Fine buy content from someone who does not cover you and your purchases. And when you find someone has stolen your site and tells you to GFY when you ask him to take it down. You will learn.

I had a guy do that to me, stole loads of my content and never responded to an email. Within 3 hours his site was down. Just emailed his host. He offered to buy the content the next day. Told him to GFY. LAC come up with an alternative, the internet has made APIC what it is, not visa versa. And please do not threaten me with not buying my content, some of the big guys buy my content BECAUSE I protect it with APIC

but they still shave like 50% of signups, yeah?

The alternative is what quiet does. Like he said, works for him. And he doesn't have to deal with a bunch of incompetant morons like APIC.

cum on charly you sound like a fucking tv shop seller trying to sell a no good hairgrowth product...

I've had my share of problems with copyright violaters BUT i would never use APIC and I always contact webmaster first!

I wouldn't buy your content because I'm looking for japanese girls for a paysite. LOL. You only have European girls right?
I don't really care about APIC issues cause I don't rip content.

I understand you use APIC because no one else to choose from unless you wish to take each case to court yourself.

LoveAsianChicks is right - I saw the letter they sent to lensman and would have never believed it was written by an attorney.

Pretty unprofessional organization and not too bright either if they aren't willing to provide basic details as to what copyright was being violated.

Content producers deserve someone that will follow the law and file legitimate DMCA & other complaints on their behalf.

My mother can get someone shut off of an ebay auction. I have done it dozens of times.

Here was the APIC thread with Lensman:

http://bbs.gofuckyourself.com/showth...highlight=APIC

The stuff they produced was amazing - such as amateur pages "supports approximately 50% of the theft of copyrights"

They are just used to bullying everyone to get their way.

I always license my content. I believe in the rights of content producers, but you guy deserve better.

Charly - this will be my last post on this thread but I do have a serious question.

If APIC thought kenny was stealing content why would they go straight to his sponsor and get his account put on hold, before even contacting Kenny?
Isn't that a little severe when they have not heard Kenny's side of the story?

Didn't the Hun post a javascript that he uses to fuck people over. Something like loading the offenders page in the background of every viewer at thehun.net, and thus bring the offender to his knees, and cost lots in bandwidth?

all haters of apic should do the same to the apic graphics on all the TGP's they submit everyday.


They have a 76K Gif on thier site. If that loaded up 1 pixel by 1 pixel on every page you generage, and get 500,000 page views per day........

Imagine if 10-25 webmasters did that!!!

lol

Just trying to stir up shit!

The problem with APIC is not a few mistakes....but the numerous
ones....and on top of that...pretty fucking unbelievable how they
react on stuff...if people would get really pissed off in each letter
from APIC there can be found at least 5 valid reasons for sueing
them for slander.

That combined with their TOTAL lack of knowledge of this
industry makes them complete worthless bunch of lame ass
assholes.....yes I know now can sue me aswell.:1orglaugh

I understand as content producer and owner of content you
need some organisation to look after you....but I seriously
doubt if APIC is the organisation to go with.

I for sure would never wanted to have my business associated
with those assholes not for a minute!

I agree that there is no real good alternative...which is the root
of the whole problem....once there will be an alternative APIC
is history...and for our industry an alternative can´t come soon
enough...

APIC has done already more than enough damage.

DynaMite
:2 cents:

Here's another thought (I can't stop thinking this week for some reason)..... What if you (paul) adjusted your method slightly, and first emailed the webmaster of the site that you feel is using your content without your permission? If they remove the content or have a reasonable explanation for you, then the problem is solved, no? But if you get no reply or action within 24 hours or the webmaster tells you to GFY, then you would send that email to APIC and release the hounds.

I'm not saying it's all about protecting assholes that are really raping you of your content, because I'm all for those people getting what they deserve. My concern is for hardworking honest webmasters that have been wrongly accused, like Kenny, or let's say someone that had a dishonest partner or whatever. I would rather clear up a misunderstanding first before firing with both barrels at someone. Wouldn't you?

I lied I'll post again. I was hoping for Charly to reply to my last msg & explain why APIC would contact Kennys sponsor before hearing from Kenny first.
I guess it takes time to think up a long excuse for those APIC bullies.
Anyway night night charly.

Ok my :2 cents:

I work for a hosting company and deal with the apic requests so this is from my expeirience.

1. Apic has sent (x) number of letters so far talking about copyright out of those letters I have closed down 1 - one account.

The rest were webmasters who was able to show license agreements with the content providers or a payapl reciept of some sort.

Or like in the one case APIC sent me a letter telling me to take down a site and the site was of an amateur doing her own content much like Nina. (that one was a joke) The girl turned her web cam on for me to chat with her while she told me all about how APIC was wrong.

2. APIC always goes to hurt the webmasters first. Out of all the complaints I have dealt with none (0) of the cases had any contact directly between APIC and the webmaster.

I think someone like lawpal should step up to the plate and provide an alternative to APIC and the first thing is the wbmasters that have been wrongly accused should file a class action suit. I know there is more than enough evidence for this.


TopBucks ... I'm new with a tgp and I am adding sponsors on a daily basis but your answers here totally swayed me to stay away from your program. The fact that you put a webmasters account on hold stopping all sales while you hash this out with the webmaster is wrong. The time it takes to setup trades and traffic and everything else to be put down the drain over an APIC accusation that turns out to be false and lose all sales while the account is on hold is enough for me to take you off my list.

Yes we need reform on this issue.

:2 cents:

( *puts on his Devil's Advocate hat* )

APICS - excellent idea, poorly executed.

I'm surprised no-one else has set up a similar organisation...

OR...

Could it be that content providers don't mind lots of webmasters getting fucked over by APICS poor quality service 'cos they are fed up getting fucked over themselves and no longer care what happens to webmasters?

( *takes off hat...* )

Seems this thread is turning into more of an APIC bashing, but I just wanted to quickly respond to a few people who posted earlier and seemed to not see my remark about TopBuck's policy or not understand.

TopBucks policy is to respond to APIC's complaint by <b>temporarily deactivating</b> the webmaster's account (not terminating) and contacting the webmaster with the option to either provide license info or to remove the pictures. We work with the webmaster to get the issue resolved and then reactivate the account with <b>ABSOLUTELY NO LOSS OF SALES/CLICK DATA</b> for the webmaster. The temporary deactivation allows us to still track data, but prevents the webmaster from logging into their account so they realize that something is wrong and should contact us (if they didn't already see the email)

By taking this action it is much more likely that the webmaster will respond and work with us on fixing the problem. Kristin's original email was unclear about our policy and we do admit that and will make sure our policy is completely clear in the future.

Thanks,

~Alli

:thumbsup

Allison excuse me but TopBucks first response should be to see if APIC contacted that webmaster ... or is TopBucks an enforcer for APIC.

Thats like me calling someones boss complaining they didn't pay me. Which BTW is an illegal practice.

You may want to check laws on your policy also Allison they can land your company in a law suit if someone is disabled wrongfully and he can prove a sales loss due to it.

:2 cents:

Allison --- Thank you for clarifying the Topbucks policy for everyone.

However, my previous suggestion is still hanging in mid-air here, which was on the previous page.... Doesn't contacting first and deactivating second sound more reasonable? It doesn't really matter that no data or clicks/sales are lost, it's really the statement that having one's account deactivated sends to webmasters. "Nuke first and ask questions later" just won't fly with most professionals.

I would be very tempted to drop any program that treated me this way.

Ya, sorry allison, i understand your resoning, but your still accusing your webmasters of being thieves because of a letter from APIC which has been known to be wront often. I certainly wouldnt use you after recieving one of your letters. In fact, i wouldnt use you now at all.

You really should treat your webmasters with a little more respect.

Oh well, i have an election to rig in Equador. Be back in a few hours after results are in.

Everything is tracked during deactivation status so there is nothing to worry about on that end.

The webmaster is just unable to log into their account during deactivation.

APIC is usually correct when they contact us about a webmaster using unlicensed content. I believe APIC contacts the sponsors and hosts because those are 2 companies the webmaster will listen to and work with because webmasters want their money and they don't want to lose their hosting. I would imagine that if APIC did not have the support of hots/sponsors they would be pretty much useless as webmasters would have nothing to lose by using stolen content unless legal action is taken (which is often unlikely in small cases)

~Alli

obviously they bank off the law suits
probably 5 - 10%

allison,

apic should be going to the webmaster first, and asking some questions and for a license or something

they never do that, even though that is like a very vital part

APIC is far from always right.....the examples are too numerous.
Then the theory of chasing sponsors instead of thieves is a very
weird one...

I would steal a car and drive it to my work....APIC would sue
my boss because I stole a car and because I probably won´t
pay any attention to APIC therefore it´s OK for APIC to go
after my boss in order to get the car back?

I don´t think this will stand long in any court case

DynaMite

I should add offcourse that APIC would only assume I stole the
car because it happens to be a blue one just like the car that
was stolen....

It was not checked and verified that the car I drive was stolen
but they still would go after my boss?

Come this doesn´t make any sense....besides that it´s completely
redigouloug

DynaMite

Originally posted by CDSmith
Allison, just a thought here.... why not work it out with the webmaster FIRST and THEN deactivate if the webmaster is proven to be in error? (Like Lensman does)
Again, just a thought.


Well, a few reasons.

Again

a) deactivation does not affect stats
b) webmasters are more likely to react promptly when they realize they can't log into their stats
c) webmasters don't always update their email addys with us or have multiple accounts, so if they do not get our email- when they see their account is deactivated they know something is up and contact us


Lensman's policy works for his company and I'm under the impression that he does that because the other option is to just terminate the webmaster's account and by doing that it would be unfair.

~Alli

Same here. The worst part was that all the pics and thumbs had the sponsor's url and name on them.:mad:

Then people should contact APIC about their policies.

I think TopBucks' policy is very fair and allows webmasters to work this out quickly. If we did not deactivate the accounts I know it would take much longer to work things out because there would be much less urgency to the matter.

~Alli

they probably just go after the sponsors and hosts without contacting the webmaster.

let you sort the situation out. then notify the complaintant of the status.

That way they get paid for your hard work in resolution of the matter :1orglaugh

still wouldn't use topbucks after reading your last few replies. If you take APIC's word first & webmaster second it shows you don't treat webmasters right.
Who wants to help make you rich with that attitude?

Lensman has a better solution which is to treat the webmaster with respect until proven guilty.

BTW if a person is using stolen content it isn't the sponsors job to nail the thief, it would be the owner of the content.
The owner can take them to court and get the stolen content removed. APIC is making you police what should be their job.

i would use topbucks

they pay, they have good sites

if apic screws up your business with topbucks, then sue apic

they would be at fault

i don't think that law makes the sponsor liable to go after

i think somebody is twisting around the wording of that law :)

What sponsor wants affiliates who use stolen content? It makes them look like shit and is defined in most every T&C I've read. The sponsor has great interest in shutting thieves down, and I think they should, but the method and attitude of Top Bucks towards the situation is complete BS.

Yes the sponsor does become liable because if we allow the webmaster to earn $ off of stolen content constantly then we do put ourselves in a position where we are liable. Thats basically paying someone else to advertise our sites with stolen content.

It's like a pawn shop purchasing a product that they suspect may be stolen.

~Alli

Sly_RJ we admitted that the APIC email to the webmaster from us was unclear about our policy (which I have explained numerous times now) and seemed harsh. A new member of our support team created the e-mail and did not completely understand our policy. We apologized to Kenny and let him and other webmasters know that we will be sure to clarify how we deal with APIC's concerns in the future.

~Alli

How about a counter organisation? If the content providers out there have an organisation designed to help them deal with content theives than the webmasters should have one to combat false accusations when they occur. If someone were to make it a point to gather all the evidence every time APIC were to falsely accuse someone and hold it in a central database. These people would hold alot of power over APIC. Anytime a webmaster was falsely accused they would report it to this new organisation. This organisation could then contact APIC and threaten them with a class action law suit based upon all of the evidence collected. This group could also keep a list of all sponsors, hosts, etc. who were too "eager" to comply with APIC before proof had been given. That way we have a good system of checks and balances. APIC wouldn't be so quick to throw around accusations, The sponsors/Hosts would have more reason to check things out before shutting off accounts, and APIC would still be free to go after people who actually steal content. As it stands APIC seems to be holding way to much of the power and it seems they aren't afraid to misuse it.

I just don't like the idea that someone can arbitrarily point the finger at me and my account or my site can be "put on hold" without me even getting the chance to say my side of the issue.

I don't like that at all.

I'll go so far as to say that I don't fucking like that at all. (at the risk of sounding "unprofessional")
My professional integrity is one of my most prized possessions and I make no effort to hide that fact, and I don't like when it is called into question, much less having any of my accounts affected in any way. As I said, if this were ever to happen to me, I would be very tempted to discontinue business with a company that would treat me this way.

I am not adverse to taking others to court either, unlike some that would rather avoid it. If I'm in the wrong it would be because of an unintentional mistake only, so accusations better be backed up solidly with proof, at least where myself and my businesses are concerned.

I know you did, and I respect that. Very professional, thumbs up. However, I wasn't referring to your handling of email to the least bit.

Instead, I was referring to your general policy of deactivation. Completely ridiculous if you ask me. You claim its a way to get the users proper attention, damn right it would get my attention! And piss me off, too. There are much better ways of getting an affiliates attention. I realize you folks are busy, but if this matter is important to you (I'm assuming it is), I think a phone call to the affiliate would be most appropriate. If someone was accusing me of theft, the least they could do is give me a buzz.

And instead of leaving the affiliate hanging by not allowing them to login (that would seriously piss me off), you should print up a screen that says there are a few concerns regarding theft, please contact TB immediately so we can clear your name.

You're making the affiliate feel like absolute shit. Is that really what you want your policy to do?

Well, I'm fine with calling the webmasters, but I think many webmasters out there don't always appreciate being called because of time differences or because they may be trying to hide what they do from the people that might be answering the phone. But if webmasters generally agree that a phone call is better then I'd be happy to buzz.

In regards to our policy, after this thread we have made some changes. We will be clear to state that the webmaster log in is temporarily deactivated and that all sales/stats info is still being logged.

I do like your recommendation for the screen for when they log in and will see if we can implement that as well

thnx

alli

OMG. TOPBUCKS KILLED KENNY!

(sorry, if it was already said, I didn't read the whole thread)

I for one would be very happy to be phoned and given a chance to clear up any misunderstandings, <i>before</i> my account was deactivated or changed in any way. No matter what time of day or night, I would want to address that kind of issue immediately, and my answering machine is on 24/7. If a message was left, including a phone # for me to call back, you bet I'd get my arse out of bed and call you back, and try to resolve the problem on the spot.

If you were to implement that practise into your existing policy, I'm sure a lot of webmasters would feel much better about things here, and hopefully other sponsors will take a cue from you Alisson, and from Lensman too.

Thanks,

exactly :) it is incredibly easy to shut down an infringer's site via their isp if they are violating copyright. i've never run into a SINGLE case where the isp won't kill the site of a proven copyright violator asap. and i've literally taken down *hundreds* of sites/pages over the years. blah, blah, blah. some helpful dmca links:

http://www.authorslawyer.com/c-pir-l2.html (to infringer)
http://www.authorslawyer.com/c-pir-l3.html (to isp)