Yeah, such a great job... cutting off a site hosting CP.
WTF else are they supposed to do?
They likely knew about it and turned a blind eye like they are with everyother file host site.
and once they couldn't ignore them, they cut them off.
Appears responsible, but it's bullshit and you all know it.
Here you are ( I picked you randomly to quote ) giving props to CCbill.
they deserve ZERO congrats in this situation.
they did only what they were FORCED into.
If we've learned anything though, the one way to get processors, hosts and the likes to cut off these filesharing sites, is the CP and illegal files they host.. not the copyright issues.
Keep pointing out publicly what you find, and after a few times, CCbill will actually start giving a fuck about who they process for.
Everyone has to realize that CCBILL willingly processes for these file sharing sites. The only reason they shut down processing is because of the CP references on theses sites.
THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT THE PIRACY. They clearly mentioned this. Just send a DMCA is what they say.
If you believe a website using CCBill for processing is violating your copyrighted content, and they are not addressing your concerns, contact our CCBill DMCA agent of record directly, so that we can proceed to notify our Client
So the ONLY reason they took this down is because of the cp references (and ONLY because they were made public here) and they will continue to happily process for all other sites that steal content. They do not care about the webmasters that have been with them for 10+ years that struggle because their content is posted on these sites.
ccbill has no choice if we continue to send their processing violations straight to visa & mastercard
True. Only because too many complaints sent to Visa and MasterCard will get CCBill shut down. We don't want CCBill to be shut down, so I propose a policy of reporting such sites first to CCBill and give them ten business days to shut the site off.
In the case of copyright violations, the DMCA says CCBill should NOT take it upon themselves to check sites for violations, but MUST act on proper DMCA notices, so send them a notice first. If they fail to take the site down (or at least have the content removed) THEN send the DMCA upstream.
I think ten business days for them to read the complaint, check it out, send to Legal for their stamp, and turn off the site is reasonable. Otherwise this turns into nothing more than an effort to put CCBill out of business, which would be shooting the industry in the foot.
Alerting CCBill so they can act in the interest of the industry and society is a good thing. Skipping that step and going straight to Visa/MC is an irresponsible act that threatens the health of the industry. Not only does it risk the livelihood of programs and affiliates that use CCBill, but the damage to those sites worlds have serious secondary effects on vendors that rely on webmasters for survival - web hosts, software companies like NATS and ourselves, etc. If NATS list their CCBill sites and NATS went out of business, what would the effect of that be?
Ten business days notice to CCBill before you put their merchant accounts at risk!
For historical display only. This information is not current:
support@bettercgi.com ICQ 7208627 Strongbox - The next generation in site security Throttlebox - The next generation in bandwidth control Clonebox - Backup and disaster recovery on steroids
While it's great they're taking action against efforts of blatant piracy, I still find this to be quite a sad state of affairs. It's similar to thanking a murderer for stopping killing people. Yeah, it's great they stopped... but why are we thanking them?
If you're facilitating piracy, you're guilty of a pretty serious crime. I think we need to let the guillotine go and start holding people accountable instead of "asking nicely" and whispering sweet nothings into the ears of the people involved in this. VISA puts you and I through the ringer to make sure we're dotting our i's and crossing our t's and in compliance with all manner of regulation... and then ALL compliance rules are simply tossed out the window in the name of piracy so Oron, Rapidshare, and everyone else can generate thousands of joins per day on the backs of content producers such as ourselves. They're padding the bank accounts of these outright thieves... why in the hell is this allowed to happen?
I think Theo should put a geotargeted block on a 50 mile radius of Aaron Jaques IP. Why entertain the ideology of people who actively promote not just crime, but the complete and utter destruction of our business? This is a fucking business forum. I think Digitalpoint, being one of the largest webmaster forums online, should ban any reference to file lockers.
Really makes we wonder why everyone seems to be pussyfooting around the subject.
Has anyone given any thought to the RIAA approach to fighting IP infringement? Seeding your content on bit torrent networks, collecting IP addresses and then suing end using infringers directly? I'd really like to discuss that with an attorney, because if the RIAA can do it... it's certainly within the realm of possibilities. And I'd love to win some judgements that end up with liens against people's homes and vehicles. Fuck, I'd love to see these end-user idiots be forced into homeless shelters...
True. Only because too many complaints sent to Visa and MasterCard will get CCBill shut down. We don't want CCBill to be shut down, so I propose a policy of reporting such sites first to CCBill and give them ten business days to shut the site off.
In the case of copyright violations, the DMCA says CCBill should NOT take it upon themselves to check sites for violations, but MUST act on proper DMCA notices, so send them a notice first. If they fail to take the site down (or at least have the content removed) THEN send the DMCA upstream.
I think ten business days for them to read the complaint, check it out, send to Legal for their stamp, and turn off the site is reasonable. Otherwise this turns into nothing more than an effort to put CCBill out of business, which would be shooting the industry in the foot.
Alerting CCBill so they can act in the interest of the industry and society is a good thing. Skipping that step and going straight to Visa/MC is an irresponsible act that threatens the health of the industry. Not only does it risk the livelihood of programs and affiliates that use CCBill, but the damage to those sites worlds have serious secondary effects on vendors that rely on webmasters for survival - web hosts, software companies like NATS and ourselves, etc. If NATS list their CCBill sites and NATS went out of business, what would the effect of that be?
Ten business days notice to CCBill before you put their merchant accounts at risk!
Thanks Ray I was going to say similar, but not so clearly.
I know CCbill are the whipping boys this week, but let's not stop there.
This industry needs someone like "Remove Your Content" who is paid by all of us, so cost to each is minimal, to go around these sites looking for CP, Scat, Bestiality and notify the processor who ever they are. Paypal would be inundated with emails.
The emails need to be professional and need to explain that if it's not responded to and acted on within 10 working days the complaint will be sent again and CC to their clearing bank, Visa and MC.
Expecting a few people like DWB to do this is lazy and shirking responsibility. I will contribute to such a scheme.
And I agree with xenigo, identify the pirates, make sure you're evidence is right. Then hit them. don't just send out a mailshot, use the IP address as a start to the process.
True. Only because too many complaints sent to Visa and MasterCard will get CCBill shut down. We don't want CCBill to be shut down, so I propose a policy of reporting such sites first to CCBill and give them ten business days to shut the site off.
How about if instead of us dealing with 10 day waiting (for nothing to happen) periods, CCBill chooses to simply stop processing for file lockers?
How about if instead of us dealing with 10 day waiting (for nothing to happen) periods, CCBill chooses to simply stop processing for file lockers?
Period.
Problem solved .
Yes, and the even bigger question is... why is VISA / Mastercard / JCB allowing this to happen? What happened to their super stringent approval process?
Everyone has to realize that CCBILL willingly processes for these file sharing sites. The only reason they shut down processing is because of the CP references on theses sites.
THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT THE PIRACY. They clearly mentioned this. Just send a DMCA is what they say.
I understand CCbill has a different stance on piracy, and while I don't agree with that stance, I also know there is more than one way to skin a cat.
While we may not be able to force their hand to stop processing on pirate sites, we can force their hand by finding illegal content on those sites and exposing it. And at the end of the day if they terminate processing, I honestly don't care if it is due to piracy or due to illegal content, because the result is the same.
Originally posted by Brad Mitchell
What other sites are there and who either in addition to or besides CCBill is processing for them?
Brad
I would also like to know. Anyone have such a list?
Originally posted by looky_lou
Looks like Paypal processes for most of these sites too. At least they do for the two that CCbill has dropped recently Oron and Uploaded.
I am sure that PayPal profiting from child porn would make a good mainstream news story for ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, FNN, MSNBC or somebody.
I'm waiting to hear back from Paypal about some of this. I totally agree that massive exposure about them profiting from CP would be a good move and would probably apply a lot of pressure.
Originally posted by V_RocKs
I hear Baddog is getting good at posting things to CNN...
A CNN iReport would be a freakin' awesome way to put pressure on someone like Paypal.
True. Only because too many complaints sent to Visa and MasterCard will get CCBill shut down. We don't want CCBill to be shut down, so I propose a policy of reporting such sites first to CCBill and give them ten business days to shut the site off.
In the case of copyright violations, the DMCA says CCBill should NOT take it upon themselves to check sites for violations, but MUST act on proper DMCA notices, so send them a notice first. If they fail to take the site down (or at least have the content removed) THEN send the DMCA upstream.
I think ten business days for them to read the complaint, check it out, send to Legal for their stamp, and turn off the site is reasonable. Otherwise this turns into nothing more than an effort to put CCBill out of business, which would be shooting the industry in the foot.
Alerting CCBill so they can act in the interest of the industry and society is a good thing. Skipping that step and going straight to Visa/MC is an irresponsible act that threatens the health of the industry. Not only does it risk the livelihood of programs and affiliates that use CCBill, but the damage to those sites worlds have serious secondary effects on vendors that rely on webmasters for survival - web hosts, software companies like NATS and ourselves, etc. If NATS list their CCBill sites and NATS went out of business, what would the effect of that be?
Ten business days notice to CCBill before you put their merchant accounts at risk!
It does not take 10 business days to shut down billing for CP.
10 mins is plenty.
"Americas Hitler" JD Vance.
“There isn’t really an upside to Trump.” Tucker Carlson.
“a convicted felon rapist is now your president” OneHungLow, gfy.com
LOL @ all the idiots congratulating them because they stopped doing something they shouldn't be doing to begin with ONLY after they get publicly called out.
Comment