AFF Contributory Infringement on The Paris Hilton Sex Video or 1 Night In Paris

I am still waiting to get one DMCA abuse letter that has been send in the PAST to any of the mentioned publishers/sites mentioned in this thread. I am looking forward to see this

I am sure that we will have lots and lots and lots and lots of fresh content available for viewing with out you and the entire members of this thread...content that will be produced by people that respect web 2.0. if there is one thing we are not going to have any more is ignorant people like you! That's so clear! and YOU KNOW IT! but just to arugant to admit it!

hahahaha

Accusing sponsors before sending even one DMCA abuse to the actuall publishers so pathetic!

We all know by now that some of the people ("rightowners") here has admitted that they do not believe in DMCA principles...They are not interested to send DMCA notice to publishers - they just want them all closed and the admins behind bars (may be also electric chairs)

Your DMCA notices will be a fraction of the entire content in those sites. Publishers will really not mind taking down your content - its really not a big deal for them. But apparently you are not after getting your content down of those sites - you are after closing them entirely, hurting them and their sponsors and accusing them doing a crime

Thats the truth about some of you guys....

This quite simply explains that you don't get it in the slightest.

The torrent / tube / P2P / filehost sites get traffic because they are filled with content that is "stolen" or "borrowed" from other sites and copyright holders without permission. They exist in larger numbers because they have discovered that they can get enough traffic and enough click outs to make a profit over the costs of bandwidth in running these sites.

Companies such as AFF, Adbrite, Etology, and (hopefully no longer) Fleshlight are the guys who convert this traffic to money for these sites. Without these companies (and companies like them) these sites would have no income, no way to sustain themselves, and they would pretty all disappear within a couple of days. Without income, only the hardest of the hardcore file sharing sites would be around.

Without the stolen content (ie, the good stuff) these sites wouldn't get traffic and also wouldn't be profitable.

You need to understand the idea of basic conspiracy theory. The public steals the stuff, gives it to the fence (p2p network, torrent site, tube, whatever) and the fence pushes the resulting traffic off to AFF to turn the whole effort into money.

Remove the money, and people would still steal the content but have less chance to distribute it, and that would change the dynamics of the situation.

There is no way that companies like AFF can justify doing buisness with websites that are enabling the distribution of copyright material. There is no way that anyone in the adult business should be able to justify continuing to send traffic to AFF, as it is clear they are financing the other side in a very strong war.

Boy, you truly have no idea what you're talking about.
My previous comment was intended to make you think for a bit, but obviously you're missing few brains cells (understandable you're not fully grown adult yet).
You're mistaken if you think the industry will put up with parasites like yourself without a fight.

You also mis-concept web2.0 and profiting of someone else content without a license.
This thread is about a particular company, AFF illegally profiting of XPay's content. How do you justify what AFFs is doing being right?

As been advised before, keep out of topics you know nothing about so you won't make a fool out of yourself, which you already did several times in this thread alone.

You're an idiot

Lets put this web 2.0 outside of content theft/financing as one has nothing to do with the other.

In essence Web 2.0 provides means of advanced user interaction throughout world wide web.
Web 2.0 is not only about user generated content; it is most definitely not an excuse for piracy.

Do not try to cover illegal/immoral/unethical activities behind Web 2.0 concept. It is not what it's about.

It's pretty weak of copyright abuse supporters to come in here and try to suggest that content producers are against free speech or don't understand web 2.0, although I guess that it is easier than answering questions directly and dealing with the actual issues we are raising.

It would be nice if at future webmaster/adult industry shows, if a booth can be provided for the emerging watchdog group, where interested content producers can walk up, be shown where their content is illegally being offered, and then walked through filling out the DMCA forms.

I believe this could help greatly to recruit new members to the organization, who might otherwise be unaware.

ADG

OMGzzzzzz
STFU...
Why the fuck are you people even bothering...

Hellooooo Troll? Mean anything?

SOme stupid noob nick is just tagging you guys along c-mon already how fucken retarded are you people?

Scratch that question, carry on...

This whole fucken thread and topic is totally lame...

Here is the scenerio...

LOOK AT ME and my attornies, AFF sucks Blah blah blahhh

Then the rest of you...

YAWN.

Hey Alien, guess what - the value of your video productions just went down 50% because people can't afford to pay for them anymore.

Can I have a copy of everything you make to put on the tube sites with a url that redirects to AFF on it so I can make money. I won't pay you or nothing, but I am sure you are alright with that.

Yeesh!

What's 50% of squat?

AlienQ invented talking out your ass and shooting yourself in the foot...

ADG

tell your friends to check their emails - some of them had their second dmca go out for the weekend (today Sunday). Paul Berra is all over it .

please alien. if you owned the rights to the video you would not tolerate AFF littering the web with it to solicit members for their site.

you are the most transparent poster ever. call a spade a spade. we have had no issues with youtube, youporn, megarotic, redtube and many other sites as far as our content. they all move fast as shit when we notice them. good for them- there is plenty of promo content to keep those sites flooded with content that is not misused. aff has a case of wide-scale abuse and slow response time. you and your buddies should diversify sponsors and find one that is not in over its head.

tell your boy at adultsins.net to make sure he is getting copies of the domains by proxy emails... you never know with those.

hello everyone

The reality is that many of them don't get the mail because they intentionally put crap on their whois records.

If they don't have a DMCA complaint link, and falsify their WHOIS info, that should be actionable...

ADG

you go man. checked over at adultsins. net in the last 15 minutes and the AFF banners are still flying... as a matter of fact the FLeshLight ads are still up and clicking through too so Josh was obviously, as always, utterly full of shit about them making any changes on that front... they cant feign ignorance over this infraction as its been pretty fucking public.

love to see this one lose its reason to facilitate theft friend, drop in the bucket of course but these punks need some examples set i think..


ps: ADG, just dropped you an email bud, thx..!

If this issue is about a specific site and not the entire web 2.0 paradigam
xpays: I really enjoy this conversation. Okay, I see tones of stolen content on Megarotic now and in this thread I have seen some people that want to shut it down. on the other hand megarotic is responsive to your abuse emails (I can guess this from your previous replay) or any abuse emails so is megarotic a thief in your and your buddies book? are sponsors doing business with him are criminals? are the users surfing to it criminals?

Xpay, you have all the rights to take action in order to protect your content. That's understandable. but if you are going to think that web 2.0 sites are a crime (which many of your friends here think) even if they tend to host copyright clips then your days in this business are over!

you see that's the point - there a shit load of publishers that do not get anything and I would very much like you to give me some specific details of publishers mentioned in this thread that you have send them DMCA notices...
Can you be more specific: Site, date DMCA has been send and specific URL to the file. Please do I am very interested to dig into this point.

you know, i think a better question would be exactly who *you* are, and why anyone should be giving you copies of the DMCAs in question... maybe you should identify yourself here if you expect to be kept in the legal loop perhaps?

also, i don't see anyone in this thread bringing up Web 2.0 other than you... all of this talk is about companies who help thieves monetize stolen content, what does that have to do w/ your Web 2.0? theft is theft.

oh, and as mentioned above you have been pretty transparent here, why not take off the mask and proudly stand up for these rights and legalities you seem so sure about, eh..?

you call me transparent Thanks you for that! My thought are spoken out loud a clear!

Yes, I do protect web 2.0 and I am a big fan of it!
Yes, Its my business interest to protect adult web 2.0 since I am involved with some pretty cool projects in this field.
and yes, I think that you guys do not want to understand nothing about this paradigm called web 2.0. You just want the world to be policed in nasty way! you are trying to get a bad reputation to web 2.0 sites in general. YOU WILL NEVER Succeed.

on a side note:
- Adultsins is a torrent site and I am more involved personally with video streaming sites. I am a bittorrent user as well and a big fan of this technology! but in my book bittorrent are the same thing as tube sites - they are web 2.0 oriented!

(I want that some of your buddies here to talk with wired magazine or some other blogers - I want you to get your opinion out to the public and admitting that you are against web 2.0 as this thread it the a good proof for it. I wonder how would you talk out in public) Just tell me that you are ready to talk with the press and I will organize it for you

Did dh get a fake nickname or what is going on lol

I don't know the publisher of adultsin.net. I am not familiar with bittorent. but I am ready to do the following:
Please send me all the DMCA notices that has been send in the past to this publisher and I will start investigating he matter for the knowledge of the entire community:

Please send me the following info:
Date abuse has been send and the url of the file requested to be deleted.
(my guess you have send only recently an abuse email - long after you have started screaming and barking like a dog in this thread)

spoken like a typical prick kid who thinks he has the world figured out today... and will probably be broke or in jail in less than 5 years.


stealing is stealing. period. end of story. you don't have the right to steal other peoples property.

there is no "new business environment" - there is theft on a wholesale scale due largely to gaps in the law and poor enforcement. your "new business environment" won't last too long.

"web 2.0" isn't stealing content. stop confusing the two. a website community and wholesale theft by particular website communities formed for the purpose of wholesale theft are two entirely different things.

can i be your attorny and wast also some of your money yes I really think you are right and you should start hunting them all

why should anyone send you anything? who are you, and why should any proprietary information be forwarded to you? unless, of course, your interest is a little closer than you are trying (badly) to play off..

Do you REALLY think mobile carriers are going to BILL FOR YOU to allow stolen copyrighted videos to be sent to cell phones?

They will take ANY kind of traffic and sign ups. From bestiality to CP, they apparently don't have a problem with it. They know exactly what is going on out there on the web and who is pushing them with lord knows what kind of traffic, and do nothing about it.

Time after time, they prove themselves to be a "below the board" company. Unfortunately wealth and riches have nothing to do with morals and a respectable business.

J$tyle$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am quite flattered by the fact that you think that I should be some kind of a figure. well. the truth is that I am not. I am just a small developer one of many that has been following this and other threads here in this forum as some people have send me links. as a matter of fact I did not know about this forum before and I think its great. I think you know enough about my identity and I guess that soon I will be also part of the legal loop once I am completed with my project.

but even then it does not matter if I am the major stock holder of AFF or just a side worker in burgerking. My thoughts are very clear and my criticism to some of you guys is valid!

Maybe you don't get it or you are playing to be just dumb ass. Most of BT sites are web 2.0 and most of the tube like sites are web 2.0 as well. you call web 2.0 thieves ! you are playing with the words in a pathetic and ignorant manner! I suggest you read this thread from the beginning!

My claim if that non of you believe in the principles of DMCA - you just want to entire internet shout down!
My point is that by not sending abuse notices to publishers on one hand and on the other hand accusing the entire web 2.0 (BT/Tube) sites as criminals is in fact an ignorant move that no one in the world should respect.

My guess is that you are just here to hunt down the technologies and paradigms. you are not here to "protect" your content! you understand that protecting your content is irrelevant because there will always be some one to make it and those web 2.0 web sites are going to be bigger and bigger regardless..and host more and more content. So you want to shout down those sites and kill the paradigm of million of users. there should not be place in this industry for people like you! get out or grow up! no one gives a shit about your content! dont you get this?

I hope so.. lets wait and see

I remember when napster was the future.

for sure they will work with me after they will discover that you are too lazy to protect your content and do not believe in DMCA principals

I am also open to do some rev-share deal with you if this can bring in some additional pennies

Napster was the first one - but after napster there has not been any p2p network that has been closed p2p is the future you are so ignorant and soon you are also going to use it if you want to stay in the business! remember my words!

LegendaryLars
Pimpin on the web since 1994

Last Activity: Today 01:26 PM

heh... your on the wrong board to think thats going to fly. i guess we'll see what the courts think about it now won't we...

and again, noone here is spouting off about banning Web 2.0 aside from you... we're talking about going after those who pay such sites to purvey stolen content. once the companies that pay such "Web 2.0" sites to deal in stolen media aren't allowed to any longer then i guess they can just pay out of pocket for the bandwidth so all the leechers out there can get free content. going after those who make it profitable for such activity doesn't even really have anything to do w/ shutting the sites themselves down, just the input of these ill-gotten gains.

and if your actually serious about just getting into this business, maybe you should look into more reputable channels to focus your energies... sticking up for those who cost the actual content makers untold amounts of lost revenue isn't going to garner you many friends in lots of circles..

winmx and Grokster come to mind

edonkey I forgot that one also if they are so on the up and up why do they hide in places where content theft isnt a crime? Also why no addresses or phone numbers on the sites? If they are just guys making a buck why hide?

Yes they do!

Big props to Evan for standing up and saying things most wouldn't

I have sent the following letter to AFF tonight for Mr. Bloom. Please keep in mind that this letter bears in mind that Mr. Bloom has received copies of our previous documentations per other AFF employees who let us know they were forwarded on to Mr. Bloom.


Subj: AFF sponsored Copyright Infringement Outbreak


Dear Mr. Bloom,

My name is Evan Horowitz from XPays Inc here in San Francisco. Hopefully you have had a chance to review the many emails containing varied and widespread misuse of The Paris Hilton Sex Video to sell AFF memberships. As you know, XPays has substantial rights to the video and also has been assigned the copyright for enforcement purposes as well - in writing.

Please assist us with making sure that our rights are clearly respected by your affiliates and any in-house traffic generation specialists. There are so many cases of AFF sponsored misuse of the video now that the most logical first step to resolving this problem is to clarify your terms and conditions posted on your site as they pertain to XPays, HotelHeiress and TrustFundGirls. I will add some sample text for a clarification to be sent to all of your affiliates with regards to respecting the rights of XPays, HotelHeiress and Trustfundgirls.com at the end of this email. You can craft the letter, but we would like to approve it prior to its mailing and/or posting.

Next, although on several of the notices we provided AFF on thursday and friday last week, AFF suspended the affiliate links of the content submitters- we provided specific examples of ways that our rights were still being abused in conjunction with the selling of new AFF memberships. We also provided banner codes in javascript for several of the sites, which AFF could easily disable more components of the site to totally eliminate the possibility that copyrighted content would be abused.

Also, we requested responses as to AFF's actions taken for each case, accounting,and other details per my previous emails and faxes and posts. I am not a lawyer and should we need to make this a lawyers only conversation, XPays will have no choice but to change my opinion that AFF is sincerely is against the misuse of copyrighted content.

I look forward to working with you & establishing a protocol for future matters such as the events of recent so that we can maintain swift resolutions and the losses that XPays suffers will be minimized.


Here is the text regarding the clarification for AFF affiliates:

Webmaster News ->

IMPORTANT UPDATE REGARDING THE PARIS HILTON SEX VIDEO

< < usual AFF header for reseller email notices > >

CORRECTION: AdultFriendFinder regrets to inform its webmasters of the following:

NEITHER AdultFriendFinder, Passion.com, FriendFinderInc NOR (other AFF sites) HAVE ANY RIGHTS TO THE RICK SALOMON/PARIS HILTON SEX VIDEO. AS SUCH, THEY WILL NOT BE PARTICIPATING IN ANY MARKETING, ADVERTISING, SALES, LINKING OR ANY OTHER TYPE
OF COMMERCIAL EXPLOITATION OF THE VIDEO IN ANY MANNER,
WHATSOEVER, UNLESS THEY ARE DULY AUTHORIZED BY THE OWNERS
OF THE COPYRIGHTS AND OTHER RIGHTS THEREIN.

THE ONLY WEBSITES ON WHICH THE SALOMON/HILTON SEX VIDEO IS
BEING LICENSED ARE > WWW.HOTELHEIRESS.COM WWW.TRUSTFUNDGIRLS.COM.
WWW.XPAYS.COM
OPERATES THE WEBMASTER AFFILIATE PROGRAM FOR
WWW.HOTELHEIRESS.COM & WWW.TRUSTFUNDGIRLS.COM.


(INSERT EXCERP FROM AFF TERMS)

You are prohibited from submitting an Affiliate Network Application if your site or service(s) are involved in unlawful activity or contain objectionable material including by way of example only: a site or services containing images or content that is in any way unlawful, harmful, threatening, defamatory, obscene, or otherwise legally prohibited, a site or services facilitating illegal activity or considered obscene or harmful to minors or not in compliance with applicable laws; a site or services promoting fraudulent, unlawful, misleading, or unfair business practices, a site or services promoting violence, a site or services that has sent unsolicited commercial e-mail within the past four years, a site or services that intends on sending unsolicited commercial e-mail at any time during the term of this agreement, a site or services promoting discrimination based on race, sex, religion, nationality, disability, or age, a site or services incorporating any materials which infringe or assist others to infringe on any copyright, trademarks, patents, or other intellectual property rights, or a site or services involving unfair competition (collectively "Content Restrictions").

_______________________

Once we resolve the first batch of issues, we will have a protocol for the next batch we have for you. Without a clarification to AFF resellers etc. the task is much more cumbersome and overly burdonsome (it is already- please send the clarification letter asap and work with us so as to respect each others rights).

Thanks for your prompt attention.

Best Regards,
Evan Horowitz, CEO
XPays, Inc.
415-331-2496 ph
415-387-1516 fx
866-666-Evan mobile



- The unauthorized copying and distribution of the Video clearly constitutes intentional and malicious infringements of copyright in violation of the United States Copyright Act, Title 17 of the United States Code, Section 101, et. seq., and exposes you and everyone acting in concert with you to civil liability, damages, injunctive relief and reimbursement of all attorneys> '> fees and costs incurred by my client(s) in connection with a copyright infringement action. Section 504(b) of Title 17 of the United States Code states:

[T]he owner of copyright under this [Act] has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following: (1) to reproduce the copyrighted work . . . (2) to prepare derivative works . . . (3) to distribute copies . . . (4) to perform the copyrighted work publicly . . . and (5) to display the copyrighted work publicly.

(Emphasis added). Any action inconsistent with, or in any way violative of, Mr. Salomon's & XPays copyrights in the Video will constitute copyright infringement. See also, CMAX / Cleveland v. UCR, Inc., 804 F. Supp. 337 (M.D. Ga. 1992). The Copyright Act clearly defines such actions as unauthorized copying, publications and broadcasts of copyrighted material, whether or not you are selling the copyrighted work, merely trading, or supposedly giving the content awy away. Section 101 of Title 17 of the United States Code sets forth the legal definitions of terms within the Act:

"Publication" is the distribution of copies . . . of a work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending . . . or other distribution.

Anyone "who violates any of the exclusive rights of the copyright owner . . . is an infringer of the copyright." 17 U.S.C. &#167;&#167; 501(a).
_________________
This letter does not constitute a complete or exhaustive statement of all of XPay's rights, claims, contentions or legal theories regarding this matter. Nothing stated herein is intended as, nor should it be deemed to constitute, a waiver or relinquishment of any of XPay's rights or remedies, whether legal or equitable, all of which are hereby expressly reserved.

yes, so get your content out of those sites by sending an abuse email. Most of those sites will comply if you do this in the right manner. They really don't give a shit about your content. They will delete it in a second! But apparently you just want to call web 2.0 admins criminals and you don't respect DMCA principals this is my point here - that as ironic it may sound a vast majority of content owner do not respect DMCA principles! because they are not threatened by their content being pirated - they are threatened the entire technology and phenomena. They know that their content is just a small fraction of the entire content presented on those sites - they know that no one will give a shit once there content is deleted! Comon man, I have asked in this thread alone maybe 5 times to give me DMCA notices - and you know what? no one send me a thing!

yes for sure.. they need the traffic - this is their business. But they are not the responsible people to police your content hahaha especially if the rights owner goes to them directly before he sends abuse emails to the site. The way I look at it... Right owners do not want really to get there content down - they just want to eliminate the competition in a very stupid way (if there is a word like that called Morals and ethics in the adult industry - )

I am sure that AFF and similar companies will take some action against some really extreme practices after they will be 10000% convinced and then again they will only do this as an act of courtesy. but the majority of sites 97% of them will still work with AFF and will serve "pirated" content and will also comply with DMCA. Most sites will comply with DMCA and also serve "pirated" content - this does not contradict.

Trust me - they will get a lot of traffic - more then you can imagine - there is no lack of content out there!
They are also good for you business - they are the ones the pushes the drugs for free to consumers - and you are the dealer that once the consumer gets addicted you start selling him the drugs!

Right - that's exactly the point! your biggest problem is the "public". its you against the public. you have no choice to win this war! No curt and no administration could do that. again - you have a problem with content - get it out by sending an abuse email - it will be deleted!

who are you to decide that web 2.0 has no right to do money?

if you don't want to make business with aff then don't do business with them. Its after all your free while! I would say there is no way you should call web 2.0 site criminals and not respecting DMCA principals and not policing your content directly with the site admins!

Gosh be darned - where could those AFF reps be? I guess no one ever works there on the weekend...

You would think a big company like that, which has time to advertise 24/7 on sites featuring CP and Beastiality, and illegally displaying content of some of their Bro's, might have a little time to check this thread - I mean in between cracking a beer and counting their money and all.

I guess Andrew and Lars have more important things to do than to worry about the reputations of their company and themselves.

ADG

I love Paris Hilton. She pays for my car.

xpay, I you going to answer my qustion?

when you insinuated that i needed to post dmca's to prove something to you, that was it. take care-