+ Review Site Owners: Why do you punish people who want to protect their content?? +

Woot at least someone noticed I just know a lot of paysite owners who also list their content on clip4sale and drive traffic to the store and do well with it... I figured I'd take it one step furthur. I was planning to have the downloadable clips in super high quality though to make it worth while... I dunno just an idea I came up with in the shower last week.

One thing you have to remember. With tough times in the economy and tough times in our industry (credit card scammers and tube sites) the push for more quality, more content and more technology for less money is very strong. If you are going to build a site that goes against that trend you better have a very solid business plan

doc how can you compare tubes that are free to paysites?of course viewers dont bitch they arent paying

It is unique and exclusive content in a niche that sells very well for me.

Smart

They don't bitch because it works. When it doesn't work they go to a new home. When a home changes players that the mass population doesn't like, people leave to the next best player. It's why hulu is more popular than fox streams directly, same exact free movies, but one technology is better than the other.

Tube also doesn't mean free site, we have tube style paysites and paysites with flash streams and I consider tube to be the flash style player personally.

You named free sites free sites are very different than paid. Quality can be shit be if its free and good enough they wont care.

I just said tubes, then called illegal sites out differently. Tubes being anything streaming, I don't care if it's free or paid. It's exactly the same in the end.

You guys act like every surfer won't join without downloads, when that straight up isn't the truth. Even when you offer downloads, members still choose to click the embed wmv streams and watch those (if you offer them), as much as they download, often more than downloading. How many of you even offer embedded wmv streams? Hehe.. Not many that's for sure. Most of you guys are still doing what was cool 12 years ago.

I'm not saying the download model doesn't work. it does, but it still also creating a problem that you guys simply ignore and try to cover up with some lame ass excuses.

Funny thing is companies like TB do things totally different than most of you in this thread, you can't download crap and they have other stuff highly DRM protected content. They also do mass distro of the same content. But yet the TB program and paysites are bigger than anyone that has posted in this thread, no mater what the topic of the post was.


What can I say, other than wake the hell up? At least give it a fair shot before you come out and bash it.


Edit... nite, laterz.

Couldn't agree more - I had a big fight with one of the big review sites because they marked me down for having lots of videocaps (photos) on my sites. The reason they're there - is because in my niche, it's almost impossible to get hi-res stills of the exact shots the members want to see. In fact, when I stopped putting up videocaps a number of years ago, the members DEMANDED that they be resumed.

I finally got the review site to understand the reasoning, so they didn't mark me down as much. But much sites with crappy content (in terms of what my niche is all about) still get much higher marks than me, because they meet the review site's expectations of what should be on a porn site.

They still cash my checks, though.

Mike I have known you for over 10 years. I remember selling you smoking content back when I owned Pure Candy Images in the late 1990's and early 2000's If ANYBODY understands the Smoking niche it is you. I feel your frustration.

Quick Edit: I remember making the girls smoke and smoke and smoke so we could get the smoke coming out of their mouths just right and French inhaling, etc. Damn near killed those bitches with smoking to get a few high res shots for you lol So yeah, vidcaps ARE essential for your niche to catch all those nuances of smoking.

Hi Robbie...yep, it HAS been a long time. Thanks for the nice words...and I appreciated your work at trying to get it just right
And you've nailed the frustration - the sites that have tons of beautiful high-res photos of beautiful women just holding cigarettes - that get higher scores because the photos are 2000x1500, or whatever.

I hear your remembered pain - you *can* get a perfect high-res smoking shot, but it's largely by accident, happening to hit the button at the right time
When we shoot with a new girl who doesn't know the drill, we try to keep a wastebasket just out of camera range for just the type of situation you mentioned
(Although we did have a girl a few years ago, who despite all of our instructions, took some stackers and then ate the entire menu at a Jack In the Box before showing up for the shoot - on her third cigarette, she shot it all onto her lap, the couch, the floor - and she just sat there, stunned, for about two minutes. Best outtake we ever shot )

I suggested this way here because I´m planning to do as well. Have you already plans for a payment system? If so, care to share?

Bump....

When I am in the shower I think about fucking that girl in your avatar.

Review sites and their reviewers by and large don't understand the niches they are writing about. They are all geared towards VALUE based largely on QUANTITY and price to the consumer - which is why you see the same sites getting the highest scores i.e. Videobox - which is a great site for a surfer who's just a guy who wants an easy to get to huge organized library of porn movies.

And no - just because high quality Flash video streaming is ubiquitous on the Net on tube style sites doesn't mean that's what surfers want or will be satisfied with when they join a paysite. Many I'm sure are fine with it and prefer it BUT I sure know in the solo girl niche and other niches a large portion of surfers are COLLECTORS. Just like mainstream movie fans who may go to the theater to see a movie, watch it again when it's on cable yet they still BUY the DVD for the pleasure of collecting and owning that movie.

I like fuzebox's idea and i've thought about a similar idea - just afraid to piss off people who are paying a hefty price already for a membership by making them pay more to collect the content to keep.

I craft my comments for my audience.

why would I ever throw pearls before the swine that is you?

Unfortunately joins that come from review sites retain the least.

The review site surfers have learned to signup for the trial, cancel before logging in and then download everything you can get your hands on.

I like the joins I get from review sites, unfortunately they are the least profitable.
(I am considering removing the trial pricing options for review sites)

deadly accurate which is why I stopped responding to review requests long ago.

Who gives a shit if the members don't like it? Fuck em. They are the ones stealing it in the first place. All we are doing by not protecting our content is allowing them to steal it easier. Why should I give two shits what they want beyond providing a quality product that gets them off?

If I have a home loan, car loan, and bank account that I regularly make deposits into, does that mean I should be allowed to rob the bank? I think not.

Better yet....I'm going to go buy a new car, make one monthly payment on it, then stop my payments and keep the car. Yeah, that sounds reasonable. Oh wait, banks use repo companies who will come take their car back. How dare they protect themselves like that. People should stop buying cars.

Not like people would stop buying if all sites had protected content on it.

When I pay for a movie ticket, will they let me bring a video camera into the theater and tape the movie? No. Do people still go to the theaters to watch movies? Yes. There will always be those who sneak in to the theater too. You can't stop all theft but you should still try.

The last I checked, the review sites get paid by the sales they send to our sites.

I fully understand what you are saying, I simply don't care if the surfers like it or not. Go steal somebody else's content, mine will remain protected. Anybody who is not doing the same is clearly more focused on short term income rather than caring about content theft, protecting content, and long term income.

shap is in no way saying you should not protect your content he is just pointing out that the review site business model is counter productive to giving you a good review when you do so.

Protect your content all you want, just don't cry about when it cause you to get a lower score on the review sites.

except copyright act that gives you your exclusive right to distribute your content, says that right is superceed by something called fair use. And the courts have recognized rights like backup/recover/timeshifting/format shifting as those fair use rights.

Streaming only solutions prevent some of those fair use right (backup/recovery)

herding cats


your assuming that all paysites would jump on board,
your assuming that no one will rip dvd and put them up on torrent sites

Robbies "super special" streaming technology has one serious flaw in the spec, the digital stream is completely decoded at the video card level.

All that is necessary to copy the stream is to virtualize the video card (like vm ware does for network cards) and treat the showing as a display on second monitor to get a crystal clear copy of the video, clear of any encryption.

The only reason it has not happened yet, is because software coders (like me) realize that you would running a race against streaming software companies.

They would have to implement some sort of download and disable function to that virtualized video card. Or try and sue you into oblivion (open source would solve this probelm since there would be no one to sue). The market is not big enough to justify the cost of competing in that space, however if everyone did it, it would be.


there is a law against that act in many countries, however in the countries where there is no such laws all they can do is ask you to leave

since there is no law against review sites giving you bad review because you are "protecting your content" all you can do is live with it.

there are tons of way to make up the revenue short falls then applying draconion copyleft protections.

process monitization
branding bugs
live interaction

hell robbies own quotes prove his members not caring about the right to download and wanting to be part of the family (live interaction) proves it. Just becuase their are people who will try other alternative solutions to your proposed solution does mean they are not thinking about the future.

Robbie says he his protecting his content but what he is really doing is creating a site that focus on live interaction at the expense of the traditional content distribution methodology.

American Idol (and all voting based reality shows) did the same thing, by intergrating a live interactive component to the show (vote for your favorite artist) that loses all value if you watch it months, days later. They suffer the backlash (reality trash) because of it, but they don't care because the money from live interaction is worth more than fully servicing the needs of all consumers. Negative reviews are your backlash, they live with it so should you,

When people ask me about traffic on my tgps I have always told them the same thing...I wish I had none. I wish that everybody that ever came to my tgp would join a paysite with my ref code and then NEVER come back to my free site because they would always be a member of that paysite. heh-heh

Speaking of which. I just looked in my big CC Bill account and see that I STILL have 2 guys rebilling for your old How I Got Rich program that was CC Bill only from years ago!

Now how is THAT for some valuable traffic hitting a well retaining program.

No reason to cry, simply contact the review site and tell them to change it.


Umm... No, see if I DRM protect (even at a basic level) anything, you backing it up, recovering it, or timeshift isn't relevant. You aren't allowed to download it, store it, keep it, share it, crack it, or even copy it - it's a CRIME and is ILLEGAL. Period.

Once you add in DRM, the fair use bullshit goes out the door. Other than for an "authorized" small sample. Or what I authorize the use for. Taking any part you want, is illegal.

Laws already in place for this that shit all over fair use.


Lots of Paysites have protection already and a the largest adult sites on the Internet are fully DRM protected.

Like VOD sites have 10000's of videos you can't even buy in stores, that are fully DRM protected, that you 100% never see them on torrents... ever.. why is that?


Difference... You just broke the law.


We don't need a law. I'm the Sponsor, I just tell you to change it and you will.


He is simply protecting his content, like the other posts in this thread that don't try to do any live interaction with members. Programs far larger than him, me and or any else that has posted in this thread.


DRM & more so streaming DRM is the future of the Adult Industry. Best get with it!

I got bored of reading this thread halfway through the second page, but did
anyone mention that the "protection" people are talking about only protects
your content from a few morons? Using an embed tag to stream your video
or using Flash only makes it take about 6 seconds longer to save - you aren't
protecting a damn thing. What it does do is make it a pain in ass for legit
customers. There still isn't a Flash player for 64 bit systems just yet, though
there is a beta which crashes your browser. 64 bit systems are now $500 at
Wal-Mart, so anyone with a recent system can't see your fucking Flash without
downloading it and using another program to convert it. Then same thing with
Microsoft DRM - one version, I think it was the latest, was hacked before it was
officially released, so it doesn't protect anything. It does, however, mean that
if I want to use any player other than Microsoft's I have to convert the video
before I can watch it. People who don't use Microsoft's player include all Mac
and Linux users, of course. So that's why you get bad reviews - because
your site is a hassle for a lot of people, for no gain - your not protecting
yourself against anyone who has done it before, only from clueless newbies.

Thanks for your input Ray. Encrypted streaming is really just that easy to steal? Hmmm...that's weird, My ENTIRE members area was all over the place, literally hundreds of tubes and torrents. I couldn't keep up with it and my sales were suffering.

Since you got "bored" halfway through the thread, let me tell you my personal experience. I began streaming encrypted h264. Since that time over 4 months ago, not even ONE of our new updates has been stolen. NOT ONE.

And I keep removeyourcontent.com searching for the old stuff.

The result? SALES

That is my actual hands-on experience. Not theorizing. Reality. And yes, somebody with knowledge and skill can absolutely figure it out. And when and if they do I'll do something else. Got tired of whining about it and losing money.

And again...I have NEVER had a bad review. I said that they made it a negative point in the review without pointing out why it does make the members membership more valuable to them.

And since you didn't read the thread I'll tell you why...If I pay $34.99 for a month membership to a site. And my buddy laughs at me and says he just saw the whole thing for free...Well THEN I am a pissed off member. However, if I am a member to a site that I know I am getting my money's worth and it's value is NOT free for everybody else, well that makes a difference to me.

You should have read through the rest of the thread. Recording HD encrypted streams isn't really an issue. It comes out pretty trashed. And you can add extra crap, like the IP address of the user embedded into the steam. The list goes on.

These players, like what is on Hulu work across Macs, Windows and Linux. And with Hulu and even YouTube, the average user, hell the above average user, can't figure out how to save the files, let alone install a group of complex software to record the stream.

MS DRM has also come a long ways, and with packaged solutions you can convert to mp4 for macs. They also have streaming solutions. And it is proven to work, even though it can be ripped it still protects from the other 99% of the people.

You lock your house/car up, not for the 1% that will break into it anyway. But because when I leave the keys in the car, doors open, with all my shit laying in the seat, the other 99% become thieves too, and that's who I'm really trying to keep out.

You are completely and totally wrong. Encrypted vids cannot be embedded. Jesus...do some research. These are NOT flv's we're talking about.

Good point, it adds value to the site because members know other people aren't just openly getting it free, so they should too. I like that line of thought.

It'd some kind of crazy custom shit, like all my stuff

The way I see it, the current global potential member base is dwindling, and everyone is trying to increase their earnings per member. I figure this is a way to do it instead of aggressive upselling, mailing, or cross selling.

I would spin it as a value added, as in the streaming videos are already good quality, but you can download a nice big 900mb high definition version of this clip for home use for $6 or whatever.

you could use http://www.phantomflicks.com/ - works with CCBill for example.

I use that to let people buy per download scenes of my stuff from before we started streaming. Works great and is a nice supplemental revenue stream to the paysite. Some people just don't want to join a paysite for whatever reason, but they will pay hundreds of dollars to download one scene at a time.

And yes, I had this in place long before I went to encrypted streaming just for the purpose of offering that option to people who don't like to join sites. Matter of fact, I was the first person to use phantomflicks after Bill had beta tested it.

Quick Edit: And that is also one of the reasons I use removeyourcontent.com as part of my 1-2 punch of protecting my content and keeping it as exclusive to our VALUED members as possible

Jepp, danke!

and since it is there site they have every right to tell you to


100% wrong, you can't tos/DRM fair use rights away, if that were true, VCR would be illegal
media PC would be illegal
myth tv would be illegal.
the copyright act explictly states that fair use is excluded from your exclusive rights to distribute. You have absolutely no exclusive rights for fair use. Maybe content producers will successfully change the laws in the US (the mpaa has deep pockets)

Although i doubt it because the fair use economy (PVR,DVR, TIVO, BACKUP, recovery etc )
is a trillion dollar industry and putting all those people out of work just to grant you rights that the original copyright act never intended you to have does not seem likely.

so what the point i was making is that the only way his arguement would work is if EVERYONE DRM/STREAMING only their content, they have to completely give up dvd sales revenue. If that does not happen there will always be drm free source (if not paysites then torrents) for competitive porn.


canadian, i live in a country where fair use is respected.
so no i did not.

While you might be able to take me to court, loser pays the legal fees of the winner so i am not worried.

And even under US law, the legitimate fair use right of back up would legitimize my invention just like the legitimate fair use right of timeshifting legitimized the VCR. And the legitimate fair use right of backup legitimized the CD/DVD burner
and the legitimate fair use right of formating shifting legitimized the MP3 ripper (diamond rio).


or what

if a sponsors got the right to dictate the reviews then the source of information
becomes tainted, it would not be respected and the review site would lose all subsequent sales.

the entire business model is to give the full details so they can make an informed choice

Threatening to pull their affilate revenue does work either, because they will just give you an even worse review, find more faults and use the negative review to push traffic to their other sponsors.

even if it is technology will come along to defeat it, i have already told how to code a solution around robbie solution. As soon as enough people jump on board of the secure streaming, some coder like me will code such a solution. If someone else doesn't do it i will, when it becomes profitable to do it.

You may want to make believe that you have a right to TOS/ DRM fair use away, but you don't people have a right to back up and recover the viewing rights for content they bought.

I know that most of you guys keep using the movie theater example to justify your control but you have to realize that a movie theater you are renting the seat not paying for the content.

Your streaming model is more like cable tv, and all of the rights that exist for users in that space (VCR/DVR etc) exist for your delivery as well. If i were going to make my software i would make sure that it naming, terminology made it clear that it was only giving you the rights you have had for years with cable streamed tv shows, for the new "internet streaming" delivery method.

Haha, yeah and I don't have to sign the check either. It's my program, my rules, my way or the highway.



Umm.. We have different laws for Legally Protected (DRM) content, that's why people hate it on Music so much. Fair rights is out the door, educate yourself.


Fact is.. Piracy happens from the online sources, and hardly from the DVD sources. I own DVD's, unique content from the paysites/plugins. They aren't pirated and they run several serious deep.



The DRM laws apply in Canada too, it's International buddy. You crack DRM in canada, I don't have to sue you. I just press criminal charges and let you deal with the bullshit.



Like others in this thread have, I have gotten my reviews changed and corrected. So whatever you are thinking is just wrong.


They can give me a bad review and leave it up, I just wont pay. Good for me, bad for them. Bad reviews still send sales.



So, and someone else will make a better way. And all while doing this 99% of the people will never ever use steal it once it's protected.

They don't buy my content, it's not a DVD, they buy a subscription to a website which has content on it that isn't allowed to be copied, duplicated, uploaded or shared under law.

Sweet, and I rent access to my members area and not to single videos that you can own, burn, or old in your hands.

You subscribe to cable networks, you pay fees to get them. You aren't subscribing to my porn tv network. You are subscribing to my website that has a set way it delivers several different products. All of which are nothing like TV.


Anything else?

If you don't want a BAD review... don't be SHITTY. It really is that simple...

I make a shitty album, I get a shitty review @ pitchfork.com, I sell less. I can't call them and bitch about it being unfair.

My movie sucks, I get a low imdb rating and people don't see my movie.

Look at all of the sites that get high marks. 100's of gigs of ridiculous quality high def exclusive porn. Your site has 1% of the content and you can't even download it, cutting of everyone who doesn't happen to find masturbating at their computer desk the perfect location.

You are not understanding the meaning of exclusive content are you? Yes, you can have a site full of hundreds of gigs of the same exact stuff that is available for FREE all over the tubes and torrents and it isn't worth much.

Our site does get high marks.

But the way we are being reviewed would be the same as if there were a review site for Car Manufacturers. So they go to the Morgan Car Company and then they visit the Kia Car Plant.

Well to analogize the standards being used...The KIA would get a GREAT review and a super high score. They would be praised for the quantity of cars and the efficiency of the assembly line, etc.

Meanwhile the Morgan car company would recieve a lower score and get negative remarks for only having a few cars built each month and the fact that they are built by hand which is extremely innefficient and results in a handful of cars a year.

But in the end...I'd much rather drive a Morgan than a cheap Kia.

I do EVERYTHING by hand. It's painstaking and carefully designed to please the big tit niche guys. Same as Mike Smoke is a master of the smoking niche. Or tony404 understands the bbw niche.

I have to protect my stuff. The value of it to me is in the exclusivity of it. Once it's available for free everywhere, then my members are the proud owners of memberships that are essentially useless.

Hope that clears up any misunderstanding you may have. Because there is not one person in this thread that has a "shitty" website as you implied.

It is important to remember that not all paysites are the same. I agree 100% with a small niche paysite you have to protect your content by all means necessary. That doesn't apply to us. Our product is different and our members are different. I can see that people are missing the point in this thread. It's not 100% black and white. There are alot of grey areas that need to be dealt with differently.

Exactly, and the reality is that everyone who shoots their own content and has a focused vision of what they want to present should be reviewed in the same manner. Twistys for years was a babe niche site. And I have been an affiliate of yours for about as long as you have had Twistys up and running. I always kept your stuff in the "Babe" section of my tgps because it made no sense to put it next to a gallery of the same girl doing hardcore at another site. Same as if I were critiqueing your site I would have to do so in the niche that it is and with an understanding of what makes it desirable to the men who seek out that babe niche.

You've had a great run with Twistys and I'm digging the new stuff you're trying now. Hardcore baby! Looking great.

Though as far as the other matter of protecting content goes...it can not make you a happy man to put this in google: twistys treat torrent and see the results coming in. I have told everyone who would listen to me that a no-brainer is to hire removeyourcontent.com They have done a fantastic job for me.

Your product is no different. What you are selling to the member is different.

Outside of that...

If currently your sales are doing fine and growing the way things are, then don't worry about it. You are correct, it isn't black and white. The download model does work perfectly fine.

On that note, if your sales are slipping maybe trying something new that could produce a new volume of returns and change rebill percentages may be something worth looking into.

But not doing it because you think your members will get upset, just doesn't make a lost since. You would provide your members with a totally kick ass player. It's what you do, and your members would love you for it. It's better than downloads but they need to see it first, play with it, get it pushed to them a little. Then when it's okay, start converting everything else.

Personally.. I don't care what any of you guys do. I just don't like that idea that people bash DRM that truly haven't tried it or think it's the same as it was 10 years ago. I still think piracy provides sales for paysites, but then again I feel protecting your streams right now would probably provide you more sales and rebills. More than pissed off members, piracy, ect..

Things are changing and I'm loving the way online streaming media is going. I freakin love hulu... I can't wait for it to get better and better over the years. Downloading crap sucked.

good for you
if you have so much power good for you
i know i would never trust a review site that had such a policy
why don't you post the list of sites that gave in to your requests.


IF you bypassing drm was a crime, as you seem to want to claim, then you could never rip an mp3 for your ipod, zune or blackberry. Tools that bypass the drm would result in a one way ticket to jail.

do a google search on drm removal there are hundreds of tools to do just that.

Fairuse4WM hides behind fair use right of backup by stating "FairUse4WM is intended to be used to make fair-use backups only" even though they it can be used to rip out copyprotection and upload those files to torrent sites./shared with friends etc.

IF drm trumped fair use they could not do that.


but we were talking about the theoritical world where everyone was streaming securely (herding cats) and you could not record the stream (see virtualizing of the video card)



see fairuse4WM if what you were saying was true, apple, etc would have sent them to jail a long time ago. If i need to remove drm to fulfil a fair use right, i can legally do so, even if don't want me too.

Fair use has been proven to trump drm in the fairuse4wm cases and in the hundreds of cases for all the drm removal tools.


like i said i would never trust a site that backpeddled like that
so why not post all the sites that backpeddled.


just like the television signal
and just like the television stations you can't TOS away fair use right
if they could the supreme court would never have ruled

all that movie studios would have to do to force you to pay them 5 buck an episode for lost would be to TOS away the timeshifting rights.

they can't do it legally and neither can you, you might be able to sucker some fool into believing you can when they signup but more and more people are learning the truth.


except you are sending the bits to my location, not me comming to your location
their is a difference
it the difference between a movie theater
and a cable tv subscription

your membership is a subscription and so is a cable subscription
anything i have a legal right to do with my cable subscription (timeshifting) i have a legal right with your subscription.


it exactly like tv in the important distinctions
1. the bit stream of data is delivered to my home
2. it a subscription
3. the courts have recognized that even if unauthorized i have a right to timeshift my favorite shows.

your website is exactly like a specialty channel that i subscribe to on my cable bill.

When they cancel dr who again, i will unsubscribe from BBC canada but i have a legal right to keep all the shows i recorded (when i have a pvr) and all the copies i downloaded (when i replaced pvr with a torrent box). I will continue to legally timeshift my viewing rights to after that subscription is long since dead.

The same is true for your web site. IF invent a technology that records the secure stream, i have the same right to sell my software as sony had to sell their betamax and there is nothing you can do about it.

gideon, you cannot imagine how much i would like to shove the words "fair use" up your ass - really


don't you have some bum sitting in front of your house you can tell all that?

Power? I have held payments until Webmasters confirmed domain ownership, provided tax ids, changed words that I didn't find represented my site correctly, made them remove me before I paid them because I didn't agree with the site they pushed me on.. and the list goes on.

It's not power, it's "My" product, content, company and brands to protect.



Oh and... Hahaha, that is the craziest rant of bullshit I have honestly ever seen on gfy. Bits of data through tin foil hats, as if my site is a channel or anything setup anything like cable tv.. wow.. You do come up with some crazy shit.

Do you know why the MPAA has won so many cases? Oh, yeah... DRM baby.. It even has allowed them to sue people, which they have done... which is f'ed up... but they did it and they won! Do you know why people pirate music? Because people feel that it was made for the people and locking it down is total freaking bullshit. Even I agree with that.

But until a court comes out and says my private online subscription site that I fully control everything for, and I set the rules for on what I do and don't allow.. and yet people are still allowed to record and upload it to tubes..

You know what.. At the end of the day if I protect my movies and they want to time shift recored and store it on a torrent or on the shelf or sell it to bob down the road, thenf uck it... let it get ripped. All the better branding for me. But since that doesn't happen, I'm tired of talking about it.

Hey gideongallery...you know you aren't even in the adult industry. So why you continue to try your best to piss people off that ARE in it is beyond me. lol

As far as your views on Review Sites....bro you must think that Pro Wrestling is real too!

A review site is an affiliate that is creating an illusion of a review site. Yes, they do honest reviews. Yes they provide a service to the consumer. But at the very bottom line, they are reviewing sites that they are affiliates of. That's how they make a living and pay the bills. Not a damn thing wrong with that.

They have only been in existence a very few years at all. It was a cool marketing idea. As I said earlier, in the beginning when I started...A TGP was an illusion as well. We presented ourselves as just guys who happened to have found a lot of free porn and wanted to share it. I can still remember all of us putting up little messages saying: "Keep these pages free! Please click on a sponsor" lol

What thedoc is saying is that every review site is an affiliate. As affiliates we are paid by sponsors. If I were to break one of the terms of one of my sponsors...or hell, just piss them off...they can and WILL end your account and thus your money.

It's no different for a review site. If I were really really upset about a review I got, I would definitely go to the review site owner and talk about it. If he and I didn't come to some sort of understanding then I would ask them to remove my site from their reviews.

It's just common business sense gideongallery. Who in their right mind would allow someone that they pay to be a salesman for them to hurt them instead of promote them?

Again, I'm not saying that review sites don't hire people to do honest reviews. And every one of the good review sites do honest reviews to the best of their abilities.

What thedoc is saying would be an extreme example of the shit hitting the fan. I don't know if that happens a lot or not. I've been an affiliate of hundreds of programs for over 10 years and have never had a program owner pissed off at me enough to do something like that.

Usually it's a symbiotic relationship. The affiliate needs the sponsor to get paid. The sponsor needs a handful of real affiliates (the ones who can actually make sales) to bring in fresh revenue. So I'm sure it rarely comes down to a showdown.

But yeah, if it did come down to it. Then the review site would yank links and the sponsor would cancel their account.

So yes gideongallery, a review site is paid by the sponsors. It is their only income stream as a review site. And wrestlers are not really enemies and actually are friends outside the ring. And movies aren't real either.

It's show business, and smart marketing. Now back to your annoying faux lawyering...

I was hoing to the extreme, but he did pull it in like any issue, minor or big, getting it changed let alone stopping what they do wasn't happening. We have worked with several review companies and they helped us improve our site and we helped them improve the understanding of what we provided.

I did have terms about review sites on EGC, let's just say we go way back. Don't get me wrong, the guys that did review me and sent me sales, love'em for it. I was proud to make some of the top earning lists. But I did have terms limiting reviews...

For me to yank your account it has to be fraud.. Otherwise it's just better to work with the person.

But we have heard and seen stories on forums where webmasters get accounts pulled for the stupidest and craziest reasons..big and small programs. Always someone pissed off at a program.

And you and me.. Shap and most of us.. We aren't killing accounts without a real good reason. That's an of course in my book.

Hoing heh-heh Me too!

name one case where the mpaa won because of drm, there isn't the closest thing decss case
where they successfully argued that technology was illegal.

However even in that case where court ruled that decss was 100% the judge ruled that every copy for backup purposes made with the illegal technology was still legal.

Go and read the case, the main reason they one was that they proved that their licienced technology fully provided for the fair use right of back up (by allowing you to backup from originals only) and the decss went to far by completely remove the protection.

However go back and look at all the cases they lost in the same space, when they refused to fully provide for the fair use rights (by open sourcing css decrypt for open source projects) those projects were allowed to use decss code even though it was ruled 100% illegal.

Take a look at any open source dvd player for linux, you will see that it used decss to remove the copyright protection and buffer a small portion of the decryted dvd on the hard drive
that is what you actually watch.

I must say, this has been quite a spirited and heated thread. I for one have learned a lot from a variety of perspectives. It's a lot to chew on.

For all the pay site owners. What percentage of your own members do you think are trying to download content in order to spread it around the Internet?

I also wonder what percentage of pay site members are really interested in collecting porn? If a pay site had a stellar streaming option would that be sufficient for most members?

Review sites are designed to tell surfers EXACTLY what they get when they join, nothing more nothing less. Oh and of course to make sales but that happens naturally because of the honesty.

If you want review site traffic you have to play with their rules. Same for TGP same for google ad words.

Matt

i understand the difference between staged and fake,
they have to keep the illusion of being honest
exposing something that seems to be a secret is the easiest way to keep that illusion
and make money.

knocking you for being streaming only doesn't hurt their sales because the people who click thru would not care about it being streaming only
but those that would appreciate being warned away.

The same was true with informing people that britney lightspeed doesn't really have a solo girl behind it (JANA MRAZKOVA), it just a a rotation of pre bought content and when you think your chatting/communicating with is some bubba pretending to be the girl doesn't hurt sales for anyone who just wants to see the pictures and isn't purchasing the membership for the live interaction would not care and would still signup anyway.
those that do want to interact with the live girl telling them the truth get you a level of loyalty. (more money).

if they pushed people who wanted the right to download content to a site that was streaming only the only thing they would get is a lot of charge backs.

gideongallery I have no fucking idea WHAT you are talking about. My point in the conversation that I was having with actual people in this business was that when they review a site like mine, they should present BOTH sides of the coin.

Not just say: It's a complete negative because there are no downloads.

YOU on the other hand are simply trolling. You come into every discussion to start arguments. And now you're trolling Steve again.

I know you're having fun, but sooner or later you're going to realize what a complete and total waste of time this has been for you. Can't you just go and play in the other threads for one goddamn time and let the grownups have a discussion without you just completely ruining it?

To the real people here:
I have said what I have to say. My sales from review sites are almost nothing these days. My type ins are pretty strong. Any review site that would like to work a little closer and bring those sales up...I'm more than happy to sit down with you at Internext and show you exactly what I'm doing.

Hell, I'll even show you my sales numbers so you can see for yourself what you are doing in comparison when promoting my site. I want you to make money and sales. But I do feel that by not encouraging websites to protect themselves and keep their entire members areas off the pirate sites, you are hurting yourselves.

I DO talk to other owners of paysites. And they do express the fears that I mentioned earlier. And one of the worries they have is that the review sites will drop their scores. It's not a huge thing, but it is something. And every little bit of negativity hurts.

That's all I'm saying. Let's work together and get some sales rolling. It can only be beneficial to all of us.