fiddy 6x

Damn skippy.

Is this GFY's 1st 10k view thread?

At least since you made that girl quit doing porn a couple years ago

Did that one do 10K? I didn't think it did.

that alphasky thread is at like 20k

I missed that one.

Link?

yes, this is what you should do.

get a password to brazzers free

leech their site

make a tube site upselling to a bro's dating traffic

collect checks

Ahh the classic win that is the apple twins melt down.

Consider it done.

odds of anyone actually doing anything to stop them: 0:1,000,000

Government intervention and a massive change in how digital content is managed would be the only real solution. When governments get pissed off enough at the lost revenue (of which porn is a tiny fraction, as compared to software and mainstream media) they will sit down with Intel, AMD, Motherboard manufacturers, etc and solve the problem from a hardware part of the equation.

Until then we are left having moral arguments over whether someone should or should not do something regardless of whether they are able to do it or legally allowed to do it. Those tend not to have teeth, especially in a tight economy. :2 cents:

How long until those same fundamentalists that took down Max turn their eyes to the 'tubes'? How long until they realize that little Johnny can go watch hardcore german fisting in his bedroom without any age verification? How long until they realize that most of these tubes have Traci Lords scenes on them and are thus hosting child pornography?

If you have a link to one of those, please send it to me [email protected] or icq 62835707. That would be easy.

Tubes are here to stay

I don't know if it's got anything to do with this thread, but I'm coming up with a lot of dead files now on that site.

Good thread.

Bump for goodness

very informative read

As they should be allowed to, so long as they are not stealing peoples content. :2 cents:

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=896755
20K

The file sharing sites agree, because they are only getting bolder. Take a look at either of these sites...

http://milf-city.com/

http://allkindsofxxx.com/

Try downloading and watching any of the videos on either site, and they both have a nice amount of traffic. Not only are they stealing and uploading the videos, but they are watermarking the videos with their site's URL and logo.

That is pretty much the ultimate fuck you. They are so confident that nothing is going to be done that they don't even care about safe harbor, they just rip the videos, upload them themselves, and watermark them with their site's URL so when they do post them on pornbb or the like they are getting more traffic. Pretty fucking ballsy...

This is what I think about. What is the point of any organization that supposedly polices the internet for porn getting in the hands of minors when there are SO many ways for it to get there?? It's absolutely ludicrous.

That's pretty fucked up.

Crazy MILF!

well they have sponsors backing them up look at all the links and the sponsors on sites like that are still loved at the shows and some get awards so why should they not be bold?

it will happen and the problem is they wont say the tube industry is doing this, they wil lsay the adult industry is doing this.This industry will not learn til there is a big smack down,its not will they take action its when.

If you slap your watermark on a clip then as far as I'm concerned they should be considered a "producer" of that content and have to keep 2257 records. Makes no sense whatsoever that we all have to comply with 2257 and then everyone else doesn't.

I ask again...knowing what we know now...how many studios would like a do-over on the appeal to 2257 that made it so "secondary producers" wouldn't have to keep 2257 records?

cliff notes on this thread?

lotza tubes

When I was young and stupid (like 2 years ago), I was totally 100% against government regulation. Now I am 100% pro-regulation.

We had the FBI raid our office and came out clean in the first sweep of 2257 inspections.

We'd all be in better shape right now, had a few assholes been hauled off to jail.

:2 cents:

That would all depend on your definition of "asshole" in this instance.

If you mean tubes, or anyone else using stolen copyrighted adult content, than yeah, I'd love like hell to see those thieving bastards get an FBI visit.

But watch what you wish for.

There's lots of honest mom & pop operations out there (some of which are just barely getting by) that might not have all their 2257 i's dotted and t's crossed.

Hell, the newest version of 2257 is all but impossible to fully comply with and you know it.

Like I said, watch what you wish for.

They'd regulate your cross sales, mind you.

:2 cents:

it's amazing how many full scenes extreme tube has from the evil angel catalog.

When they did our inspection not every single record was in place by the letter of the law. As long as you can show reasonable proof that the people you were shooting were definitively over 18 you should be alright.

It took just over 3 clicks to find 3 of our videos on there too.

http://www.pornhub.com/view_video.ph...key=1700933461
http://www.pornhub.com/view_video.php?viewkey=742552843
http://www.pornhub.com/view_video.ph...c3c095c9e6d59d

Some of them still had the freakin' watermarks on them.

Lame.

good summary of DMCA from a website owners point of view for complying with DMCA, but you can also view it through the eyes of a content producer looking to enforce DMCA:

http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?articleid=74294 [view]

this was an interesting point of the article:

---

10. Do Not Receive A Financial Benefit Directly Attributable To Infringing Activity Within The Company's Control

If an online service provider has the right and ability to control infringing activity, it is eligible for the safe harbor if it does not receive a financial benefit directly attributable to such infringing activity. The "direct financial benefit" issue is complex and necessarily dependent on applicable facts and circumstances. Although this issue still remains to be clarified by the courts, Viacom has made arguments regarding direct financial benefit in its lawsuit against YouTube. To the extent that the Viacom v. YouTube case results in a decision, this issue would be one of the more interesting DMCA legal questions the case addresses.

--

whether a legit community site that allows user uploads or an illegal tube site, both generate revenue from the advertisement around the content.

some illegal tube sites offer a "premium" version that gives access to longer videos, better quality, etc.. this would certainly violate DMCA safe harbour provisions for a paid-membership model using stolen content (oh the irony of paysites who used usenet content inside members areas and now crying foul about DMCA)

---

takedowns have to occur in a "reasonable period of time"... 24-72 hours.

content producers could coordinate their DMCA notices to do a "DMCA bombing" at the same time.

you would have to have a shared IP attorney ready to then file a lawsuit if the DMCA process wasn't followed. Having a large amount of complaints that were disproportionate to the "legal" content on a tube site, could show that the site owners do know about infringing material.


Fight the YMCA!

Darn, the link is dead. I wish I could find a list of all the biggest say 150 illegal tube sites


spaz

this thread inspired a Fight the Blog blog post.

i started a new thread for it:

Putting tube sites into historical perspective

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=920207


Fight the link challenged!

I agree with all of this, in particular, on the premium areas and the "for profit" model.

Funny, the first one's gone already. You that quick on the DMCA trigger? Or are there eyes watching... :winkwink:

As far as regulation goes, I'd be perfectly fine with a regulation banning free adult content. All tours censored, any nudity behind a pay barrier, NO freebies... would be beautiful. Alas, all the non-US'ers would cover that base.

Just face it, Brazzers controls and ARE the adult industry.

Wow.... I just followed the links you posted and watched quite a few of the FTVGirls videos. I have to say, the quality sucks but it sure beats paying $19.95.

I read an article in a mainstream video mag. They spoke about how the success of you tube and the relatively poor quality of the video shows its not hidef that matters is the quality of the actual content. You are correct and for some reason this industry doesnt understand that.

why don't you hire some HA's in canada to sort them out?

But wouldn't this mean that all US sites lose pretty much all their traffic?

(At the risk of sounding gay...)

Hence, my use of the word "alas."

I agree wholeheartedly with this, a surfer's going to rub a much better one out to a lo-def clip of something he's really into, than a hi-def crystal clear 1920x1080 clip of a butterfly. Content is much more important than quality. That's been obvious for years now with MGPs. If quality was more important than content, nobody would surf MGPs. Now, the fact that it's free also helps. But content will always trump quality in a head-to-head.

Very true. If the scene is hot enough, I can rough up the suspect to a low-def tape dub from 1970.