I see some threads about fighting the good fight... but what the fuck is up with the tubes? They have a *pass*?
-
-
Filelockers are easier to fight because they have billing, and that can get shutdown. A tube on the other hand has usually no billing and makes money off ads. People still fight tubes with dmca notices and lawsuits.Mechanical Bunny Media
Mechbunny Tube Script | Mechbunny Webcam Aggregator Script | Custom Web Development -
Illegal tubes are being fought - mostly via lawsuits, so not as fast and not as "visible" as other campaigns.
Change IS happening.
If you think that you can't do anything to help, how about you at least follow AdultKing's campaign to #StopFileLockers on Twitter or "Like" his Facebook Page and have others follow and "Like" him... You all have friends on Twitter and Facebook, don't you?
I also think #StopFileLockers is a nice hashtag to push on Twitter...Facilitation - BizDev - Traffic - Consulting - Marketing
Skype: jokerempire | Silent Circle: joker
Comment
-
Stress illegal tubes.
Plenty of tubes are legal and do not steal content.Comment
-
i have no problem with legal tubes - but i have a problem with people who make money with my content in original qualityComment
-
Tubes that make money with your content aren't illegal either. The only thing that makes a tube illegal is if the owner of the tube is the one uploading the copyrighted content. If it's actually users of the website, then the site is still legal so long as they take down the offending content upon receiving notices.
This precedence has been set in the courts by companies as large as FaceBook and Google (YouTube).
* I'm sure you knew that already, but there is so much misinformation thrown around GFY. Figured I'd have a little "the more you know" moment.
Comment
-
Mechanical Bunny Media
Mechbunny Tube Script | Mechbunny Webcam Aggregator Script | Custom Web DevelopmentComment
-
tube sites kicking porn industry in the ballsComment
-
so you lost money investing in tube traffic and now tubes are the enemy?
http://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1073013webmaster at pimproll dot comComment
-
If you look at niches on tubes, outside promotional material you will find a few amateur clips and a handful of pirated videos.
The difference is tubes have no affiliate program, Boris and Patel have little incentive to upload. On filelockers Boris will go to incredible lengths to make his $20 per day, like having VPSs with dedicated software that upload 24 hours a day.Comment
-
Speaking of misinformation, your post actually isn't accurate, either.
There is more to complying with the DMCA than simply responding to take-down notices and the tube owner/operator not being the one who uploads the content in the first place.
I still see many tubes that have not registered a DMCA agent with the U.S. Copyright office. That's a violation of DMCA. (For those who care about chapter and verse in citations, it's a violation of §512 (c)(2), specifically.)
Under §512 (i)(1)(A), UGC sites like tubes also must establish and enforce a policy with respect to repeat infringers among the users who upload content; many tubes still have not done this.
Also under Under §512 (i), UGC sites must also "accommodate and not interfere with standard technical measures." This is something many tubes do not do.
There are other requirements for receiving safe harbor, as well, but my point is that it seems like you might need to be on the receiving end of a few "the more you know" moments yourself. ;-)
Oh, one more thing: that YouTube case you alluded to? It isn't over, and the most recent ruling (by the Second Circuit) cut in favor of Viacom, not YouTube.Q. BoyerComment
-
Not to defend illegal tubes but they aren't quite as bad as file lockers.
Say I'm a surfer that loves a particular paysite. I can go on a tube, comb through tens of thousands of videos and maybe find one or two poor quality videos from my favorite paysite.
Or I can go to a file locker and get a full, up to date complete rip of that site in full HD quality plus the same for hundreds of other sites for a price that's a fraction of a membership.
There's many ways to compete with a tube but no way to compete with a file locker.Last edited by baryl; 06-29-2012, 09:37 AM.Comment
-
Comment
-
Great info there. I think safe harbor gets thrown around way to easily these days, without most have the full understanding of what it entails.Speaking of misinformation, your post actually isn't accurate, either.
There is more to complying with the DMCA than simply responding to take-down notices and the tube owner/operator not being the one who uploads the content in the first place.
I still see many tubes that have not registered a DMCA agent with the U.S. Copyright office. That's a violation of DMCA. (For those who care about chapter and verse in citations, it's a violation of §512 (c)(2), specifically.)
Under §512 (i)(1)(A), UGC sites like tubes also must establish and enforce a policy with respect to repeat infringers among the users who upload content; many tubes still have not done this.
Also under Under §512 (i), UGC sites must also "accommodate and not interfere with standard technical measures." This is something many tubes do not do.
There are other requirements for receiving safe harbor, as well, but my point is that it seems like you might need to be on the receiving end of a few "the more you know" moments yourself. ;-)
Oh, one more thing: that YouTube case you alluded to? It isn't over, and the most recent ruling (by the Second Circuit) cut in favor of Viacom, not YouTube.XXXRewards - Karups - Boyfun - Jawked. Paying on time since 1997. Contact me at brent [at] xxxrewards.comComment
-
I haven't yet seen a tube which has thousands of files of child exploitation material, yet I have identified file lockers with tens of thousands of child exploitation images and movies.
It's not all about piracy, although that's an important component, it's also about common decency.
And before anyone says people will just use peer to peer, it's important to note that police agencies have a very good handle on peer to peer now and can map out offenders very easily.
Apparently here in Victoria they knock on doors every morning. File Lockers are easier for offenders to use and remain less detectable if they go about it the right way, the less of this material on the web the better IMHO.Comment
-
Which is why it's completely worthless to waste any effort or attention on all this fingerprinting nonsense.
Most programs have working relationships with the tubes already, and the tubes remove everything a partner sponsor sends to them. The Manwin tube network is a very large chunk of tube real estate, so any partner who works with them already has tubes covered.
File lockers and torrents are completely immune to any kind of fingerprinting technology.
Comment
-
Kill the uploads and kill the tubes. Fuck youtube as well. Site still is not in the money last I checked. What is the skewed statistics of youtube nowadays?
The thing with youtube, amateur uploaded videos of whatever. Porn tubes straight up stole producers, sponsors, site owners videos. Now its this retarded *fad* to copy the model.
Doesn't anyone in this industry have any balls? How hard, really, is it to destroy a datacenter?Comment
-
I wasn't arguing what is needed to be compliant, but that someone's content being on a tube site doesn't make the tube site illegal. You're arguing from the other direction I did.Speaking of misinformation, your post actually isn't accurate, either.
There is more to complying with the DMCA than simply responding to take-down notices and the tube owner/operator not being the one who uploads the content in the first place.
I still see many tubes that have not registered a DMCA agent with the U.S. Copyright office. That's a violation of DMCA. (For those who care about chapter and verse in citations, it's a violation of §512 (c)(2), specifically.)
Under §512 (i)(1)(A), UGC sites like tubes also must establish and enforce a policy with respect to repeat infringers among the users who upload content; many tubes still have not done this.
Also under Under §512 (i), UGC sites must also "accommodate and not interfere with standard technical measures." This is something many tubes do not do.
There are other requirements for receiving safe harbor, as well, but my point is that it seems like you might need to be on the receiving end of a few "the more you know" moments yourself. ;-)
Oh, one more thing: that YouTube case you alluded to? It isn't over, and the most recent ruling (by the Second Circuit) cut in favor of Viacom, not YouTube.
Yes, there are various items that a site owner must comply with to meet safe harbor.
And the reason Google lost that latest court date is because they didn't meet/comply with every little detail. So the basis of the point I made still stands.
Comment
-
Buzz off Bozo.
Unauthorized content STOLEN from an honest producer is illegal.
Period.
Site owner ?
This discussion is about illegal tube boys.
What the hell do the compliance measures that genuine site owners deal with have to do with this?
Get real... or get the fuck out of here.
.Last edited by topnotch, standup guy; 07-01-2012, 06:33 PM.A hard dick has no conscience.Comment
-
Reading comprehension? I said it doesn't make the tube site illegal, not that the initial act of copyright infringement wasn't illegal.
I swear internet forums have ruined people's reading comprehension skills.
Comment
-
Comment
-
-
-
Comment
-
The file lockers are low hanging fruit. They are easy to make a case against.
File lockers are not new Drop Boxes and innocent victims of their own users. They are conspirators in criminal copyright infringement when they run user upload affiliate programs.
What amuses me is all the support Kim Dotcom gets around here like he is some great anti-governmental hero.
The only difference I see claimed is the C/P aspect of the filelockers. If there is substance in those claims there should be criminal indictments forthcoming. The irony of this industry being the instigator of their indictments would be paradoxical in the end game.
Not only a tactical change -- it helps the tubes too. It's not that my enemy's enemy is my friend but more of a case of the pot finding a dirtbag that is coincidentally competing with the kettle.
Last edited by Barry-xlovecam; 07-02-2012, 10:25 PM.Comment
-
-
Very true. File Lockers are very vulnerable via the funding route. Using C/P to fight them is merely a tool.
The flood back to buying porn online will turn out to be a trickle. We've spent far too long perfecting the ways of making buying porn unnecessary. Tubes will have more traffic.
Comment
-
Atleast the file lockers make the user pay to use them, while the tube is free.Comment
Comment