You cannot kill TUBES... Here is why... - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

onlymovies · 03-26-2009, 09:44 PM

bah, nevermind...forgot where i was posting

FIDDY! woot

Barefootsies · 03-26-2009, 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onlymovies

bah, nevermind...forgot where i was posting

toe say fiddy

onlymovies · 03-26-2009, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

toe say fiddy

....................

tiger · 03-26-2009, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

Ease back toots.

1. I answered your question. No. I do not think a lot know about it.

2. I explained I have done it. Both sides. So I know how it works, and doesn't.

3. Thanks for letting us know you have actually filed the DMCA, and know the process.

4. For the record, Google removes the main site's url from the index. Others remove only the link... Rapidshare, Youtube, etc..

5. To address your question of why some could be, or are, still listed ASSuming they were DMCA'd I explained re-inclusion is possibe, as provided by the link.

6. I did not claim I know all. Explained from experience.

7. I did not call you a noob.

Let's stick to the facts. Thank you.

No worries footsies, I wasn't upset just thought you were assuming a bit too much. I always enjoy your posts and I know you are knowledgeable guy from your posts, was only trying to share what I have seen happen.

I would be surprised though if any tube site that accepts user submitted content and that has large traffic didn't receive multiple DMCAs per week if not more. Let's just say one of those is sent to google per week. Delisting and reinclusion takes time usually at least a week or more. If someone was sending even one per week to google any large tube site would never have a chance to get reincluded in the index they would be constantly getting delisted and DMCA'd over and over again.

I'm not saying there aren't times when google does completely delist a site for stuff like this but I would seriously doubt that their policy is to automatically delist (the main url) anyone that receives a single DMCA.

Barefootsies · 03-26-2009, 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiger

No worries footsies, I wasn't upset just thought you were assuming a bit too much. I always enjoy your posts and I know you are knowledgeable guy from your posts, was only trying to share what I have seen happen. .

It's all good BRO. I am not here to fight. I am here to make money.

Sorry for any offense. My apologies.

tiger · 03-26-2009, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

I am here to make money.

Same here man. Like I said no worries, I know you know your shit and I don't get offended that easily.

gideongallery · 03-27-2009, 04:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

Quit while you're behind.

1. You have no idea who I do, and do not, do business with.
2. Most do not have affiliate programs.
3. My license restricts use, and I know which programs are licensed to use content, and how.

This include the domain(s) they are licensed to use to promote material on, and which are authorized to USE the material according to the license. How and where material can be used.

For simple minded gideon's sake, I'll provide a real life legal example. Tube sites are not allowed according to the license. So I see a full length clip on ANY tube, I know there is no license permitting that.

except for that tricky fair use thing that automagically authorizes it use for such activity as timeshifting, backup and hopefully in the future access shifting.

Quote:

Any DMCA is legal. Should any affiliate or program use clips in such a manner would be breaking the license, making it null and void.

again you can't licience way fair use if they could

counter suits like this one would not happen
http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=3777651

http://www.eff.org/cases/lenz-v-universal

and before you do the bullshit, sampling is obviously fair use, timeshifting isn't real dance you always do. The fact is there is no ladder of fair use, each is equally valid and has to be considered equally.

Quote:

While that is one of countless examples to blow gideon's hypotheticals out of the water. One is enough. We, as do many content providers, have licenses and limits to how content can be used. It is spelled out clearly urls, and uses, or limitations.

Now, once you are finished talking out of your ass, and making up hypotheticals that do not apply to any mistakes I am not going to be making in the future thanks to a license, good record keeping, and restrictions.....

carry on with your usual stirring up bullshit shtick.

the irony is the more effective you prove this policy is
the more reason that the tubes would have to fight back.
if everyone dmca a site out of google then they would have no choice but to start counter suing to keep their listings.
Funny thing is counter claim notice is only 1 page long too, send that in and the list has to be put back.
The only way you could deal with it then is to go to court and prove that the fair use right justification is bogus.

I am sure the judge would love your ni gg a please arguement

gideongallery · 03-27-2009, 04:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

I doubt any tube site (that is run 100% by a script anyway and rarely sees human eyes) in the porn biz is going to sue any producer for dmca'ing his content down. I don't doubt that it CAN be done...just like we could all start suing for a bunch of reasons. But since none of us want to be on the govt. radar, I'm gonna say that the big boys of tubes aren't gonna want that either...and since most of them are paysite owners as well I can pretty much guarantee you that they aren't gonna take legal action against someone who produced that content and then bring the light of day upon themselves.

Now I'm sure that theory can and does hold true with mainstream stuff....but in the porn biz I just don't see that ridiculous scenario happening. And if it did, you would find the tube owner and content owner both wishing they had never went into a courtroom. Because in the end they are both "scum" in the eyes of the court because of the fact it's porn.

that the point
BF is ignoring the fact that the counter notice is a 1 page form letter too.
If a tube site wants the listing back all they have to do if fill the form letter based on any of the fair use rights i have talked about.(with the relevant court cases quoted)
He would have to take them to court to discredit that application of fair use.

if anything this we are both scum effect makes it easier to defend your google ranking.

CarlosTheGaucho · 03-27-2009, 07:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

http://www.google.com/dmca.html

Once you send them a DMCA, swear out your affidavit, sign it, and provide the examples, the offending site is removed from the SERPS. Tada. An illegal tube no longer holds the top spot for your keywords.

It is that fucking easy. Almost like magic eh?

An answer to my question before..

Barefootsies · 03-27-2009, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gideongallery

except for that tricky fair use thing that automagically authorizes it use for such activity as timeshifting, backup and hopefully in the future access shifting.

again you can't licience way fair use if they could

counter suits like this one would not happen
http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=3777651

http://www.eff.org/cases/lenz-v-universal

and before you do the bullshit, sampling is obviously fair use, timeshifting isn't real dance you always do. The fact is there is no ladder of fair use, each is equally valid and has to be considered equally.

the irony is the more effective you prove this policy is
the more reason that the tubes would have to fight back.
if everyone dmca a site out of google then they would have no choice but to start counter suing to keep their listings.
Funny thing is counter claim notice is only 1 page long too, send that in and the list has to be put back.
The only way you could deal with it then is to go to court and prove that the fair use right justification is bogus.

I am sure the judge would love your ni gg a please arguement

Goddamn you are ignorant.

Not one sentence in your reply has addressed anything I said. Your time shifting (i.e consumer use of backing up files on some internet cloud) has nothing to do with licensing of content to a company, and restrictions on how a client can use it (tubes, affiliates, distribution) as laid out by a license.

Learn to fucking read assclown.

CarlosTheGaucho · 03-27-2009, 08:41 AM

I have gideon gallery on ignore, I'm not interested in people, who are here to share bullshit, I want to talk with people who are here to make money.

Barefootsies · 03-27-2009, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gideongallery

that the point
BF is ignoring the fact that the counter notice is a 1 page form letter too.
If a tube site wants the listing back all they have to do if fill the form letter based on any of the fair use rights i have talked about.(with the relevant court cases quoted)
He would have to take them to court to discredit that application of fair use.

if anything this we are both scum effect makes it easier to defend your google ranking.

Wrong again bitch.

Can you fucking READ the counter suit? You have to swear out the affidavit that you have some kind of OWNERSHIP. Not to mention, this thread is about illegal tube content.

So let me point out the usual gideon routine.

1. Thread is about illegal content and tube stealing that content. Gideon defends it.
2. Gideon will change course, saying he does not defend illegal content but a consumer can cloud/timeshift/blah blah blah.
3. Nothing to do with O.P.
4. Gideon, as in almost all of these similar types of threads, is proven a troll as usual. He enjoys twisting people's words, the O.P. and trying to stir up shit arguing consumer use of time shifting. However, the argument does not apply because content theft is not protected by any laws of any kind.

The end.

gideongallery · 03-27-2009, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

Wrong again bitch.

Can you fucking READ the counter suit? You have to swear out the affidavit that you have some kind of OWNERSHIP. Not to mention, this thread is about illegal tube content.

from googles own site regarding copyright take down requests

http://www.chillingeffects.org/fairuse/

Quote:

When a copyright holder sues a user of the work for infringment, the user may argue in defense that the use was not infringement but "fair use." Under the fair use doctrine, it is not an infringement to use the copyrighted works of another in some circumstances, such as for commentary, criticism, news reporting, or educational use. The defense generally depends on a case-by-case judgment of the facts.

http://www.google.com/dmca.html#counter

there is absolutely no requirement to prove or claim OWNERSHIP.

Quote:

To expedite our ability to process your counter notification, please use the following format (including section numbers):

1. Identify the specific URLs or other unique identifying information of material that Google has removed or to which Google has disabled access.

2. Provide your name, address, telephone number, email address, and a statement that you consent to the jurisdiction of Federal District Court for the judicial district in which your address is located (or Santa Clara County, California if your address is outside of the United States), and that you will accept service of process from the person who provided notification under subsection (c)(1)(C) or an agent of such person.

3. Include the following statement: "I swear, under penalty of perjury, that I have a good faith belief that each search result, message, or other item of content identified above was removed or disabled as a result of a mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled, or that the material identified by the complainant has been removed or disabled at the URL identified and will no longer be shown."

4. Sign the paper.

5. Send the written communication to the following address:

Google, Inc.
Attn: Google Legal Support, DMCA Counter Notification
1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
Mountain View, CA 94043

Quote:

So let me point out the usual gideon routine.

1. Thread is about illegal content and tube stealing that content. Gideon defends it.
2. Gideon will change course, saying he does not defend illegal content but a consumer can cloud/timeshift/blah blah blah.
3. Nothing to do with O.P.
4. Gideon, as in almost all of these similar types of threads, is proven a troll as usual. He enjoys twisting people's words, the O.P. and trying to stir up shit arguing consumer use of time shifting. However, the argument does not apply because content theft is not protected by any laws of any kind.

The end.

the reason i keep repeating myself is because you keep spouting the same bullshit again
tube posting is not theft it copyright infringement
fair use trumps all copyright infringement
you don't have to own the content to use it (see fair use trumps all copyright infringement)
if you file a counter notice, with the reasoning (referenced court cases) the next step for you would be going to court and proving that those fair uses did not justify the act of publishing without your consent.

where your nig ga please bullshit
or deliberately misrepresenting the counter notice by claiming that you have to prove OWENERSHIP will not work.

gideongallery · 03-27-2009, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

Goddamn you are ignorant.

Not one sentence in your reply has addressed anything I said. Your time shifting (i.e consumer use of backing up files on some internet cloud) has nothing to do with licensing of content to a company, and restrictions on how a client can use it (tubes, affiliates, distribution) as laid out by a license.

Learn to fucking read assclown.

ok please explain how a member of one of your liciencees site

downloading the content from the members area
and using the torrent site as a tool to backup the viewing right for future download
or using a tube site to timeshifting his viewing rights to after the membership is cancelled

has absolutely nothing to do with fair use right of backup or timeshifting.

DaddyHalbucks · 03-27-2009, 10:47 AM

The tubes would have a hard time proving "fair use" when they are stealing thousands of images over and over again.

Content owners have the advantage in court, and that is where they should go for relief.

Barefootsies · 03-27-2009, 10:52 AM

a tube site is now 'time shifting' or a means for people to back up their content??

Truly priceless.

Barefootsies · 03-27-2009, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gideongallery

from googles own site regarding copyright take down requests

http://www.chillingeffects.org/fairuse/

http://www.google.com/dmca.html#counter

there is absolutely no requirement to prove or claim OWNERSHIP.

the reason i keep repeating myself is because you keep spouting the same bullshit again
tube posting is not theft it copyright infringement
fair use trumps all copyright infringement
you don't have to own the content to use it (see fair use trumps all copyright infringement)
if you file a counter notice, with the reasoning (referenced court cases) the next step for you would be going to court and proving that those fair uses did not justify the act of publishing without your consent.

where your nig ga please bullshit
or deliberately misrepresenting the counter notice by claiming that you have to prove OWENERSHIP will not work.

So now you are saying a tube site is someone 'time shifting' or backing up thier content?!?
Fucking priceless. I would like to see how that one stands up in court.

My god your are an ignorant fuck.

Barefootsies · 03-27-2009, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gideongallery

I guess reading is not your strong suit. Let me help you.

Quote:

3. Include the following statement: "I swear, under penalty of perjury, that I have a good faith belief that each search result, message, or other item of content identified above was removed or disabled as a result of a mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled, or that the material identified by the complainant has been removed or disabled at the URL identified and will no longer be shown."

So once again, you are blown out of the water.

Counter suit, to get re-included, means you removed the material.

I went ahead and underlined that for you, even though it is mentioned three times. Maybe you will actually READ it this time.

Barefootsies · 03-27-2009, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks

The tubes would have a hard time proving "fair use" when they are stealing thousands of images over and over again.

Content owners have the advantage in court, and that is where they should go for relief.

Exactly right.

You have to love gideon's twisting of the words, and circumstances. Since he is not actually in this business, and does little more than troll this board spewing the same bullshit over and over in these threads. He has to twist all these discussions in a way that make him look like he has knows what he is talking about.

Kinda amusing when you think about it. But pathetic at the same time.

Tube sites are now a back up, like a hard drive? Pure comedy.

Barefootsies · 03-27-2009, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CarlosTheGaucho

I have gideon gallery on ignore, I'm not interested in people, who are here to share bullshit, I want to talk with people who are here to make money.

Sounds like a plan. If you have read a single thread he's in. You have read them all.

Same paraphrased bullshit and links as the thousand times before. Same twisting of people's words, the O.P. and situations that have nothing to do with one another. Just so he can repeat the same shtick. All this from someone not even in this industry.

Snake Doctor · 03-27-2009, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

a tube site is now 'time shifting' or a means for people to back up their content??

Truly priceless.

Well common sense says it isn't, and you and I both know it's bullshit.

But when dealing with the law it doesn't matter what you know, it only matters what you can prove, and this argument, unfortunately, could pass muster in court.

Blazed · 03-27-2009, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

No, I do not. If they did, you would see more people mentioning this in the past, across this board, in any number of a thousand tube posts other than me. I've obviously done it. Both sides of the issue to be exact in regards to Google, and DMCA'd according to the other tactics I have mentioned. I am not doing your GFY armchair quarterbacking of DMCA opinion.

When you have experience with the process, you come and let us know.

That said, they can be re-included (of you actually read the link that is) once they remove the offending, DMCA'd, material.

Unless you know what you are talking about in this regard, I prolly would keep the

to myself.

No offense chief.

I dont think they remove the entire site, they remove the offending page. That is my experience when coming accross removed [pages when surfing anyway. It would not make sense to remove a whole site based on one infringing video.

Barefootsies · 03-27-2009, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snake Doctor

Well common sense says it isn't, and you and I both know it's bullshit.

But when dealing with the law it doesn't matter what you know, it only matters what you can prove, and this argument, unfortunately, could pass muster in court.

Agreed.

Quote:

This message is hidden because gideongallery is on your ignore list.

A thing of beauty.

Barefootsies · 03-27-2009, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blazed

I dont think they remove the entire site, they remove the offending page. That is my experience when coming accross removed [pages when surfing anyway. It would not make sense to remove a whole site based on one infringing video.

I do not know what they do more recently. I know Perfect10 had main site's url removed. Not the subsequent. Not just main, as well as many others. You can still find it on certain pages.

That said, and more REALISTICALLY, when I have had to do DMCA's. 99% of the time, offenders just remove the content, and apologize. It is that simple. YouTube, Rapidshare, whatever.

Few times you have to go to hosts, processors, sponsors, law enforcement and the rest. Despite these endless threads on GFY battling wet paper bulls in the dark about what you will do, could do, gideon's bullshit. 99% are resolved with one notice, and it's over in my experience. I've talked to others at some of the shows, and the say the same. Occasionally there is some gideon gallery asshat, or Pirate Bay, but most simply comply because they know they are in the wrong and that is the end of it.

gideongallery · 03-27-2009, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

So once again, you are blown out of the water.

Counter suit, to get re-included, means you removed the material.

I went ahead and underlined that for you, even though it is mentioned three times. Maybe you will actually READ it this time.

my god you have the reading and compenhension level of a 5 year old.

Quote:

I swear, under penalty of perjury, that I have a good faith belief that each search result, message, or other item of content identified above was removed or disabled as a result of a mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled

this is what you do when you want to claim that the removal request is wrong

sort of exactly what lenz did in the lenz vs univeral case.

the second part (after the or) is the part you do if you backed down like a little bitch.

your absurd reading of the quote would mean they would have to remove the content EVEN if you had a fair use right to publish which would have resulted in a automagic win for universal. Guess what they lost that one.

slapass · 03-27-2009, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

Tube sites as a business model are not going anywhere.

1. Affiliates are crying in their beers because soon they will be more a less wiped out if things keep going as they are. Most admit to sales in a tailspin.

2. Content providers, and programs who license content are pissed about illegal tubes. Those being the one's who do not own any of the material, license, copyright, and post full length movies for traffic.

The 'tube issue' is more complicated than most of the threads get down to. All depending on which segment of this industry you are in, and how it effects you directly.

Or simpler. They are giving the product away for free. Very tough to make great bank with this business model. Tubes make money but they make way less money with far more traffic then the older style marketing.

gideongallery · 03-27-2009, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snake Doctor

Well common sense says it isn't, and you and I both know it's bullshit.

But when dealing with the law it doesn't matter what you know, it only matters what you can prove, and this argument, unfortunately, could pass muster in court.

definition of a cloud (computing)

august 24, 2008 appeal court ruling establishing the right to timeshift using a cloud

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

So now you are saying a tube site is someone 'time shifting' or backing up thier content?!?
Fucking priceless. I would like to see how that one stands up in court.

My god your are an ignorant fuck.

it already has..

Barefootsies · 03-27-2009, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slapass

Or simpler. They are giving the product away for free. Very tough to make great bank with this business model. Tubes make money but they make way less money with far more traffic then the older style marketing.

Agreed.

Ozarkz · 03-27-2009, 02:33 PM

You can't kill something people love.

I mean yah you can kill a person and they die and you can't bring them back.

But a tubesite is just a piece of software.

roxyxxx · 03-27-2009, 04:51 PM

time for fake CJ tube sites.

Snake Doctor · 03-27-2009, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slapass

Or simpler. They are giving the product away for free. Very tough to make great bank with this business model. Tubes make money but they make way less money with far more traffic then the older style marketing.

That has been true of every new type of free site in this business.

The driving force has always been the cost and availability of bandwidth.

Link lists gave away alot more content (10 pics per site) than pic posts (1 pic) and made less money on more traffic.
Then the link lists stopped allowing consoles on free sites, then they stopped allowing full page ads between the warning page and menu page, then they stopped allowing pics on html pages with advertising on them, then they required 20 pics per site. Then they limited the number of advertising links you could have on any page in your site in addition to requiring 20-30 pictures.

Then TGP's came along and required 6 pictures per page, but linked directly to the page with the thumbnails instead of forcing the surfer through 2 or 3 pages of advertising first.
Then 10 pics were required, then 15.
Then MGP's started giving away short movie clips. Then the movies were required to have sound. Then they were required to be a certain screen size and file size.

So in the regard of giving away more content and making less money on more traffic, tubes are no different than any of the sites I mentioned above....the reason they exist today is because bandwidth is $5/mbit and in the heyday of link lists it was $200/mbit.

At each stage of the game, a new set of people got rich, and a new set of people went broke. This one is no different.
I just wish I'd had this epiphany a year or 18 months ago instead of last month.

DudeRick · 03-27-2009, 05:22 PM

Lets get down to the facts people...

1. There has always been sharing and there will always be sharing!

2. None of you are going to stop it.

3. The Internet made you and Internet sharing is going to break you!

4. How can you survive? Create the highest quality content possible for your niche and watermark it. If it's good enough to attract tube viewers to your site you may make some sales. The industry is entering a survival of the fittest era.

03-26-2009, 09:44 PM	#51
onlymovies Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Southern California Posts: 906	bah, nevermind...forgot where i was posting FIDDY! woot __________________ HomemadeVideoPass.com - High converting Homemade mega site! StolenPornVideos.com - The hottest site on the web converting like crazy! ReelPass.com - Offer your surfers 15+ exclusive movie sites for one low price Last edited by onlymovies; 03-26-2009 at 09:48 PM..

03-27-2009, 08:41 AM	#61
CarlosTheGaucho Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 9,512	I have gideon gallery on ignore, I'm not interested in people, who are here to share bullshit, I want to talk with people who are here to make money. __________________ CTG Media \| skype: carlosprague \| cb \|at\| ctgmedia \|dot\| net \| Want to make more with your Dating Traffic? \| Read My Educational Series \| Read my Adult Biz Chronicles \| Did your ad revenue drop by 40 pct. or more last year?

03-27-2009, 10:47 AM	#65
DaddyHalbucks A freakin' legend! Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Las Vegas, Nevada USA Posts: 18,975	The tubes would have a hard time proving "fair use" when they are stealing thousands of images over and over again. Content owners have the advantage in court, and that is where they should go for relief. __________________ Boner Money

03-27-2009, 10:52 AM	#66
Barefootsies Choice is an Illusion Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Land of Obama Posts: 42,635	a tube site is now 'time shifting' or a means for people to back up their content?? Truly priceless. __________________ Should You Email Your Members? Link1 \| Link2 \| Link3 Enough Said. "Would you rather live like a king for a year or like a prince forever?" Last edited by Barefootsies; 03-27-2009 at 10:57 AM..

03-27-2009, 04:51 PM	#80
roxyxxx Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 104	time for fake CJ tube sites. __________________

03-27-2009, 02:33 PM	#79
Ozarkz So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 2,377	You can't kill something people love. I mean yah you can kill a person and they die and you can't bring them back. But a tubesite is just a piece of software.

03-27-2009, 05:22 PM	#82
DudeRick Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Tobacco Road Posts: 1,568	Lets get down to the facts people... 1. There has always been sharing and there will always be sharing! 2. None of you are going to stop it. 3. The Internet made you and Internet sharing is going to break you! 4. How can you survive? Create the highest quality content possible for your niche and watermark it. If it's good enough to attract tube viewers to your site you may make some sales. The industry is entering a survival of the fittest era.