The Happiest Girl in Porn!

[XXXMovie4M]

Anyone have info on this gem?

http://efukt.com/21063_The_Giggliest_Girl_in_Porn.html

[Harmon]

[Lykos]

Hahaha fuck me

[Chosen]

Cute girl

[seeandsee]

she is good!

[TheDA]

Anyone have info on this gem?

http://efukt.com/21063_The_Giggliest_Girl_in_Porn.html

What do want to know?

[Jake]

Anyone have info on this gem?

http://efukt.com/21063_The_Giggliest_Girl_in_Porn.html

Yeah, it's another stolen video with the URL cropped out! Just another case of parasites capitalizing on the efforts of a hard-working site owner/content producer. But hey, it's all good right efukt? I mean I'm sure it was user submitted and you'd be happy to remove it once you receive a DMCA.

[Supz]

Yeah, it's another stolen video with the URL cropped out! Just another case of parasites capitalizing on the efforts of a hard-working site owner/content producer. But hey, it's all good right efukt? I mean I'm sure it was user submitted and you'd be happy to remove it once you receive a DMCA.

you dont see the ref link below the video?

[adultmobile]

you dont see the ref link below the video?

yes is just 4 min teaser with ccbill link below, is all ok.
Just.. if google for:
Claire glory hole swallow
Within first page you can find the full 40 minute videos in russian sites...

[Jake]

you dont see the ref link below the video?

No, I don't! I see a banner for a completely unrelated site BELOW the video. Do you see any branding at all on the video iteslf? No URL watermark, no pre-roll branding, no post-roll branding, absolutely nothing giving any credit to the producer/site owner.

Upon further scrutiny I do now see a rather inconspicuous text link ABOVE the video. Convenient placement since surfers are accustomed to finding a link/banner (if there is any) BELOW the video, not ABOVE it. And as previously stated the banner "BELOW" the player is for a completely unrelated site.

When people in this business, as in the OP and myself don't easily recognize there is a link back to the site then would you really expect a surfer to find the link/banner?

[Jake]

yes is just 4 min teaser with ccbill link below, is all ok.
Just.. if google for:
Claire glory hole swallow
Within first page you can find the full 40 minute videos in russian sites...

Hmmmm, so now site owners are putting out "teasers" without any branding on them? Really? Must be a new form of traffic generation I'm not familiar with! Perhaps the surfers are receiving a subliminal message that causes them to open a new window and type-in the URL received via the subliminal message.

[BFT3K]

Here's what the law SHOULD be...

In order to upload content to tube sites, the uploader should be legally obligated to prove that they are adults in a country where porn is legal. They must provide photo ID, and then fill out an upload form guaranteeing they have the copyrights to the content they are uploading.

[Jake]

Here's what the law SHOULD be...

In order to upload content to tube sites, the uploader should be legally obligated to prove that they are adults in a country where porn is legal. They must provide photo ID, and then fill out an upload form guaranteeing they have the copyrights to the content they are uploading.

I certainly hope you're not proposing any sort of regulation of tube sites, I know all of us pay site owners are required to comply with a number of overly burdensome regulations but I hope you don't expect tube site owners to dedicate any of their valuable resources to ensuring compliance with any type of regulations. How would you expect them to maintain any decent profit margins if they were required to operate under similar regulations that currently govern pay site operators. Next thing you know, you're going to suggest that they be responsible for proactively policing their "user uploaded" content and removing full-length videos of well-known models/producers submitted by "random users".

Wondering if anyone here has approached this issue from an "unfair competition" standpoint. Obviously producers/copyright holders have no recourse for copyright infringement but it would seem to me that an "unfair competition" suit would be pretty cut and dry.

[BlackCrayon]

Hmmmm, so now site owners are putting out "teasers" without any branding on them? Really? Must be a new form of traffic generation I'm not familiar with! Perhaps the surfers are receiving a subliminal message that causes them to open a new window and type-in the URL received via the subliminal message.

the gloryhole swallow guy is pretty good at getting content taken down if he wants it down. there is a ccbill link to the site just above the video. he probably gets good traffic from it. you'd be hard pressed to find any full length videos from gloryhole swallow on the tubes but there are short 'trailers' on the the tubes i assume either he uploaded or doesn't mind.

[nexcom28]

She is super fun

[duk75]

I certainly hope you're not proposing any sort of regulation of tube sites, I know all of us pay site owners are required to comply with a number of overly burdensome regulations but I hope you don't expect tube site owners to dedicate any of their valuable resources to ensuring compliance with any type of regulations. How would you expect them to maintain any decent profit margins if they were required to operate under similar regulations that currently govern pay site operators. Next thing you know, you're going to suggest that they be responsible for proactively policing their "user uploaded" content and removing full-length videos of well-known models/producers submitted by "random users".

Wondering if anyone here has approached this issue from an "unfair competition" standpoint. Obviously producers/copyright holders have no recourse for copyright infringement but it would seem to me that an "unfair competition" suit would be pretty cut and dry.

No, I don't! I see a banner for a completely unrelated site BELOW the video. Do you see any branding at all on the video iteslf? No URL watermark, no pre-roll branding, no post-roll branding, absolutely nothing giving any credit to the producer/site owner.

Upon further scrutiny I do now see a rather inconspicuous text link ABOVE the video. Convenient placement since surfers are accustomed to finding a link/banner (if there is any) BELOW the video, not ABOVE it. And as previously stated the banner "BELOW" the player is for a completely unrelated site.

When people in this business, as in the OP and myself don't easily recognize there is a link back to the site then would you really expect a surfer to find the link/banner?

Hmmmm, so now site owners are putting out "teasers" without any branding on them? Really? Must be a new form of traffic generation I'm not familiar with! Perhaps the surfers are receiving a subliminal message that causes them to open a new window and type-in the URL received via the subliminal message.

Yeah, it's another stolen video with the URL cropped out! Just another case of parasites capitalizing on the efforts of a hard-working site owner/content producer. But hey, it's all good right efukt? I mean I'm sure it was user submitted and you'd be happy to remove it once you receive a DMCA.

As nexcom28 said...

She is super funny

[XXXMovie4M]

She looks like a lot of fun! Obviously enjoying the cock feast

[Supz]

Wheres that dudes neck.

[Vapid - BANNED FOR LIFE]

Thoughts exactly

[Biggie Smalls Web Writing]

She does some serious drugs for sure

[nextri]

I'm sure efukt is sending more sales with that one textlink above the videos, than any other affiliate they have..

[Caldo]

[nexcom28]

Wheres that dudes neck.

[kurtov]

Does she seem a bit retarded to anyone else, like, literally.

[John-ACWM]

Wheres that dudes neck.

He is Humpty Dumpty.