Response from Norm to Mac & Bumble

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Big E
    Registered User
    • Mar 2002
    • 935

    #1

    Response from Norm to Mac & Bumble

    "Google is currently displaying without authorization hundreds of
    thousands, if not millions, of images from Perfect 10, Playboy,
    Macandbumble.com, Hegre Archives, and other major copyright holders, in
    an attempt to attract massive traffic and generate huge advertising
    revenues. In the process, it is directly competing with, and
    supplanting all legitimate pay sites, as there is no reason for
    consumers to pay to join paysites when they can see hundreds of
    thousands of images for free by going to Google.com and viewing images
    via Google's image search.

    Perfect 10 has been trying for years to stop massive theft on the
    internet, which is drastically affecting the income of all legitimate
    players. Perfect 10 has sent to Google 40 DMCA notices covering about
    10,000 infringing URLs since May 31, 2004. To the best of Perfect 10's
    knowledge, Google has NEVER acted to block access to such infringing
    URLs, and has in most cases actually ADDED links to such URLs and in
    many cases, starting placing ads on such infringing webpages. Google
    currently places ads next to infringing images of every major celebrity
    and supermodel -- millions of unauthorized copyrighted images.

    On December 22, 2005, Perfect 10 sent to Google a DMCA notice, its 40th
    DMCA notice since May of 2004. In that notice, Perfect 10 listed some of
    the URLs below images that Google was displaying without authorization,
    some of which were the URLs of Macandbumble.com affiliates. The notice
    was directed at GOOGLE, and was intended for GOOGLE to remove those
    images from its unauthorized display. However, Google elected to (we
    believe) intentionally misinterpret the notice to start affecting
    Macandbumble.com affiliates without providing them with the ability to
    file counternotifications. I have emailed to Google a list of the
    Macandbumble.com affiliated URLs listed in Perfect 10's December 22
    notice and Google now knows that those URLs are not alleged to be
    infringing.

    I am sorry for the confusion and I hope that my email to Google will
    correct any misunderstanding on Google's part. Hopefully all legitimate
    webmasters will understand that if Perfect 10 succeeds in its efforts to
    stop widespread infringement on the internet, all legitimate webmasters
    will benefit enormously.

    Sincerely,

    Norm Zada, Ph.D.
    PERFECT 10
  • Tom_PM
    Porn Meister
    • Feb 2005
    • 16443

    #2
    Good response to a serious issue.

    40 notices.. wow..
    43-922-863 Shut up and play your guitar.

    Comment

    • Big E
      Registered User
      • Mar 2002
      • 935

      #3
      In general, we support Norm's fight to reduce copyright infringement. It's just unfortunate that some of M&B's own URLs as well as some of our affiliates got caught up in this.

      But our affiliates need to know that we're going to stick up for them when they're using our content to promote Mac & Bumble within our T&C.

      Comment

      • Doctor Dre
        Too lazy to set a custom title
        • Jan 2001
        • 51692

        #4
        hrmm ... this sounds a bit better then all the mess that we heard about...
        Originally posted by rayadp05
        I rebooted, deleted temp files, history, cookies and everything...still cannot view the news clip. All I see is that fucking gay ass music video from "Rick Roll". Anyone else have a different link to the news clip?

        Comment

        • Big E
          Registered User
          • Mar 2002
          • 935

          #5
          I think one thing content producers need to understand is the potential liability Google has on this. Google has really pushed the envelope with Google Images, Google Books, etc. I'm not sure if they've stepped over the copyright line or not, but they're sure taking A LOT of (in my opinion) unnecessary risks..

          Comment

          • Spoff
            Confirmed User
            • Jan 2005
            • 783

            #6
            Interesting explaination. Thanks for the follow up.
            Who the fuck is Spoff????? - 10087393 (ICQ)

            Comment

            • Kimmykim
              bitchslapping zebras!!!!!
              • Jun 2001
              • 16015

              #7
              LOL, Norm's spent years trying to make life difficult for everyone he can, legitimate or not.

              Comment

              • Hardlinks
                Confirmed User
                • May 2005
                • 1333

                #8
                I never promoted you and never used images not liscenced, yet my url is removed from serps. And mines been gone since 04 sometime.

                Thanks for your effectiveness.
                Find out how I make Fabulous Cash !!

                Comment

                • MrIzzz
                  If u touch it, I will cum
                  • Sep 2003
                  • 22923

                  #9
                  big E!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


                  WHO WANTS TO PLAY GRAB-ASS?

                  Comment

                  • SilentKnight
                    Megan Fox's fluffer
                    • Oct 2005
                    • 24812

                    #10
                    MAJOR kudos to Norm and Perfect10 for taking a strong, proactive stance against the rampant copyright infringement that dominates the industry these days.

                    Although I understand a few webmaster toes were unintentionally stepped on in the process - overall, Norm's action against Google is great news for those of us producers and photographers who constantly suffer loss of livelihood at the hands of organizations such as Google (and Yahoo, as well). Accountability has to start somewhere...and I quite agree this may help to set beneficial precedents for us all in the future.


                    Silent Knight

                    Kastle Archives Productions Inc.

                    Comment

                    • candyflip
                      Carpe Visio
                      • Jul 2002
                      • 43070

                      #11
                      He's got a Ph.D in the Internets. He knows what he's talking about.

                      Spend you some brain.
                      Email Me

                      Comment

                      • JFK
                        FUBAR the ORIGINATOR
                        • Jan 2002
                        • 67369

                        #12
                        Originally posted by Big E
                        In general, we support Norm's fight to reduce copyright infringement. It's just unfortunate that some of M&B's own URLs as well as some of our affiliates got caught up in this.

                        But our affiliates need to know that we're going to stick up for them when they're using our content to promote Mac & Bumble within our T&C.
                        Thanks Big E

                        FUBAR Webmasters - The FUBAR Times - FUBAR Webmasters Mobile - FUBARTV.XXX
                        For promo opps contact jfk at fubarwebmasters dot com

                        Comment

                        • Trax
                          [----------------------]
                          • Aug 2001
                          • 14486

                          #13
                          Norm is a fucking lunatic
                          this reply sounds so noble when in case it's not. It's all about him, not about M&B or some affiliate.
                          Don't be stupid guys...
                          get real

                          Comment

                          • SmokeyTheBear
                            ►SouthOfHeaven
                            • Jun 2004
                            • 28609

                            #14
                            Originally posted by Big E
                            In general, we support Norm's fight to reduce copyright infringement. It's just unfortunate that some of M&B's own URLs as well as some of our affiliates got caught up in this.

                            But our affiliates need to know that we're going to stick up for them when they're using our content to promote Mac & Bumble within our T&C.

                            the problem is the damage has already been done.. and will continue to be done by filing dmca complaints.. isn't there a way to file a dmca complaint about google itself ?

                            If the dmca's only affected the pages and content that was in question , that would be one thing , but its clear just by knowing how google works , you cant just re-include something like that.. ( maybe google can , but i wouldnt count on them doing that )

                            I would be interested in hearing from people who feel their serp's have been affected along with the pages in question , just to see if they are being penalized using known methods..
                            hatisblack at yahoo.com

                            Comment

                            • GlydeGirl
                              Confirmed User
                              • Feb 2005
                              • 1516

                              #15
                              It's good that we have a few noble copyright protectors taking on the big corporate giants! My support is behind you!

                              Comment

                              • Trax
                                [----------------------]
                                • Aug 2001
                                • 14486

                                #16
                                Originally posted by MaskTVMaura
                                It's good that we have a few noble copyright protectors taking on the big corporate giants! My support is behind you!
                                you're an idiot without a clue
                                did you even read the threads?
                                the idiot got pages removed from google, causing loss of income for honest webmasters.
                                They should sue him for loss of income because those totally random DCMA letters he is sending
                                he is fighting for himself
                                this idiot is not a noble copyright protector, he is a rich idiot with too much time on his hands.

                                Comment

                                • Kimmykim
                                  bitchslapping zebras!!!!!
                                  • Jun 2001
                                  • 16015

                                  #17
                                  Originally posted by SilentKnight
                                  MAJOR kudos to Norm and Perfect10 for taking a strong, proactive stance against the rampant copyright infringement that dominates the industry these days.

                                  Although I understand a few webmaster toes were unintentionally stepped on in the process - overall, Norm's action against Google is great news for those of us producers and photographers who constantly suffer loss of livelihood at the hands of organizations such as Google (and Yahoo, as well). Accountability has to start somewhere...and I quite agree this may help to set beneficial precedents for us all in the future.


                                  Silent Knight

                                  Kastle Archives Productions Inc.
                                  I'm going to guess that you simply don't have any idea how he operates. Otherwise you'd realize that's the most idiotic thing you could have said.

                                  Comment

                                  • Trax
                                    [----------------------]
                                    • Aug 2001
                                    • 14486

                                    #18
                                    Originally posted by Kimmykim
                                    I'm going to guess that you simply don't have any idea how he operates. Otherwise you'd realize that's the most idiotic thing you could have said.
                                    thanks Kimmy
                                    I thought I was the only one with a clue here
                                    last thing anyone would want to happen is Norm getting a nobleman image on GFY lol

                                    Comment

                                    • SmokeyTheBear
                                      ►SouthOfHeaven
                                      • Jun 2004
                                      • 28609

                                      #19
                                      Originally posted by SilentKnight

                                      Although I understand a few webmaster toes were unintentionally stepped on in the process - overall, Norm's action against Google is great news for those of us producers and photographers who constantly suffer loss of livelihood at the hands of organizations such as Google (and Yahoo, as well). Accountability has to start somewhere...and I quite agree this may help to set beneficial precedents for us all in the future.


                                      Silent Knight

                                      Kastle Archives Productions Inc.
                                      i dont agree at all. This doesnt "protect" producers and photographers from copyright infriingement .. all it does it create a process wherin a company would have to constantly scan and report sites to google for something that is wrong to begin with. ( google copying copyright images and serving them )
                                      hatisblack at yahoo.com

                                      Comment

                                      • SmokeyTheBear
                                        ►SouthOfHeaven
                                        • Jun 2004
                                        • 28609

                                        #20
                                        what google should do is make a watermark to put on any picture that a webmaster might want to allow to be on google images.. not a reverse inclusion
                                        hatisblack at yahoo.com

                                        Comment

                                        • SilentKnight
                                          Megan Fox's fluffer
                                          • Oct 2005
                                          • 24812

                                          #21
                                          Originally posted by Kimmykim
                                          I'm going to guess that you simply don't have any idea how he operates. Otherwise you'd realize that's the most idiotic thing you could have said.
                                          Yep, that's right. Its a very idiotic thing to stand up in support of copyrights. How silly of me.

                                          Unless you care to steer me straight here.

                                          Comment

                                          • twist
                                            Confirmed User
                                            • May 2003
                                            • 415

                                            #22
                                            Someone so worried about protecting business should do his homework before hurting other people.
                                            I love big boobs.

                                            Comment

                                            • KCat
                                              Confirmed User
                                              • Sep 2002
                                              • 2204

                                              #23
                                              Nice to know that Mac & Bumble sticks up for its affilitiates. Great work, Big E!

                                              ~ 300+ FHGs, 100,000 pics to use plus a rockin' Video of the Day download! ~

                                              Comment

                                              • Kimmykim
                                                bitchslapping zebras!!!!!
                                                • Jun 2001
                                                • 16015

                                                #24
                                                Originally posted by SilentKnight
                                                Yep, that's right. Its a very idiotic thing to stand up in support of copyrights. How silly of me.

                                                Unless you care to steer me straight here.
                                                You aren't standing up in support of copyrights. You're standing up for one man's egotistical decision to spend his free time and a decent portion of his considerable bucks to attempt to fuck up other peoples businesses.

                                                He doesn't care who owns the copyright on an image. If he's got an image similar to it, of the same person, or even woke up thinking about an image or a pseudo-celeb, then he claims to have the right to protect all these images. From anyone on the internet, including legal copyright holders.

                                                I'm not in favor of copyright infringement. I've shut off people's billing accounts and hosting accounts in the past for failing to remove images when the DMCA's were properly done and not responded to, or not responded to correctly.

                                                Before you start running off at the mouth with me on this issue, do a little research.

                                                Comment

                                                • pornguy
                                                  Too lazy to set a custom title
                                                  • Mar 2003
                                                  • 62910

                                                  #25
                                                  Hate to say this, but with the financial paowe base that google has, nothing will happen in the near future to stop this.
                                                  PornGuy skype me pornguy_epic

                                                  AmateurDough The Hottes Shemales online!
                                                  TChicks.com | Angeles Cid | Mariana Cordoba | MAILERS WELCOME!

                                                  Comment

                                                  • SilentKnight
                                                    Megan Fox's fluffer
                                                    • Oct 2005
                                                    • 24812

                                                    #26
                                                    Originally posted by Kimmykim
                                                    You aren't standing up in support of copyrights. You're standing up for one man's egotistical decision to spend his free time and a decent portion of his considerable bucks to attempt to fuck up other peoples businesses.

                                                    He doesn't care who owns the copyright on an image. If he's got an image similar to it, of the same person, or even woke up thinking about an image or a pseudo-celeb, then he claims to have the right to protect all these images. From anyone on the internet, including legal copyright holders.

                                                    I'm not in favor of copyright infringement. I've shut off people's billing accounts and hosting accounts in the past for failing to remove images when the DMCA's were properly done and not responded to, or not responded to correctly.

                                                    Before you start running off at the mouth with me on this issue, do a little research.
                                                    If you've got issues against this guy, that's yours to deal with. I have neither the time nor the inclination to spend "researching" the fucking guy's biography.

                                                    Its obvious you're already an expert on all this - so "running off at the mouth" would be rather pointless.

                                                    Your words don't change my support one iota of someone who takes action against Google for copyright infringement. Fine, so the guy's cheese has slid off the cracker a little. I won't condemn him because of it.

                                                    Calling me an idiot for expressing my supportive opinion of his actions against Google isn't exactly the best way of bending a sympathetic ear to your opinions.

                                                    Comment

                                                    • Brujah
                                                      Beer Money Baron
                                                      • Jan 2001
                                                      • 22157

                                                      #27
                                                      Google shows thumbnails, and I get some decent google image traffic. Why would you want to shutdown the image traffic google sends you ?

                                                      Comment

                                                      • Kimmykim
                                                        bitchslapping zebras!!!!!
                                                        • Jun 2001
                                                        • 16015

                                                        #28
                                                        Originally posted by SilentKnight
                                                        If you've got issues against this guy, that's yours to deal with. I have neither the time nor the inclination to spend "researching" the fucking guy's biography.

                                                        Its obvious you're already an expert on all this - so "running off at the mouth" would be rather pointless.

                                                        Your words don't change my support one iota of someone who takes action against Google for copyright infringement. Fine, so the guy's cheese has slid off the cracker a little. I won't condemn him because of it.

                                                        Calling me an idiot for expressing my supportive opinion of his actions against Google isn't exactly the best way of bending a sympathetic ear to your opinions.
                                                        I don't need your sympathy, nor do I really care. I don't build sites so nothing of mine got shut down.

                                                        Comment

                                                        • SilentKnight
                                                          Megan Fox's fluffer
                                                          • Oct 2005
                                                          • 24812

                                                          #29
                                                          Originally posted by Brujah
                                                          Google shows thumbnails, and I get some decent google image traffic. Why would you want to shutdown the image traffic google sends you ?
                                                          I don't know about other people, but I tend to view both Google and Yahoo in the same light. The images are not theirs to do with as they please. Whether they contribute to traffic or not (and in our case the traffic is insignificant at most)...the point is - its not their call to make.

                                                          In the case of Yahoo, they've made revenue both directly and indirectly from our original images for many years without our permission. People illegally reposted our content on their Yahoo groups (and Clubs, before that)...and Yahoo was then able to sell print services on those same images.

                                                          Two Yahoo groups in particular (that we knew of) ripped hundreds of images from our pay sections and filled their groups with them, thus providing free access to our content and quite possibly dissuading surfers from possibly paying for membership. Result - potential loss of livelihood to us.

                                                          When we went to the time and effort to file DMCA complaints against them, it resulted in Yahoo deleting OUR Yahoo group and terminating our member accounts. No reason was given. Our group obeyed Yahoo's TOS and contained only our own original copyrighted content.

                                                          Comment

                                                          Working...