over and over again goes to why I posted what I did. He literally was frothing at the mouth about seeing this signed copy or no license really exists.

I always only buy exclusive with full rights to resell both for internet and DVD.

oh and btw, there should be an option that says "I only buy exclusive with all rights"
I never pay extra for all rights. Clearly the content is not the same quality as from many producers that post here, but the girls are hot and the members are happy

It's not for me to send them a signed license, we are the granter of the license. It's for them to agree to our terms and sign our license. Which we sign and return. If only we sign that we agree with our terms it's a bit pointless isn't it? They agree, send it to us and we sign it and return it.

The license and invoice are there to be printed out on the penultimate page of the ordering process. It's also mailed to him with the FTP information. It's also ALWAYS in the clients shopping basket for them to grab should they lose it. But yes you are right we do have a box they tick on the site that says they have read and agree to the terms. Do you wait for members to send you a signed license before you grant access or just a box to tick or nothing?

What else do you suggest we do to make it more available for clients? How about I go knock on their door and hand it to them and hold a gun to their head before I give them the content?

What would you suggest we do with a client who signs it and ignores it?

You are dead right that after the license was ignored and the person who was not the client knew it and continued to ignore it I got upset. Getting upset made him come to me with a different approach. But I was wrong.

Tell me what you do when someone ignores you and continues to ignore you. Please tell us what you would of done if a member was breaking your TOS and had not signed a contract.

Then you PAY for those extra rights. This is all about people who do not pay for the extra rights yet feel they can take them.

This business is about selling licenses and rights. If we ignore them we should not flame others for ignoring them. We constantly flame illegal Tube sites, yet are a lot less severe when we do the same.

What if you sold a DVD license to a company who decided they can put it on a website and ignored you when you told them they should not. AFS would be nice and smile at them sweetly, what would you do Gunni?

Again my lame attempt at irony.

My issue was never about waiting for them to sign it. My issue is with that the license issuer never returns a signed copy to the license holder. Thus in the future when the licensor says show me a signed copy they can not since nobody ever bothered to send the buyer a damn signed copy back. Before the sale, after the sale, hell 30 days latter, it does not matter as it does not get done.

Now if you sign a contract and they do not sign well obviously they do not have any rights now do they as the contract was never filled. You as the licensor are in a good faith situation anyways. You already know whom is allowed to use your material and can protect your rights to the full extent of the law if they can not show that they have a valid contract.

Lastly you took great issue and painfully argued that nobody had the right to register/license the content to a company or domain and then sell that domain or company and have the license move with it. Again yes your right to do this if your choose, however it is not dictated in your old license agreement that this can not be done as the content is not being transferred to someone else, ownership of the company is and the same company owns the content whom it was licensed to. This alone was purely a money grab as it was not spelled out in your old agreement. Though I nor nobody else really should pick apart the old agreements as that would just be down right mean and spiteful.

Sadly I am on your side for the most part, just not in your tone, voice, or how you went about it. I also really feel you should update your license to bring it out of the internet dark ages and into today's world to better serve your clients and to better protect your own rights.

We always sign and return licenses, we are also in the magazine and DVD business and they have lawyers. LOL

Yes it clearly states in our license that it's not to be sold with the company and cannot be transferred. In this case all irrelevant as I pointed out to the seller and the new buyer what the license says. They just din not want to abide by the terms.

99% of the time we transfer these licenses with little to no trouble. We give the new buyer a list of the content, he goes back to the stores and adds them to a new basket. He signs out and gets a new license. We don't transfer the old one. It's easier to do a new one. Any charge we decide, usually 5-10% is paid and everyone moves on. Happiness is the aim.

This case was someone knowingly breaking the license by selling it, and using it against the terms of the license, the new buyer constantly thinking he had bought content and not a license, him losing the content and then telling me I should provide him with a new FTP.

He had no IDS, Model Releases and less idea what belong to who. He was never shown the license. What I should of done was told him to speak to the buyer as he was no customer of mine. Yes I did not kiss the guys ass for buying my content from someone else and then thinking I would give it to him all again.

After all that the guy takes it to the boards and starts flaming me. For sticking to my license.

The reason for Terms and Conditions is to protect other buyers and the seller. Otherwise what's the point of having them?

You should sell a license for a domain that is completely transferable upon sale of said domain.