Should XTube Ban ALL Webmasters? - Page 3 - GoFuckYourself.com

maxpower · 08-15-2007, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drunkspringbreakgirls

EXACTLY. This is the problem. Sponsors dont care if you have some of their content up if you are sending traffic but there is no way in hell someone is going to find that link.

If a webmaster grabs some content from a site and makes tgp galleries with a million AFF ads and one tiny hidden banner to the program that is a problem.

Change your banner system so there is an obvious link to the program of the displayed content not to AFF. End of problems.

This is a excellent idea, but .................................................. ........

TheAccountant · 08-15-2007, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drunkspringbreakgirls

EXACTLY. This is the problem. Sponsors dont care if you have some of their content up if you are sending traffic but there is no way in hell someone is going to find that link.

If a webmaster grabs some content from a site and makes tgp galleries with a million AFF ads and one tiny hidden banner to the program that is a problem.

Change your banner system so there is an obvious link to the program of the displayed content not to AFF. End of problems.

I can say you that users are able to find this link!

RawAlex · 08-15-2007, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by simons

I can say you that users are able to find this link!

The only link is small, and located BELOW THE FOLD on a 1600X1200 screen. On an 800 X 600 or 1200X whatever, it would be two full screens below the video.

It is clear that the intent of the site is to generate hits to cam sites, dating sites, to etology pay per click ads, and importantly to get people to signup to xtube to pay for videos on their VOD system. It is not designed in the slightest to get traffic to the site that the video comes from.

Any program owner that thinks they are getting a good deal on that should contact me about the sunny warm lake front property I am selling cheap in Nunavut.

TheAccountant · 08-15-2007, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

The only link is small, and located BELOW THE FOLD on a 1600X1200 screen. On an 800 X 600 or 1200X whatever, it would be two full screens below the video.

It is clear that the intent of the site is to generate hits to cam sites, dating sites, to etology pay per click ads, and importantly to get people to signup to xtube to pay for videos on their VOD system. It is not designed in the slightest to get traffic to the site that the video comes from.

Any program owner that thinks they are getting a good deal on that should contact me about the sunny warm lake front property I am selling cheap in Nunavut.

I said that looking my stats. CTR is really shitty but I cannot complain at all. It's a good balance. Webmasters contents are making xtube bigger and wider and both webmasters both xtube owner are making money. Program owners are happy (at least 100% of he ones that I talked with). The black point are users. Not amateur users but normal users. Every day I see stolen contents uploaded by users, NOT webmasters. Proly a user cannot understand the difference between stolen and not stolen contents. It's porn! Free porn good to jerk them off! XTUBE should keeping eyes opened on users. Webmasters are the most safe people that they could deal with. Users are wasting the system. So or control users uploading or closing eyes. Banning webmasters doesn't change the situation because the problem is on another side.

TheAccountant · 08-15-2007, 07:46 PM

That's an example of what I was trying to say

http://www.XTube.com/play_re.php?v=9...cl=N5abX5cdsC9

It has been uploaded by a normal users. It seems to be something amateur but NOPE. It's not amateur. It's a STOLEN CONTENT produced by GammaCash / GayPornAccess. Lets say that webmasters have been banner.... users keep uploading stolen stuff. Isn't better let webmasters posting stuff with their ref code so: xtube owners are happy, webmaster are happy, sponsors are happy. It's so great! Why try to fix the problem on one side if the real problem is on another side?

RawAlex · 08-15-2007, 07:51 PM

simons, I understand your point, but that is almost besides the point. much of the "webmaster" uploaded content is content intended for affiliates to build galleries and free sites that they host themselves, not to be uploaded to another site. Further, because of the site design and layout, I would guess that 99.8% of the clickouts off that page aren't going to the sponsor who's content is used even when it is uploaded with full permission.

There is 6 to 8 ad spots significantly more prominent on that page, and they are mostly above the fold line. The sponsor's content is being used mostly to sell dating and sell cam shows. It isn't being used to sell their site.

There is no argument you can make that would make that problem go away. All this site is doing is giving away an ass load of content and not even bothering to put the effort into marketing the sites that the content comes from.

I dare you to make a few galleries like this and show them to your sponsors and see how they feel.

RawAlex · 08-15-2007, 07:53 PM

Oh yeah, and simons, I'm in the porn business. uploading your gay home movies and thinking you might upset someone is rather silly. "uploaded 7 minutes ago". Nice.

TheAccountant · 08-15-2007, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

simons, I understand your point, but that is almost besides the point. much of the "webmaster" uploaded content is content intended for affiliates to build galleries and free sites that they host themselves, not to be uploaded to another site. Further, because of the site design and layout, I would guess that 99.8% of the clickouts off that page aren't going to the sponsor who's content is used even when it is uploaded with full permission.

There is 6 to 8 ad spots significantly more prominent on that page, and they are mostly above the fold line. The sponsor's content is being used mostly to sell dating and sell cam shows. It isn't being used to sell their site.

There is no argument you can make that would make that problem go away. All this site is doing is giving away an ass load of content and not even bothering to put the effort into marketing the sites that the content comes from.

I dare you to make a few galleries like this and show them to your sponsors and see how they feel.

You're right but I've ever asked the agreement of the sponsors that I promote. I know lots of sponsor owners that are promoting their sites on xtube. What's the difference between a gallery and an uploaded movie on xtube? None. They're free contents giving away. It needs about a couple of hundreds of tube sites to cover all free stuff that you can find looking tgp/free sites and so on. Sponsors haven't any problem with galleries.

Regarding CTR you're right too. But it seems that this CTR is good for both side. Xtube owners get a huge % of clicks to their adv. That's good and the smaller % of clicks on webmaster's banners seems to be profitable too if people keep posting every day ;).

TheAccountant · 08-15-2007, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Oh yeah, and simons, I'm in the porn business. uploading your gay home movies and thinking you might upset someone is rather silly. "uploaded 7 minutes ago". Nice.

lol, are you thinking that I've uploaded this movie? Nope, you're wrong. I got it from last uploded movies (http://www.xtube.com/videos.php?c=mrv&sex_type=G)

maxpower · 08-15-2007, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

The only link is small, and located BELOW THE FOLD on a 1600X1200 screen. On an 800 X 600 or 1200X whatever, it would be two full screens below the video.

It is clear that the intent of the site is to generate hits to cam sites, dating sites, to etology pay per click ads, and importantly to get people to signup to xtube to pay for videos on their VOD system. It is not designed in the slightest to get traffic to the site that the video comes from.

Any program owner that thinks they are getting a good deal on that should contact me about the sunny warm lake front property I am selling cheap in Nunavut.

See this is what worries me, they already seem to be most worried about sending traffic to their ?sponsor? and try to kind of hide where it came from. Now I understand they need to make money, but I know how these things go soon they see the contributors are completion and think they can fix the traffic links by just removing as many of them as possible to increases their profits.

Now I am not sure this is what?s going on, but really when you start to talk about banning ALL WM?s for a site built on content provided by them it just seems fishy. And to add to all this they are not really telling anyone what is going on they come to a WM board and say hey what do you think about us banning all WM?s. How do you think this is going to go?

CaptainHowdy · 08-15-2007, 09:00 PM

Watttttttttttt ??

RawAlex · 08-15-2007, 09:15 PM

Maxpower, this is all part of the greater shift in traffic and affiliate programs that has been coming for a few years.

As more and more traffic sources come into play that can be purchased or traded for, traditional websites such as TGPs, galleries, free sites, blogs, etc are all become less and less relevant to some programs. They have Zangos, torrents, and tube sites to get traffic from. Much in the same way some programs were totally addicted to spam traffic, some have beecome addicted to web2.0 traffic.

What many of them are not seeing (or not caring about at this point) is how these sites are accellerating the decline of the adult business. The 1 in 200 business that in 2 years turned into a 1 in 2000 business and is rapidly heading to a 1 in 20,000 business. They are making the mistake of thinking they can support sites that give all of the product away and somehow make it up in volume.

Instead, they are killing demand for their products, and the only people left laughing are the dating, cam, and toy sites who's business doesn't change because their content can't be given away.

For them, WM are not the focus of thier business anymore.

Piptay · 08-15-2007, 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Again, sorry, but you are wrong.

Pretty much every program I have seen has limits on how content can be used. Most programs do not grant webmasters the right to repost or distribute their content on other sites. Also most programs do not allow their content to promote any other site, but clearly posting on xtube promotes mtree, at least 2 other programs, plus whatever is on etology on every page, which would make it an invalid promotion.

so you only have one sponsor on your sites and no other ads to other sponsors at all ? he has a link on the page to the sponsor and the ref code would be in place to the webmasters site that would also have a link to the sponsor .... as for reposting or distributing the content dont all webmasters do that the second we download the content to put on our sites ?

rowan · 08-15-2007, 09:42 PM

Why can't the video itself be linked?

Tempest · 08-15-2007, 09:44 PM

Why not just limit all videos to be no longer than 2 minutes in length... The biggest complaint is people uploading entire videos ripped off from other sites... You could then only allow "approved" submitters to post longer videos and they must be reviewed first. Or some variation of this.

Tempest · 08-15-2007, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by studd

douchebags.

bang bros VIOLATION:
http://www.xtube.com/play_re.php?v=990jAEvA77K

bang bros VIOLATION:
http://www.xtube.com/play_re.php?v=99Z5OVtqTo3

bang bros VIOLATION:
http://www.xtube.com/play_re.php?v=99QjKl06AEA

sean cody VIOLATION:
http://www.xtube.com/play_re.php?v=99VFKkma14k

and on and on and on and on

Poor bang bros & sean cody, you'd think if xtube cared they would create some sort of filter to at least try to prevent bang bros content from being uploaded.

Instead, in order to get their PROPERTY removed from the site they have to go through a long process. That doesn't fix the fact that xtube profits for the views the videos get BEFORE it is removed.

People love free content, I'm sure they are searching for their favorite content on xtube everyday (bangbros, etc)

What's wrong with the BangBros ones? They're only 1 minute clips (you get just as much or more on LLs and TGPs) and there's a link that leads to the site... Granted I think the link should be overlayed on the video or something like that, at least it's being done to promote the site.

The Sean Cody one.. yeah.. 7 minutes is a bit much.. no affiliate link either.

Libertine · 08-15-2007, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piptay

so you only have one sponsor on your sites and no other ads to other sponsors at all ? he has a link on the page to the sponsor and the ref code would be in place to the webmasters site that would also have a link to the sponsor .... as for reposting or distributing the content dont all webmasters do that the second we download the content to put on our sites ?

Compare it to a TGP gallery. Very few sponsors will allow you to use their content on a TGP gallery if you fill up that gallery with ads for another program and bury a small link of theirs near the bottom.

The idea behind sponsor content is that it is used to promote that sponsor.

That is also why reposting the content on a third party site is most often not allowed. Reposting content on your own site (galleries, blogs, etc) means it is being used by someone (the affiliate) who got permission to use that content. Reposting on a third party site (tubes, etc) removes it from the control of the sponsor, since the third party site is not bound to any agreements between the sponsor and the affiliate.

camperjohn64 · 08-15-2007, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Libertine

And there are so many sites like yours out there, ...[snip]

Can you give examples of other sites like xtube?

VoyeurWeb, RedClouds, Homeclips, Rude.com I can think of.

Libertine · 08-15-2007, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by camperjohn64

Can you give examples of other sites like xtube?

VoyeurWeb, RedClouds, Homeclips, Rude.com I can think of.

Yuvutu, Youporn, Pornotube, Megarotic, Shufuni, BeastTube (protip: avoid), ImageFap (images only), ImageReverb (images only), Flurl, RedTube, BadJoJo, YourFileHost, TimTube, YourPornTube, LubeYourTube (gay), etc.

But sure, we can monitor it all

KrisKross · 08-15-2007, 10:54 PM

Seriously, I think going with a paid webmaster model would be brilliant. Charge $20 a month, allow for text linking in the description and/or a larger banner (468x60) and reduce the amount of ads that show up near the top of the page.

I'd pay for that monthly.

RawAlex · 08-15-2007, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tempest

What's wrong with the BangBros ones? They're only 1 minute clips (you get just as much or more on LLs and TGPs) and there's a link that leads to the site... Granted I think the link should be overlayed on the video or something like that, at least it's being done to promote the site.

The Sean Cody one.. yeah.. 7 minutes is a bit much.. no affiliate link either.

1 minute stitch togethers are still an issue - the content isn't provided like that to start with, but rather as 6 20 second clips or whatever. The beauty of a TGP is most surfers don't watch all of the clips, and they certainly have a hard time to click and whack at the same time. Give them one minute run time they might be able to rub one out.

Matt 26z · 08-15-2007, 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drunkspringbreakgirls

EXACTLY. This is the problem. Sponsors dont care if you have some of their content up if you are sending traffic but there is no way in hell someone is going to find that link.

That is between the video site, the affiliate uploader and the sponsor. Not a bunch of GFY wackos who are blind to new sources of traffic.

The smart bet is on the watermarks alone being worth a good amount of uncredited affiliate traffic. So right there is enough reason for a sponsor to not only allow this, but encourage it.

Nathan · 08-15-2007, 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Sorry, but I have to disagree. If we were talking about 2257 circa 1995 or so, you might have something. Even then, it is questionable.

xtube changes the format of the videos. The add their trailer / logo onto the videos. They sort them by type, content, name, etc. They publish them on webpages that they alone control (the submitters do not control the pages that their content appears on).

From where I sit, Xtube received, encodes, repackages and redistributes the videos on their website. Sourcing the videos from a content supplier or from the general public to build a website doesn't change the nature of the game. "hosting" and hosting alone wouldn't involve things like re-encoding, managing, listing, indexing, insertion on page, etc.

At minimum, they are a secondary producer, and with absense of contact information for the individual posters, they could be the defacto primary producer (because no other information is provided).

It is a very, very long stretch to say that xtube is nothing more than a filehost, doubly so because the line between the "content for sale" and the "user submitted content" is blurred by the format of the site.

There might be a problem with the fact that they have selected and submitted content, I agree with that... Still, user submitted sites do NOT redistribute even if they reencode the content to publish it. They do NOT select it... the 2257 regs clearly state in 2 (h) (B) (v) if you only "[transmit, store, retreive, host, FORMAT or TRANSLATE]" a communication and do not SELECT or ALTER the content then you are not a producer... If they actually watermark each video, it might be altering it, not sure if thats enough though...

But simply reencoding it into another format is not enough to be a producer.

The main 2257 issue they might face is, I agree with that, the fact that they have actual selected and user submitted content mixed up in one site...

Ripshit · 08-15-2007, 11:33 PM

Ripshit,Ripshit,Ripshit,Ripshit,Ripshit,Ripshit,Ripshit off!

maxpower · 08-15-2007, 11:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Maxpower, this is all part of the greater shift in traffic and affiliate programs that has been coming for a few years.

As more and more traffic sources come into play that can be purchased or traded for, traditional websites such as TGPs, galleries, free sites, blogs, etc are all become less and less relevant to some programs. They have Zangos, torrents, and tube sites to get traffic from. Much in the same way some programs were totally addicted to spam traffic, some have beecome addicted to web2.0 traffic.

What many of them are not seeing (or not caring about at this point) is how these sites are accellerating the decline of the adult business. The 1 in 200 business that in 2 years turned into a 1 in 2000 business and is rapidly heading to a 1 in 20,000 business. They are making the mistake of thinking they can support sites that give all of the product away and somehow make it up in volume.

Instead, they are killing demand for their products, and the only people left laughing are the dating, cam, and toy sites who's business doesn't change because their content can't be given away.

For them, WM are not the focus of thier business anymore.

What is the difference in WM and affiliates to xtube I really do not get this, I own the site but I have to join my affiliate program and pay myself 1% just to participate? I really do not get this?

Are they really saying they will not allow “us” to send them clips from our site in exchange for a return link, this is kind of what is sounds like of where they are going with this to me.

I do agree this is not a good thing but for different reasons too, I work with allot of gay content and all the LL’s ect are about dead as people just do not care about image content when they can get vids for free. Now as this tubes stuff goes one we will see longer and longer vids being offered for free just to get more attention for programs. This will soon devalue video content in the same way we have already done with pics. What the hell are we going to have to sell after that, not sure I want to sell sex toys

How can they say (WM are not the focus of thier business anymore) where do they think these videos come from?

I am just really lost with this stuff and do not see why more people are not really pissed off it what I think is going on is really true. BTW this vote is a joke, what WM’s want to be banned I guess the ones that do not use it in the first place hu?

Tempest · 08-15-2007, 11:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

1 minute stitch togethers are still an issue - the content isn't provided like that to start with, but rather as 6 20 second clips or whatever. The beauty of a TGP is most surfers don't watch all of the clips, and they certainly have a hard time to click and whack at the same time. Give them one minute run time they might be able to rub one out.

3-20 seconds clips these days is typical (and some sponsors offer even more) and then multiples of them which a surfer can download and play all at once or play just the one he wants over and over again while jerking off (I find it odd that you wouldn't know this and that you would think he's going to be clicking while trying to whack off)... A suffer can't download and can't loop with Flash (unless the players have been setup to loop or they search out some tools to dowload etc.).. I've made 2 minute teaser Flash clips for some of my blogs (from 30+ minute videos) and they are actually VERY good at building the frustration factor. But then again I put some thought into what I do and I don't show the money shot.

I support the issues against full site rips, full movies, torents, the video "sharing" sites etc. but lets not lose sight of the reality of what the internet is these days.. It's Flash videos on tube type sites... Embedding flash clips in blogs etc.. So no. I can't agree with you that 1 minute stitched together is the same issue... Far from it... and if you start getting that picky you're going to lose any support you might try and put together...

Focus on the big issues... No site rips... No full or long videos.. Must be linked to sponsors... Watermarks not removied/obscured... Not used to promote other sites.

maxpower · 08-15-2007, 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Maxpower, this is all part of the greater shift in traffic and affiliate programs that has been coming for a few years.

As more and more traffic sources come into play that can be purchased or traded for, traditional websites such as TGPs, galleries, free sites, blogs, etc are all become less and less relevant to some programs. They have Zangos, torrents, and tube sites to get traffic from. Much in the same way some programs were totally addicted to spam traffic, some have beecome addicted to web2.0 traffic.

What many of them are not seeing (or not caring about at this point) is how these sites are accellerating the decline of the adult business. The 1 in 200 business that in 2 years turned into a 1 in 2000 business and is rapidly heading to a 1 in 20,000 business. They are making the mistake of thinking they can support sites that give all of the product away and somehow make it up in volume.

Instead, they are killing demand for their products, and the only people left laughing are the dating, cam, and toy sites who's business doesn't change because their content can't be given away.

For them, WM are not the focus of thier business anymore.

What is the difference in WM and affiliates to xtube I really do not get this, I own the site but I have to join my affiliate program and pay myself 1% just to participate? I really do not get this?

Are they really saying they will not allow ?us? to send them clips from out site in exchange for a return link, this is kind of what is sounds like of where they are going with this to me.

I do agree this is not a good thing but for different reasons too, I work with allot of gay content and all the LL?s ect are about dead as people just do not care about image content when that can get vids for free. Now as this tubes stuff goes one we will see longer and longer vids being offered for free just to get more attention for programs. This will soon devalue video content in the same way we have already done with pics. What the hell are we going to have to sell after that, not sure I want to sell sex toys

How can they say (WM are not the focus of thier business anymore) where do they think these videos come from?

I am just really lost with this stuff and do not see why more people are not really pissed off it what I think is going on is really true. BTW this vote is a joke, what WM?s want to be banned I guess the ones that do not use it in the first place hu?

maxpower · 08-15-2007, 11:58 PM

Sorry guys this thing takes too long to refresh sometimes I guess

The Incredible Skulk · 08-16-2007, 01:57 AM

So basically, we built the monster and now we can't control it. That's responsible. Thank you Dr. Frankenstein.

The Incredible Skulk · 08-16-2007, 02:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XTube_Kurtis

We would need about 10 people working around the clock there are so many uploads it's crazy, The thing is given our position we are compliant.

So basically, "We built the monster and now we can't control it."

That's responsible. Thank you Dr. Frankenstein.

RawAlex · 08-16-2007, 06:16 AM

maxpower, I think they are talking about banning "affiliates" from submitting, and only allowing program owners to submit.

Program owners need to realize that these sites aren't helping. Video clip content shouldn't run 1 or 2 minutes without interruption, that is more than enough for a dedicated wanker to get off, not just get up. You want surfers excited, not satisfied.

I understand where the tube site owners are coming from - they are looking at the sheer volume of traffic, the daily click counts (they all talk proudly about that) but what they won't tell you is the percentage of people who actually click on the link off to the paysite in question (it's a really small number) nor will they disclose how many click on the other stuff on the page (a higher number, but they won't discuss it because it's their income).

Once again, tube sites are like dating sites, they aren't in the business of selling porn, because they are burning through the porn too quickly. Why do you think they have so many cam and dating banners? Because it is the only think left that they can sell. They don't even try to make the porn banners on the pages relevant, the Peter North videos had a bunch of gay banners on the page, the teen videos had a bunch of shemale banners, etc. They are trying have to get people to go to dating and cam sites.

Tube sites once again don't have any skin in the game. They have nothing to lose, everything to gain. They have no concern over rights and over exposure and burning the porn sites, because they really aren't in the business of selling porn. Once you grock that, the rest is easy.

Magnum PI · 08-16-2007, 06:37 AM

The simple solution for sponsors would be to quit arguing on GFY, and just sue Xtube. XTube would be forced to settle, or fight a lengthy court case -- which would probably change their stance on stolen content.

Of course, all sponsors should be watching the Viacom vs. Youtube situation before acting, to ensure any lawsuit would not be a wasted venture.

XTube_Lance · 08-16-2007, 07:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Lance, there should be no other company's content on the page with that content.

from braincash's site:
Quote:
Can I build my own galleries with the samples provided?
Yes, but you'll have to host everything yourself. We do not allow hot linking to our content, except banners. We do not allow you to promote other sites than ours with Braincash content.

The very essense of your site puts the affiliates in violation of the rules of the program. There is no way that an affiliate can post a video on your pages without breaking the rules of the game. They don't have the rights to do that, simple as that.

The Braincash WM who uploaded the PN video should have been aware of those conditions. Braincash could also have contacted us to let us know. Considering both parties did not, and I have found out via GFY, I have included Braincash in the DO NOT PROMOTE list that all WMs see when they log into the home page of XTube.

XTube_Lance · 08-16-2007, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Libertine

Ok, so I took a closer look at XTube.

Very first video I look at is by this user:
http://www.xtube.com/user_videos.php?u=kameo20

I have no idea whether he's a webmaster or not, but none of the watermarked videos seem to have links going to sites by the programs owning the sites in the watermarks. Most videos seem to have been uploaded a full year ago and have thousands of views, so obviously, they're there to stay.

Somehow, I don't think users like this are an exception...

Thanks for pointing that out. Now that it has been reported this user has been banned. You could have reported him through the site - there is a link ON his profile as well as each upload.

XTube_Lance · 08-16-2007, 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

xtube changes the format of the videos.

This change secures the video from easy theft.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

The add their trailer / logo onto the videos.

Incorrect. We do not brand any videos. Our logo appears on the player, not the footage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

with absense of contact information for the individual posters, they could be the defacto primary producer (because no other information is provided).

Anyone can contact any user on the site. Try it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

the line between the "content for sale" and the "user submitted content" is blurred by the format of the site.

There is no line between paid and free content to blurr. They are in completely separate sections.

XTube_Lance · 08-16-2007, 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EdgeXXX

Ok, so why don't you allow webmasters and sponsors to post clips but FORBID the surfers from uploading content?

We want public users to have the option of uploading their own home-made stuff. By allowing that there are losers who will break the rules, as previously mentioned, and who get dealt with (banned) when we locate them.

XTube_Lance · 08-16-2007, 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveLightspeed

Proof is here
http://www.xtube.com/play_re.php?v=xvXxAyfQ2uH&page=1

Thanks for the heads up on that one Steve. User has been banned. He was posing as a WM but was not providing linking codes or sponsors - obviously, he has no legitimacy.

Steve, you are the 3rd person to find a violation and allow it to stay online by failing to report it through the tools available on the site.

XTube_Lance · 08-16-2007, 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDSmith

Is this a tantrum you're having? You HAD to know that in bringing your issue to this board you were going to get your feet held to the fire at least a little. How could you not know that, and be prepared for it?

Keep your cool and just do what's right and address some of these concerns, because some of them appear to have considerable merit. Or come with more attitude and this thread WILL deteriorate into a train wreck.

I was advised by many to not start this thread, but I decided against them and did so anyways. I want to know what the GFY WMs think. I am not have tantrums, but I am amazed at a lot of what I am reading. At the same time I understand and agree with a lot too. It's hard to have discussions when most people are angry or not reading/retaining what is going on.

XTube_Lance · 08-16-2007, 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by studd

douchebags.
bang bros VIOLATION:
http://www.xtube.com/play_re.php?v=990jAEvA77K

This was uploaded by a BB WM (xxxvideosnow) who is promoting Ass Parade. He has a valid linking code on that upload.
[/QUOTE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by studd

bang bros VIOLATION:
http://www.xtube.com/play_re.php?v=99Z5OVtqTo3
This was uploaded by a BB WM (xxxvideosnow) who is promoting Bangbus. He has a valid linking code on that upload.

Quote:

Originally Posted by studd

bang bros VIOLATION:
http://www.xtube.com/play_re.php?v=99QjKl06AEA
This was uploaded by a BB WM (xxxvideosnow) who is promoting Streetranger. He has a valid linking code on that upload.

Quote:

Originally Posted by studd

sean cody VIOLATION:
http://www.xtube.com/play_re.php?v=99VFKkma14k
Correct, this is an actual violation. User has been banned.

Quote:

Originally Posted by studd

in order to get their PROPERTY removed from the site they have to go through a long process. That doesn't fix the fact that xtube profits for the views the videos get BEFORE it is removed.

You clearly have not read ANYthing I have written. Scroll up or page-back and read the process I outlined.

XTube_Lance · 08-16-2007, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by simons

Is really needed a list of allowed and not allowed programs to promote. People keeps promoting stole contents even when/if webmasters are banned because webmasters don't cheat and don't post stolen contents.

Any WM on XTube can read the list of whom not to promote on the home page. Also, any WM who can read at all can find out from the TOS available from each Sponsor.

RawAlex · 08-16-2007, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XTube_Lance

The Braincash WM who uploaded the PN video should have been aware of those conditions. Braincash could also have contacted us to let us know. Considering both parties did not, and I have found out via GFY, I have included Braincash in the DO NOT PROMOTE list that all WMs see when they log into the home page of XTube.

Lance, once again you guys are going about this entirely backwards. You shouldn't be making a blacklist, but making a WHITELIST. There are very, very few programs that are going to be interested in allowing their affiliates to post videos onto pages that don't promote their product. I can find that requirement in almost every program out there.

I would venture to say that pretty much every one of the major programs has a similar restriction somewhere on their webmaster site about the use of materials.

Banning webmasters is pointless if you will let the general public post the same videos. Allowing anyone to be a "webmaster" is just nuts.

As for your logo, I am looking at it as an end user. I click a link to see a video, a video screen comes up, your logo plays for 5 seconds and then the video plays. As far as I can tell (as an end user) you branded the videos. Have the programs given you the right to brand or co-brand their product?

I cannot contact any user on the site directly. I can click a link that says "contact bob", but I can't get his 2257 location, I cannot find where his documents would be located, i cannot find his business office and I cannot find who his records agent is. If you are claiming to be only a host, and are claiming to enforce 2257 requirements, you are failing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex View Post
xtube changes the format of the videos.
This change secures the video from easy theft.

Oh how fucking noble of you. Like you guys would be the ones concerned with theft. Are you thinking that some other tube company will come in and jack your stuff? Guess what? It ain't your stuff.

XTube_Lance · 08-16-2007, 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxpower

I am sure site/content owners and affiliates will work with you, but really I am having problems seeing where your point is, or why anyone would want their products on your site if your not going to work with us. Because the Vids for the most part on your site are owned by many on this board and willing to bet they would all say they are Webmasters at last in some ways.

Really I don?t get it? What I hear is Fuck You we will use your hard work and property and not even let you work with us. If you want to stop anyone from posting videos is should be Non Webmasters or content holders, as anyone else for the most part is just posting stolen content.

Lets say Ebay did the same thing, and did not want to let the owners of the property list it, but if you do not have the right to sell they would be more than happy to give it away for you. Would this not be call the Back Market and would someone not be going to jail?

If their is some misunderstanding now would be a good time to make us all understand as it sounds to me you want to cut out the rightfully owners of the content and only deal with (viewers) that do not have the right to be posting it. This is really backwards, if anything you should be glad the ?webmasters? or those with the right to the content want to list it with you, and be trying to work with us not against us. Nothing is perfect but fuck seems you are talking about removing the only legitimate part of the site.

Please just work with us not against us.

I understand where the confusion has caused you to think this, and it is my fault for not being clear. Because there is no obvious distinction between a WM upload and a stolen user upload I get a lot of grief about how we are ripping off you hard working people.

XTube does NOT want to rip people off, and we do NOT want to work against anyone. We allow WMs to use our BW/Hosting/Traffic/Members to drive traffic to whatever they want to legitimately promote - FOR FREE... And then the same WMs come bitching to us about it.

I got fed up and thought I would pose the question about no longer allowing it, considering that is the impression I got from the community. Seems no one wants us to do it. Now that I ask the question I see the problem lies in the perception of the people. Max, you are right, WMs are the best source or consistently legit content, and I do not want to remove that.

XTube_Lance · 08-16-2007, 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drunkspringbreakgirls

EXACTLY. This is the problem. Sponsors dont care if you have some of their content up if you are sending traffic but there is no way in hell someone is going to find that link.

If a webmaster grabs some content from a site and makes tgp galleries with a million AFF ads and one tiny hidden banner to the program that is a problem.

Change your banner system so there is an obvious link to the program of the displayed content not to AFF. End of problems.

That is a valid concern, and I agree with you.

XTube_Lance · 08-16-2007, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

contact me about the sunny warm lake front property I am selling cheap in Nunavut.

Nunavut is warm?

XTube_Lance · 08-16-2007, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by simons

http://www.XTube.com/play_re.php?v=9...cl=N5abX5cdsC9

I should just ask GFY'ers to find/report violations. Thanks, user banned.

Brujah · 08-16-2007, 07:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XTube_Lance

Thanks for the heads up on that one Steve. User has been banned. He was posing as a WM but was not providing linking codes or sponsors - obviously, he has no legitimacy.

Steve, you are the 3rd person to find a violation and allow it to stay online by failing to report it through the tools available on the site.

Yeah, what the fuck is wrong with you Steve? Surf Xtube everyday and use the tools on the site!

RawAlex · 08-16-2007, 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XTube_Lance

Nunavut is warm?

it's as warm as the webmaster uploaded videos on your site are used with full permission.

XTube_Lance · 08-16-2007, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rowan

Why can't the video itself be linked?

Great idea, I will look into the mechanics.

Matt 26z · 08-16-2007, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Program owners need to realize that these sites aren't helping. Video clip content shouldn't run 1 or 2 minutes without interruption

Then what is your theory on why content owners continue to upload video after video to these sites?

RawAlex · 08-16-2007, 08:11 AM

I don't think that many content owners do, and those that do are deluding themselves into thinking that the amount of dilution of their product is worth the sales they are getting.

Some companies are also burning all their old content this way, as we move to HD.

Some people spent a ton of money on content, made thier money back in the good times, and are now looking for the gravy sales.

In all cases, I don't think they are really paying attention to just how much money they are making for the xtube guys, who run huge numbers of unrelated ads on the pages, profitting from the content without giving back anywhere near a reasonable amount of traffic.

I have a feeling it may be a "bro" thing.

View Poll Results: Should XTube Ban ALL WMs?
Yes, I am WM.	28	47.46%
No, I am a WM	23	38.98%
Yes, I am a Sponsor	6	10.17%
No, I am a Sponsor	7	11.86%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 59. You may not vote on this poll

08-15-2007, 10:54 PM	#120
KrisKross Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Canada Posts: 5,024	Seriously, I think going with a paid webmaster model would be brilliant. Charge $20 a month, allow for text linking in the description and/or a larger banner (468x60) and reduce the amount of ads that show up near the top of the page. I'd pay for that monthly. __________________

08-16-2007, 01:57 AM	#129
The Incredible Skulk Registered User Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 33	So basically, we built the monster and now we can't control it. That's responsible. Thank you Dr. Frankenstein. Last edited by The Incredible Skulk; 08-16-2007 at 01:59 AM.. Reason: sorry, didn't include original quote

08-15-2007, 07:46 PM	#105
TheAccountant So Fucking Banned Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 705	That's an example of what I was trying to say http://www.XTube.com/play_re.php?v=9...cl=N5abX5cdsC9 It has been uploaded by a normal users. It seems to be something amateur but NOPE. It's not amateur. It's a STOLEN CONTENT produced by GammaCash / GayPornAccess. Lets say that webmasters have been banner.... users keep uploading stolen stuff. Isn't better let webmasters posting stuff with their ref code so: xtube owners are happy, webmaster are happy, sponsors are happy. It's so great! Why try to fix the problem on one side if the real problem is on another side?

08-15-2007, 07:51 PM	#106
RawAlex So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In a house. Posts: 9,465	simons, I understand your point, but that is almost besides the point. much of the "webmaster" uploaded content is content intended for affiliates to build galleries and free sites that they host themselves, not to be uploaded to another site. Further, because of the site design and layout, I would guess that 99.8% of the clickouts off that page aren't going to the sponsor who's content is used even when it is uploaded with full permission. There is 6 to 8 ad spots significantly more prominent on that page, and they are mostly above the fold line. The sponsor's content is being used mostly to sell dating and sell cam shows. It isn't being used to sell their site. There is no argument you can make that would make that problem go away. All this site is doing is giving away an ass load of content and not even bothering to put the effort into marketing the sites that the content comes from. I dare you to make a few galleries like this and show them to your sponsors and see how they feel.

08-15-2007, 07:53 PM	#107
RawAlex So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In a house. Posts: 9,465	Oh yeah, and simons, I'm in the porn business. uploading your gay home movies and thinking you might upset someone is rather silly. "uploaded 7 minutes ago". Nice.

08-15-2007, 09:00 PM	#111
CaptainHowdy Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Happy in the dark. Posts: 93,581	Watttttttttttt ??

08-15-2007, 09:15 PM	#112
RawAlex So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In a house. Posts: 9,465	Maxpower, this is all part of the greater shift in traffic and affiliate programs that has been coming for a few years. As more and more traffic sources come into play that can be purchased or traded for, traditional websites such as TGPs, galleries, free sites, blogs, etc are all become less and less relevant to some programs. They have Zangos, torrents, and tube sites to get traffic from. Much in the same way some programs were totally addicted to spam traffic, some have beecome addicted to web2.0 traffic. What many of them are not seeing (or not caring about at this point) is how these sites are accellerating the decline of the adult business. The 1 in 200 business that in 2 years turned into a 1 in 2000 business and is rapidly heading to a 1 in 20,000 business. They are making the mistake of thinking they can support sites that give all of the product away and somehow make it up in volume. Instead, they are killing demand for their products, and the only people left laughing are the dating, cam, and toy sites who's business doesn't change because their content can't be given away. For them, WM are not the focus of thier business anymore.

08-15-2007, 09:42 PM	#114
rowan Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 17,393	Why can't the video itself be linked?

08-15-2007, 09:44 PM	#115
Tempest Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: May 2004 Location: West Coast, Canada. Posts: 10,217	Why not just limit all videos to be no longer than 2 minutes in length... The biggest complaint is people uploading entire videos ripped off from other sites... You could then only allow "approved" submitters to post longer videos and they must be reviewed first. Or some variation of this.

08-15-2007, 11:33 PM	#124
Ripshit So Fucking Banned Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 951	Ripshit,Ripshit,Ripshit,Ripshit,Ripshit,Ripshit,Ripshit off!

08-15-2007, 11:58 PM	#128
maxpower Confirmed User Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 734	Sorry guys this thing takes too long to refresh sometimes I guess

08-16-2007, 06:16 AM	#131
RawAlex So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In a house. Posts: 9,465	maxpower, I think they are talking about banning "affiliates" from submitting, and only allowing program owners to submit. Program owners need to realize that these sites aren't helping. Video clip content shouldn't run 1 or 2 minutes without interruption, that is more than enough for a dedicated wanker to get off, not just get up. You want surfers excited, not satisfied. I understand where the tube site owners are coming from - they are looking at the sheer volume of traffic, the daily click counts (they all talk proudly about that) but what they won't tell you is the percentage of people who actually click on the link off to the paysite in question (it's a really small number) nor will they disclose how many click on the other stuff on the page (a higher number, but they won't discuss it because it's their income). Once again, tube sites are like dating sites, they aren't in the business of selling porn, because they are burning through the porn too quickly. Why do you think they have so many cam and dating banners? Because it is the only think left that they can sell. They don't even try to make the porn banners on the pages relevant, the Peter North videos had a bunch of gay banners on the page, the teen videos had a bunch of shemale banners, etc. They are trying have to get people to go to dating and cam sites. Tube sites once again don't have any skin in the game. They have nothing to lose, everything to gain. They have no concern over rights and over exposure and burning the porn sites, because they really aren't in the business of selling porn. Once you grock that, the rest is easy.

08-16-2007, 06:37 AM	#132
Magnum PI Registered User Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Over here Posts: 12	The simple solution for sponsors would be to quit arguing on GFY, and just sue Xtube. XTube would be forced to settle, or fight a lengthy court case -- which would probably change their stance on stolen content. Of course, all sponsors should be watching the Viacom vs. Youtube situation before acting, to ensure any lawsuit would not be a wasted venture.

08-16-2007, 08:11 AM	#150
RawAlex So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In a house. Posts: 9,465	I don't think that many content owners do, and those that do are deluding themselves into thinking that the amount of dilution of their product is worth the sales they are getting. Some companies are also burning all their old content this way, as we move to HD. Some people spent a ton of money on content, made thier money back in the good times, and are now looking for the gravy sales. In all cases, I don't think they are really paying attention to just how much money they are making for the xtube guys, who run huge numbers of unrelated ads on the pages, profitting from the content without giving back anywhere near a reasonable amount of traffic. I have a feeling it may be a "bro" thing.