Excactly my Point.

If I took a photo of anyone (not just a celeb) and wanted to sell it on a place like iStockphoto.com

I would need a model release for it to be allowed.

MoreMagic can keep bumping this all he likes. Thanks for the exposure.

The facts remain.

As previously pointed out a half dozen times now, there are plenty of easy targets in the industry alone, or online as a whole. Including all major programs.

So.. either their lawyers, and mine know a thing or two in regards running celebrity sites, DMCA, and laws surrounding it. Or we are all just completely reckless putting business at risk.

With the exception of XPAYS. They own/license/bought some of the highest profile celebrity tapes and content, and it is well publicized.

Even in publication the right are still in most cases with the photographer. Even when photo is ordered by the magazine. But in all exceptions are possible.

But all what we say here i still don't see that you have the rights to sell our content on a HD.

So your complaint then is he is selling content that you own? You have proof of this?

No way. Forget it.

If I am following you correctly, you are referring to the BV paps example where they are shooting candid pictures and selling off the publications without model releases (to be 100% legal)??

Because he is claiming I do, and if he doesn't have PROOF when we know what comes next,

..... :winkwink::winkwink:

Look there is the problem, and why DMCA is not vallid in his case. DMCA is good for online content because we as producer can verify if people us our content. But now he sales it in a closed system as being a HD or closed ftp account. I have no way a possibility to verify what he sales and that si exact also why this is by law just stealing, and is DMCA not at order here.

Pap pics "in a public area" are technically legal, but subject to suit by the person being photographed under invasion of privacy. If anyone does some research they will find that there ARE cases that have been won over this by the celeb, however very few pursue it. Normally the ones that win these cases are ones that are photographed unknowingly while nude, or are in a technically private area. I suppose trespassing laws would fall under a lot of those wins. :2 cents:

That's why I said "in most celeb pics"

The other formats you mention someone owns the rights to those also. Whether it be on a box or in a magazine publication.

What gives you the right to sell it?

Candid in public location as outside photography can be publicized without any papers, candid in a private environment is illegal and can't.

Nice try chief.

You said you could DMCA all this industry's celebrity sites, but you do not do that either. Nor are you in all their monthly promo threads going after them, claiming your content is being stolen, or used without permisson, etc.. Same for blogs and sites sold over in the B&S section.

So once again, it is not the actual copyright or DMCA that is the issue. That makes it personal.

Wow you do know something, good for you.

I was trying to clarify what he was asking in regards to the rules/rights/contract/releases for different types of pictures.

Wrong, not for everyone! Only the person who took the picture, (unless he or she sells or licenses their rights)

Your pics are stolen, you don't own the copyright. Nothing to be afraid about for a ban.

Not to sound cocky, but I know a lot more than you suspect I guarantee you that.

Good for you slicky

sure no discussion about that, thought we already where passed that one.

100 thread backfires

You're right. In regards to your upcoming ban.

1. You claim I am selling your content.
2. You have no proof of claim.
3. That means ban per rules.

Thanks for playing sweety.

im having tacos 2 nite:thumbsup fiesta:GFYBand

Okay so you have no proof he is selling content that you hold the copyright to. You have no standing to be enforcing someone else's copyright. That pretty much means you're done here in this thread because there's nothing else for you to say.

Again you keep your sales with a site, still no response om the HD issue why would that be? maybe because yoi know that you are wrong there?

DMCA and say it again DMCA is not the subject here. I can't DMCA your HD

That is fact.

Not only in photography realm either. :winkwink:

Summed up nicely with a bow on top.

Don't get too far ahead of yourself though, because it's still scummy you selling stolen content.

Already pointed out repeatedly.

As well reply 102 covers it.

You can't get out of the starting blocks to begin with..

Now re-read this one sweety.
http://www.gfy.com/showpost.php?p=15...&postcount=101

I am not saying, WarChild endorsement, I am saying you put it to words better than I did.

Nothing more. Sorry for the confusion.

And that is the whole issue. and because of his description of his content I can only assume that there is a big change he sales also ours. What he doesn't suppose to do anyway, he keep his situation comparing with DMCA but its not. It's right out steeling. DMCA didn't excluded this situation for nothing.

Lol you must get stupid without shoes on. You HD is full with stolen content, as said by yourself. Only you think DMCA is protecting you, and it doesn't. Nothing wrong on this side a lot wrong on your side. You are just a thief.

Oh god stop whining, both sides, jesus christ.

I don't know whats worse the holier than thou motherfuckers or the "your opinion on this doesn't count because you committed a crime once 5 years ago" shit.

This is an industry built on exploitation, there is NO room for your morality shit.

Shhh.

Nope.

You are bouncing back and forth and picking and choosing what you want to make dedicated threads about. If you are against the theft of your content, and all programs sites have your content (those are your words) and you could DMCA (DMCA is copyright, meaning you have to PROVE OWNERSHIP. That goes for theft, or claims. try and stick to one point please) them if you wanted, then you show that you are uniform in your complaint.

Otherwise it's personal.

Regardless, you are making claims, and providing no proof of claims. You have no idea of what I do and do not have. But that did not stop you from making this thread. So back peddle all you like.

You ASSumed...

I've never said that.

Keep back peddling.

I like your style.
:1orglaugh

Do you know what, call in the judges I go to bed when I am not banned tomorrow I suppose i have a good issue here and please while i am busy to eat some pussy provide me the quote where i did say that all programs have our content. Because they don't.

Keep back peddling.

You wanted attention. You got it. Too bad it backfired on your ASSumption.

Here's a little tip for next time toots... until you can actually PROVE something, I'd hold off making threads about it. Um, k?

not sure how I got mixed up in this, but I have nothing to do with celeb content. hehe

i just make threads.... ;)

What backfired lol? Did you read at all anything else then those 2 ass kissers? Lol I think it's clear who you are, and most people will associate you with a thief.

I have some foot fetish content for sale. I just downloaded it from clips4sale.com. I sale you cheap.

Any foot fetish maybe from a guy known here?