Is 30% of the Internet traffic file sharing? - GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

X

Paul Markham

Too old to care

Join Date: Jun 2001

Posts: 52942
Share

Post
#1

Is 30% of the Internet traffic file sharing?

04-02-2009, 09:45 PM

Swedish 'Net Traffic Dips As Anti-Piracy Law Kicks In.

And more importantly what does it bring to the other 70% of users?

Some of whom I'm sure are still file sharing.

Discuss.

Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70
Tags: None
papill0n

Unregistered Abuser

Join Date: Oct 2007

Posts: 15547
Share

Post
#2

04-02-2009, 09:55 PM

not 30% closer to 90%
Comment
Paul Markham

Too old to care

Join Date: Jun 2001

Posts: 52942
Share

Post
#3

04-02-2009, 10:56 PM

Originally posted by RageCash-Ben

not 30% closer to 90%

I doubt if it's that high. But what do you think it brings to the other users?

What ever the % is.

Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70
Comment
Barefootsies

Choice is an Illusion

Join Date: Feb 2005

Posts: 42635
Share

Post
#4

04-02-2009, 10:59 PM

It's not called 'file sharing'.

See gideongallery for his 'terminology'.... time shifting, cloud, backing up files, etc...

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?"
Comment
Paul Markham

Too old to care

Join Date: Jun 2001

Posts: 52942
Share

Post
#5

04-03-2009, 12:31 AM

Originally posted by Barefootsies

It's not called 'file sharing'.

See gideongallery for his 'terminology'.... time shifting, cloud, backing up files, etc...

It seems that what ever they are doing they don't doit so much if they know their IP address will be exposed.

More transparency on the Net is a good thing.

Unless you want to hide something.

Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70
Comment
gideongallery

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 7082
Share

Post
#6

04-03-2009, 12:45 AM

Originally posted by Paul Markham

I doubt if it's that high. But what do you think it brings to the other users?

What ever the % is.

higher prices, less choice + hindering technological advancements that would make actual content producers a shit load of money.

“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak
Comment
Paul Markham

Too old to care

Join Date: Jun 2001

Posts: 52942
Share

Post
#7

04-03-2009, 02:45 AM

Originally posted by gideongallery

higher prices, less choice + hindering technological advancements that would make actual content producers a shit load of money.

That's what I thought. Detting rid of illegal file sharers will mean faster connections, possibly better prices or at least no higher prices, more paysites making more money.

Now how do we get more countries to adopt this law. LOL

Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70
Comment
gideongallery

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 7082
Share

Post
#8

04-03-2009, 02:59 AM

Originally posted by Paul Markham

That's what I thought. Detting rid of illegal file sharers will mean faster connections, possibly better prices or at least no higher prices, more paysites making more money.

Now how do we get more countries to adopt this law. LOL

no higher prices - as in forcing you to 2.99 for content you are perfectly within your right to timeshift for free

less choice - as in no release of behind the scenes, workprint stuff for people who would like to pull back the curtain and see how the movies are made

and loss of technology - no 42 bit color, no 12.1 dolby surround sound, no sync aroma releases (smellovision) for movies running in theaters.

“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak
Comment
wjxxx

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Feb 2005

Posts: 4448
Share

Post
#9

04-03-2009, 04:23 AM

European Commission wants to delegalize P2P and make ISPs liable for piracy
Comment
Fletch XXX

GFY HALL OF FAME DAMMIT!!!

Join Date: Jan 2002

Posts: 60840
Share

Post
#10

04-03-2009, 04:26 AM

Originally posted by wjxxx

European Commission wants to delegalize P2P and make ISPs liable for piracy

this makes so much sense.

lets limit technology because people will trade software, gimme a break.

they gonna ban FTP next? lol

real traders do it FTP

all this limewire crap is for dumb dads and goofballs who dont know how to get full album rips with one click.

FTP FTW

p2p FTL

lets ban HTTP next, its all filesharing lol

Want an Android App for your tube, membership, or free site?

Need banners or promo material? Hit us up (ICQ Fletch: 148841377) or email me fletchxxx at gmail.com - recent work - About me
Comment
Emil

Confirmed User

Join Date: Feb 2007

Posts: 5658
Share

Post
#11

04-03-2009, 04:28 AM

Originally posted by wjxxx

European Commission wants to delegalize P2P and make ISPs liable for piracy

car manufacturers........ people driving too fast.... bla bla bla

Free 🅑🅘🅣🅒🅞🅘🅝🅢 Every Hour (Yes, really. Free ₿itCoins.)
(Signup with ONLY your Email and Password. You can also refer people and get even more.)
Comment
wjxxx

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Feb 2005

Posts: 4448
Share

Post
#12

04-03-2009, 05:00 AM

99,99% of files shared via P2P are warez, stolen movies and stolen porn
Comment
Fletch XXX

GFY HALL OF FAME DAMMIT!!!

Join Date: Jan 2002

Posts: 60840
Share

Post
#13

04-03-2009, 05:10 AM

Originally posted by wjxxx

99,99% of files shared via P2P are warez, stolen movies and stolen porn

Doesnt matter, the technology is going nowhere, it is here to stay. It was not created to steal files, just like not all guns are used to kill people.

Even huge corporations like Electronic Arts puts out 2 gig game patches using torrents, and many other perfectly legal corporate uses.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.torrent
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer-to-peer

Last edited by Fletch XXX; 04-03-2009, 05:12 AM.

Want an Android App for your tube, membership, or free site?

Need banners or promo material? Hit us up (ICQ Fletch: 148841377) or email me fletchxxx at gmail.com - recent work - About me
Comment
Dennis69

Confirmed User

Join Date: Feb 2003

Posts: 1685
Share

Post
#14

04-03-2009, 05:12 AM

Way more then 30% I'd say, well over the half mark share these days!

HaHaHa
Comment
Paul Markham

Too old to care

Join Date: Jun 2001

Posts: 52942
Share

Post
#15

04-03-2009, 05:46 AM

Originally posted by gideongallery

no higher prices - as in forcing you to 2.99 for content you are perfectly within your right to timeshift for free

less choice - as in no release of behind the scenes, workprint stuff for people who would like to pull back the curtain and see how the movies are made

and loss of technology - no 42 bit color, no 12.1 dolby surround sound, no sync aroma releases (smellovision) for movies running in theaters.

Are you on the same planet as the rest of us or in gideonworld?

Never have you said anything more crazy. The people who are not file sharing because they don't want to be revealed obviously think differently.

More people buy, the more people will release to sell.

The rest I assume was a joke.

Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70
Comment
gideongallery

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 7082
Share

Post
#16

04-03-2009, 06:04 AM

Originally posted by Paul Markham

Are you on the same planet as the rest of us or in gideonworld?

Never have you said anything more crazy. The people who are not file sharing because they don't want to be revealed obviously think differently.

More people buy, the more people will release to sell.

The rest I assume was a joke.

you were the one who pointed out that the VCR was responsible for all those new income streams for your industry.

Had sony lost "timeshifting" case none of that revenue would have happened.

every fair use win has caused an explosion of new technological innovations and revenue generating capacity. (vcr -> home viewing marketplace ,format shifting -> cheap solid state disk ...)

when/if "access shifting" comes about and the consequence is that movies would have to be released in theaters/dvd/bittorrent at the exact same time to be protected by copyright law. Movie theaters will be forced to differentiate based on technology, which can work in their enviroment but is not technologically or economically feasible in the home (yet).

so movies will be filmed in 42 bit color so that movies in the theaters will look 3D without having to wear stupid glasses.

Aromas will be piped in and sync with key visual sequences in the movie

12 points of sound articulation will happen for the movies.

ultimately those technologies will become cheaper and more efficient and they will migrate to the home, but all of that is being stopped because movie studioes can hide behind copyright law to protect a fundamentally lacking entertainment experience.

“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak
Comment
Fletch XXX

GFY HALL OF FAME DAMMIT!!!

Join Date: Jan 2002

Posts: 60840
Share

Post
#17

04-03-2009, 06:10 AM

Originally posted by Barefootsies

It's not called 'file sharing'.

See gideongallery for his 'terminology'.... time shifting, cloud, backing up files, etc...

I know you guys all like to pounce on this gideon guy, but timeshifting and the court cases he mentions (Sony) are legit, backed by landmark decisions on the legal books.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_shifting

The legality of time-shifting programming in the United States was proven by a landmark court case of Universal Studios versus Sony Corporation (Sony v. Universal), when Sony argued successfully that the advent of its Betamax video recorder in 1976 did not violate the copyright of the owners of shows which it recorded.

In 1979, Universal sued Sony, claiming its timed recording capability amounted to "copyright infringement". However, a district court found that noncommercial home use recording was considered fair use and ruled in favor of Sony. In appeals, the United States Court of Appeals reversed this decision in 1981 giving the edge to Universal, but the Supreme Court of the United States reversed it yet again in 1984, and found in favor of Sony 5-4. The majority decision held that time shifting was a fair use, represented no substantial harm to the copyright holder, and would not contribute to a diminished marketplace for its product. Today, this is widely referred to as the "Betamax case" or "Betamax decision".

Last edited by Fletch XXX; 04-03-2009, 06:11 AM.

Want an Android App for your tube, membership, or free site?

Need banners or promo material? Hit us up (ICQ Fletch: 148841377) or email me fletchxxx at gmail.com - recent work - About me
Comment
gideongallery

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 7082
Share

Post
#18

04-03-2009, 06:48 AM

Originally posted by Fletch XXX

I know you guys all like to pounce on this gideon guy, but timeshifting and the court cases he mentions (Sony) are legit, backed by landmark decisions on the legal books.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_shifting

and it has been extended to the cloud too

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/08/victory-dvrs-cloud

and that ruling has not been overturned.

“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak
Comment
Zyzz

So Fucking Banned!

Join Date: Jul 2006

Posts: 5223
Share

Post
#19

04-03-2009, 06:50 AM

no surprise there
Comment
Paul Markham

Too old to care

Join Date: Jun 2001

Posts: 52942
Share

Post
#20

04-03-2009, 07:05 AM

Originally posted by Fletch XXX

Doesnt matter, the technology is going nowhere, it is here to stay. It was not created to steal files, just like not all guns are used to kill people.

Even huge corporations like Electronic Arts puts out 2 gig game patches using torrents, and many other perfectly legal corporate uses.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.torrent
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer-to-peer

People who don't share (theft) stuff they don't own have nothing to fear.

Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70
Comment
Serge Litehead

Confirmed User

Join Date: Dec 2002

Posts: 5190
Share

Post
#21

04-03-2009, 07:23 AM

Originally posted by Fletch XXX

...just like not all guns are used to kill people...

exactly some guns used as lighters and others as tools to achieve great sexual highs

SilverCrocodile.com
Adult web design since '05
Comment
burntfilm

Confirmed User

Join Date: Feb 2008

Posts: 972
Share

Post
#22

04-03-2009, 09:09 AM

Originally posted by holograph

exactly some guns used as lighters and others as tools to achieve great sexual highs

Like Paul Stanley's "Love Gun" !!!

Sorta...
Comment
Dennis69

Confirmed User

Join Date: Feb 2003

Posts: 1685
Share

Post
#23

04-03-2009, 09:11 AM

Originally posted by gideongallery

no higher prices - as in forcing you to 2.99 for content you are perfectly within your right to timeshift for free

less choice - as in no release of behind the scenes, workprint stuff for people who would like to pull back the curtain and see how the movies are made

and loss of technology - no 42 bit color, no 12.1 dolby surround sound, no sync aroma releases (smellovision) for movies running in theaters.

man you really need to put down the crack pipe and come back to reality!

HaHaHa
Comment
TeenCat

Too lazy to set a koala

Join Date: Jan 2007

Posts: 16139
Share

Post
#24

04-03-2009, 09:13 AM

now imagine teleports ... servers in russia selling datas how to rebuild goods as cars and clothes ...

6bot / Coming again very soon!
Svit Zlin Radio 24/7!
Comment
WiredGuy

Pounding Googlebot

Join Date: Aug 2002

Posts: 34512
Share

Post
#25

04-03-2009, 09:14 AM

Its definitely closer to 50% or more and its a great market waiting to be monetized.
WG

I play with Google.
Comment
candyflip

Carpe Visio

Join Date: Jul 2002

Posts: 43069
Share

Post
#26

04-03-2009, 09:16 AM

Originally posted by Paul Markham

People who don't share (theft) stuff they don't own have nothing to fear.

What do those downloading have to fear?

Spend you some brain.
Email Me
Comment
tiger

Confirmed User

Join Date: Apr 2002

Posts: 6986
Share

Post
#27

04-03-2009, 11:37 AM

My guess is at least 50%
Comment
Paul Markham

Too old to care

Join Date: Jun 2001

Posts: 52942
Share

Post
#28

04-03-2009, 08:53 PM

Originally posted by candyflip

What do those downloading have to fear?

The Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive requires Internet service providers to reveal the Internet Protocol addresses of alleged copyright infringers to rights holders when ordered by a court.

Does that tell you.

They are scared they will get found.

It's a good law. If you don't do anything wrong the courts won't reveal your IP. If you do something wrong they will. Then the company being stolen from can take it to the next level.

It's not a slam dunk, just another rung up the ladder to stop thieves.

Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70
Comment
donnie

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jan 2003

Posts: 1630
Share

Post
#29

04-03-2009, 11:05 PM

Originally posted by Paul Markham

Does that tell you.

They are scared they will get found.

It's a good law. If you don't do anything wrong the courts won't reveal your IP. If you do something wrong they will. Then the company being stolen from can take it to the next level.

It's not a slam dunk, just another rung up the ladder to stop thieves.

It is a very bad law. Private interests should never be given access to that information. Only police should have right to investigate crime (if file sharing is a crime).

And 30% drop credited to less file sharing is just more bullshit from "anti-piracy" people. There was a 30% drop on the same day last year and it is probably because weather is usually nice on that day (April 1st) in Sweden.

But who cares, the law is already obsolete And will be removed as soon as the current (USA/Hollywood asskissing) government is out.
Comment
Paul Markham

Too old to care

Join Date: Jun 2001

Posts: 52942
Share

Post
#30

04-04-2009, 01:11 AM

Originally posted by donnie

It is a very bad law. Private interests should never be given access to that information. Only police should have right to investigate crime (if file sharing is a crime).

And 30% drop credited to less file sharing is just more bullshit from "anti-piracy" people. There was a 30% drop on the same day last year and it is probably because weather is usually nice on that day (April 1st) in Sweden.

But who cares, the law is already obsolete And will be removed as soon as the current (USA/Hollywood asskissing) government is out.

It has to go through a court. And I don't think copyright violation is a thing the police need to get involved with. The file shares must hate this law though. Should a few thousand file sharers be allowed to bring down the profitability of industries and clog up the Internet with their free loading is the question.

Obsolete is something you might hope for. Watch your post box.

Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70
Comment
V_RocKs

Damn Right I Kiss Ass!

Join Date: Nov 2003

Posts: 32449
Share

Post
#31

04-04-2009, 02:18 AM

Sharing some illegal shit right now.
Comment
Paul Markham

Too old to care

Join Date: Jun 2001

Posts: 52942
Share

Post
#32

04-04-2009, 08:24 AM

Originally posted by WiredGuy

Its definitely closer to 50% or more and its a great market waiting to be monetized.
WG

Yes let's all concentrate on monetizing people who don't want to spend rather than monetizing those who will spend money. Or were you joking?

Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70
Comment
WiredGuy

Pounding Googlebot

Join Date: Aug 2002

Posts: 34512
Share

Post
#33

04-04-2009, 09:56 AM

Originally posted by Paul Markham

Yes let's all concentrate on monetizing people who don't want to spend rather than monetizing those who will spend money. Or were you joking?

Learn how to do it right and you can make serious bank. You could say the same about tube/mgp/tgp sites, why pay when you can get it free... p2p is just another avenue.
WG

I play with Google.
Comment
gideongallery

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 7082
Share

Post
#34

04-04-2009, 12:00 PM

Originally posted by Paul Markham

Yes let's all concentrate on monetizing people who don't want to spend rather than monetizing those who will spend money. Or were you joking?

your so right, none of those people who watch tv shows for free ever buy anything. All those ads go to waste

idiot.

“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak
Comment
HorseShit

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: Dec 2004

Posts: 17513
Share

Post
#35

04-04-2009, 12:16 PM

this thread only proves most people have no clue
Comment
Paul Markham

Too old to care

Join Date: Jun 2001

Posts: 52942
Share

Post
#36

04-04-2009, 12:46 PM

Originally posted by gideongallery

your so right, none of those people who watch tv shows for free ever buy anything. All those ads go to waste

idiot.

No you're the idiot.

How much do you pay for cable? Then add the special channels and the PPV and then the adverts.

Also adverts are every 10 to 15 minutes, do you see that coming on Torrent sites and Tubes? Great scene with an advert every 12 minutes.

Youtube loses money hand over fist.

WiredGuy my point is we spend a fortune in this industry "monetizing" people who are unlikely to buy. Yet people who do buy most spend as little as possible. Why try to monetize the bottom of the barrel when it would cost less and bring better results monetizing the top layer?

I suppose people are so set in their ways they still think what worked in 1998 still works today. Even though everything points the opposite way.

Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70
Comment
WiredGuy

Pounding Googlebot

Join Date: Aug 2002

Posts: 34512
Share

Post
#37

04-04-2009, 12:48 PM

Originally posted by Paul Markham

Why try to monetize the bottom of the barrel when it would cost less and bring better results monetizing the top layer?

Why does Rolls Royce sell 6 figure cars wen you can buy a Honda Civic for a fraction of the price. There's millions of freeloaders who have no problem looking at ads. Sure, they're the bottom of the barrel but there's millions of them.
WG

I play with Google.
Comment
candyflip

Carpe Visio

Join Date: Jul 2002

Posts: 43069
Share

Post
#38

04-04-2009, 12:54 PM

Originally posted by Paul Markham

The Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive requires Internet service providers to reveal the Internet Protocol addresses of alleged copyright infringers to rights holders when ordered by a court.

Does that tell you.

They are scared they will get found.

It's a good law. If you don't do anything wrong the courts won't reveal your IP. If you do something wrong they will. Then the company being stolen from can take it to the next level.

It's not a slam dunk, just another rung up the ladder to stop thieves.

They aren't even taking this to the courts. There's no repercussions for downloading anything you want from the internet. A few people have been sued by the MPAA and the RIAA, but that was just for show and tell.

I can download 100 new movies this week. Illegal or not is really irrelevant as they're nothing to stop me.

Spend you some brain.
Email Me
Comment
gideongallery

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 7082
Share

Post
#39

04-04-2009, 03:31 PM

Originally posted by Paul Markham

No you're the idiot.

How much do you pay for cable? Then add the special channels and the PPV and then the adverts.

Also adverts are every 10 to 15 minutes, do you see that coming on Torrent sites and Tubes? Great scene with an advert every 12 minutes.

Youtube loses money hand over fist.

the average tv show has 26 commercial spots, do you know how much money a tv show producers get out of that 4 commercial spots. Most goes to cover the infrastructure cost.

cut those spots out you only need to pay the content producers a very small amount for them to break even.

you just have to figuire out how to get that small payment from the advertisers (branding bugs you moron)

WiredGuy my point is we spend a fortune in this industry "monetizing" people who are unlikely to buy. Yet people who do buy most spend as little as possible. Why try to monetize the bottom of the barrel when it would cost less and bring better results monetizing the top layer?

I suppose people are so set in their ways they still think what worked in 1998 still works today. Even though everything points the opposite way.

first of all you are not monetizing the top of the barrel the escort agencies representing the pornstars are. Giving away their girls movies, get a bunch of people horny enough to treat themselves to getting fucked by their favorite pornstar

second of all

rolex vs timex.

nuff said.

“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak
Comment
Paul Markham

Too old to care

Join Date: Jun 2001

Posts: 52942
Share

Post
#40

04-04-2009, 08:21 PM

Originally posted by candyflip

They aren't even taking this to the courts. There's no repercussions for downloading anything you want from the internet. A few people have been sued by the MPAA and the RIAA, but that was just for show and tell.

I can download 100 new movies this week. Illegal or not is really irrelevant as they're nothing to stop me.

If you're not in Sweden this is true. What would happen if you were in a country with a similar law?

Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70
Comment
Paul Markham

Too old to care

Join Date: Jun 2001

Posts: 52942
Share

Post
#41

04-04-2009, 08:35 PM

Originally posted by gideongallery

the average tv show has 26 commercial spots, do you know how much money a tv show producers get out of that 4 commercial spots. Most goes to cover the infrastructure cost.

cut those spots out you only need to pay the content producers a very small amount for them to break even.

you just have to figuire out how to get that small payment from the advertisers (branding bugs you moron)

Firstly comparing porn videos with the mainstream TV is like comparing a cow with a chicken, the justification is they both live on a farm. Your justification is people watch both. They don't compare in any way and putting porn alongside TV shows how far you stretch to make a weak point.

Most people watch TV for hours, most porn viewers watch for 20 minutes.

They interrupt TV programs with adverts, you can't do that with a porn scene.

The pool of advertisers for TV is wide and has money to "brand" their product. It's also one part of an advertising strategy for many of the advertisers. They have adverts on many other places. They are hoping that when someone decides to buy a car, whiskey or burger or what ever. They will choose their product.

The pool for Internet advertising is small and could be shrinking with the recession. For Internet Adult products it's even smaller and the companies can't afford to "brand" they need sales to pay for adverts.

However if the Internet wakes up to the fact that if they take the business away from the advertisers the Tubes will fail. Torrents I'm not sure about, but if a similar law was adopted by the US the Torrent sites would lose those adverts.

first of all you are not monetizing the top of the barrel the escort agencies representing the pornstars are. Giving away their girls movies, get a bunch of people horny enough to treat themselves to getting fucked by their favorite pornstar

Good side track, but still a side track.

Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70
Comment
donnie

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jan 2003

Posts: 1630
Share

Post
#42

04-04-2009, 10:15 PM

Originally posted by Paul Markham

It has to go through a court. And I don't think copyright violation is a thing the police need to get involved with. The file shares must hate this law though. Should a few thousand file sharers be allowed to bring down the profitability of industries and clog up the Internet with their free loading is the question.

Obsolete is something you might hope for. Watch your post box.

Where do you get your information?? From an AVN article??

These are civil cases. There is no burden of proof. If somebody wants to have your IP you are not notified about it and can't defend yourself.

Fuck your profitability! You know there are more important things in life than just making money, things like personal integrity?

This is Sweden, not some backward country like Iran or USA. Laws are here to protect my rights as an individual.

Fuck IPRED and fuck you for supporting it. Go make some invisible join links instead.
Comment
Paul Markham

Too old to care

Join Date: Jun 2001

Posts: 52942
Share

Post
#43

04-04-2009, 11:59 PM

Originally posted by donnie

Where do you get your information?? From an AVN article??

These are civil cases. There is no burden of proof. If somebody wants to have your IP you are not notified about it and can't defend yourself.

Fuck your profitability! You know there are more important things in life than just making money, things like personal integrity?

This is Sweden, not some backward country like Iran or USA. Laws are here to protect my rights as an individual.

Fuck IPRED and fuck you for supporting it. Go make some invisible join links instead.

things like personal integrity?

You don't give a fuck about personal integrity. If you did you would not be supporting theft.

Profit? What are you on about. People are losing jobs, companies and homes because others are stealing their work. Where is your personal integrity when it costs others so much?

The people stealing don't care about personal integrity. They only care that others will pay for the property they are stealing for free. Because if others stopped paying they would find it harder to steal. They are parasites living off of others.

What about my rights to have a law to protect my rights to not have parasites steal from me?

And while you cost me and others money you are stealing. Now;

Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70
Comment
donnie

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jan 2003

Posts: 1630
Share

Post
#44

04-05-2009, 04:16 AM

Originally posted by Paul Markham

things like personal integrity?

You don't give a fuck about personal integrity. If you did you would not be supporting theft.

Profit? What are you on about. People are losing jobs, companies and homes because others are stealing their work. Where is your personal integrity when it costs others so much?

The people stealing don't care about personal integrity. They only care that others will pay for the property they are stealing for free. Because if others stopped paying they would find it harder to steal. They are parasites living off of others.

What about my rights to have a law to protect my rights to not have parasites steal from me?

And while you cost me and others money you are stealing. Now;

People losing jobs and homes?

I am sure Britney Spears will somehow survive without a private jet.

There are laws to protect your rights as a producer. If you want you can go after those who steal from you.

If your Audi is stolen should you be allowed to get personal information of EVERY other Audi owner so that you can find yours?
Comment
gideongallery

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 7082
Share

Post
#45

04-05-2009, 05:05 AM

Originally posted by Paul Markham

Firstly comparing porn videos with the mainstream TV is like comparing a cow with a chicken, the justification is they both live on a farm. Your justification is people watch both. They don't compare in any way and putting porn alongside TV shows how far you stretch to make a weak point.

Most people watch TV for hours, most porn viewers watch for 20 minutes.

the quantity of watching is not important. However if you look at the tube site you are complaining about people a lot more people are watching those 20 minute videos than are watching the tv shows (streaming).

They interrupt TV programs with adverts, you can't do that with a porn scene.

your so fucking right it not like tube site break videos into parts and release them in groups

http://www.tube8.com/hardcore/sunny-...part-i-/77864/
http://www.tube8.com/hardcore/sunny-...art-ii-/77870/

flipping between those parts result in another banner show for the advertisers

IDIOT.

add the pause ad that happens whenever you pause the video and you have tons of advertising oppertunities.

branding bugs don't interupt the content, they are intergrated in the content.

The pool of advertisers for TV is wide and has money to "brand" their product. It's also one part of an advertising strategy for many of the advertisers. They have adverts on many other places. They are hoping that when someone decides to buy a car, whiskey or burger or what ever. They will choose their product.

you are a moron, branding is more prevelant in porn then in mainstream
models brand their names (advertising opp 1)
tube sites brand their names (advertising opp 2)
torrent sites brand their site ( advertising opp 3)

The pool for Internet advertising is small and could be shrinking with the recession. For Internet Adult products it's even smaller and the companies can't afford to "brand" they need sales to pay for adverts.

which means people are going to go to the cheapest most afforable form of advertising that is effective. So you buy ads surrounding the video, or you buy branding bugs in the video. As long as you sell them cheaper than what the tube sites are charging you make money. That being said. IF you sell a for 3k exclusive and that gets a 6182824 views on one tube site

http://www.tube8.com/anal/french-girl-anal/1007/

then your cpm for a branding bug only need to be 49 cents. even the cheapest tube site doesn't sell ads that cheap

However if the Internet wakes up to the fact that if they take the business away from the advertisers the Tubes will fail. Torrents I'm not sure about, but if a similar law was adopted by the US the Torrent sites would lose those adverts.

Good side track, but still a side track.

or CCP like you will realize they can make more money turning their content into traffic sources.

“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak
Comment
wjxxx

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Feb 2005

Posts: 4448
Share

Post
#46

04-05-2009, 05:07 AM

Great news:

Two Swedes arrested in file sharing raid

France to Block The Pirate Bay, Disconnect File-Sharers
Comment
gideongallery

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 7082
Share

Post
#47

04-05-2009, 07:22 AM

Originally posted by wjxxx

Great news:

Two Swedes arrested in file sharing raid

France to Block The Pirate Bay, Disconnect File-Sharers

with all luck they will get as severe a penalty as this guy

http://torrentfreak.com/mpa-disappoi...-court-090405/

“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak
Comment
TheDoc

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: Jul 2001

Posts: 13827
Share

Post
#48

04-05-2009, 07:28 AM

Who cares if it's 30%, or 50% or 90% that fileshare? It isn't hurting your business just like it isn't hurting the movie industry, just like it isn't hurting the music industry, software industry, or anything......

And not like you haven't file shared... and you still buy shit.

Last edited by TheDoc; 04-05-2009, 07:29 AM.

~TheDoc - ICQ7765825
It's all disambiguation
Comment
TheDoc

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: Jul 2001

Posts: 13827
Share

Post
#49

04-05-2009, 07:37 AM

Originally posted by Paul Markham

Youtube loses money hand over fist.

Huh? This isn't 2006 anymore where they broke even with Youtube, actually they grew a 6% profit margin. This is 2008, where they make several hundred million a year with YouTube and the costs, with staff & bandwidth is about 5 million a month. That means they have 150 million more a year to spend on other shit...

They aren't losing money anymore... We are talking about Google... the kings of monetization.

~TheDoc - ICQ7765825
It's all disambiguation
Comment
Iron Fist

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: Dec 2006

Posts: 23400
Share

Post
#50

04-05-2009, 08:23 AM

All the whiners whining about how much they made back in the 90's seem to be the loudest whiners about tubes on GFY I've noticed. Who cares! Get your head down and get to work on it!

i like waffles
Comment

Previous 1 2 template Next

Working...