Sent out over 1000 DMCA notices today... - Page 3 - GoFuckYourself.com

SteveLightspeed · 09-14-2010, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gideongallery

where exactly in the dmca does it say that it has to be remove in 24 hours.

without a timelimit how exactly do you know the difference between missed and just gotten to yet.

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed man."

DWB · 09-14-2010, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roald

ok.....

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Trash Heap

I got 6 notices to 6 different mail addresses. I printed them out, took a dump on them and mailed it to your business address.

Fedex or normal postal?

chronig · 09-14-2010, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angry Jew Cat

sweet 1000 dmca removal requests, thats almost catching up to the 5000 uploads that went out today.... i guess it's a start.

Don't be a dumb faggot

It's a huge help...

This is what it's going to take.

chronig · 09-14-2010, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveLightspeed

my recourse will be forcing the major bandwidth providers to block your US traffic.

Do you think you'd really be able to do that? That would be pretty good

Of course people could still use proxies - but proxies suck and/or cost money, especially when you're talking about downloading porn/etc.

But - do you think you could really do that? If so - I think it would be a huge win/difference...

chronig · 09-14-2010, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moeloubani

Banning you wouldn't have anything to do with 'pro-piracy' and have more to do with 'less internet douchbagedness'. Really, threatening to fly to foreign countries to break people's legs? Calling every other country in the world a 'shithole'? Typical American 'tough guy' routine, even though your average foreigner would wipe the ground with your average American (easily). Sooooo professional no wonder these pirates take you so seriously.

^ This surfer idiot just wants to be able to surf for free porn forever

...

chronig · 09-14-2010, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Argos88

SteveLightspeed, you spend a lot of time in VAIN...

once you waste hours in this, 1000 other philipinos or indians take a whole members area to pornbb.org or extreme-board.com to get paid 10 bucks per 1000 downloads..

those guys have nothing to lose. It's a lost battle long ago.

.

Another surfer idiot that at the end of the day is worried he'll no longer be able to masturbate to free porn (or find a woman) - or runs a few illegal blogs for the same 100-200$/week 'rewards' himself

I think this is a big step in the right direction by Steve, and could possibly sway others to get involved. He won't be able to defeat piracy himself, but once him and others get active in it, more and more faggots will think twice about pirating.

Even a "dent" in the otherwise bane-of-adult-webmaster-existence current state of piracy would definitely increase porn sales overall.

chronig · 09-14-2010, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gideongallery

where exactly in the dmca does it say that it has to be remove in 24 hours.

Without a timelimit how exactly do you know the difference between missed and just gotten to yet.

time-shifter spotted - engage and destroy

time-shifter spotted - engage and destroy

time-shifter spotted - engage and destroy

time-shifter spotted - engage and destroy

jimmycastor · 09-14-2010, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angry Jew Cat

sweet 1000 dmca removal requests, thats almost catching up to the 5000 uploads that went out today.... i guess it's a start.

you mean like 500.000 uploads / day if you count in rapidshare, filesonic, netloadin and all those other bastards making big $$$ with filehosting

chronig · 09-14-2010, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimmycastor

you mean like 500.000 uploads / day if you count in rapidshare, filesonic, netloadin and all those other bastards making big $$$ with filehosting

Not for a particular program, but maybe in total

Get those 500 producers with a similar DMCA department and you got your 500,000 notices/takedown requests....

RAM · 09-14-2010, 02:02 PM

Nice one Steve !!! You must stand up for what is yours

jimmycastor · 09-14-2010, 02:05 PM

maybe sponsors should pay for blackmailing pirated content forum posts.

whenever a philipino blackmails 100 links with pirated content he should get 3 $ , would make those philipinos think about their business model

signupdamnit · 09-14-2010, 02:06 PM

Nice to see. If only more sponsors made such an effort perhaps conversions would be better for all.

pocketkangaroo · 09-14-2010, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moeloubani

Banning you wouldn't have anything to do with 'pro-piracy' and have more to do with 'less internet douchbagedness'. Really, threatening to fly to foreign countries to break people's legs? Calling every other country in the world a 'shithole'? Typical American 'tough guy' routine, even though your average foreigner would wipe the ground with your average American (easily). Sooooo professional no wonder these pirates take you so seriously.

davecummings · 09-14-2010, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brujah

don't forget to also send to the registrar's... some of them are trigger happy

I wonder if flooding Department of Justice would get their attention and possibly motivate them to go after copyright infringing?

I emailed the White House last week about all the lost jobs and revenue losses because of piracy sites, but have not even received an acknowledgement that they received the letter (but, I bet I'll receive emails requesting me to make political donations)!

Matyko · 09-14-2010, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by munki

Nothing but respect...

+1

Nikki_Licks · 09-14-2010, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by V_RocKs

[not pissing around]Have bat, will travel[/not pissing around]

No doubt

Tippy · 09-14-2010, 05:32 PM

If your going after boards like pornbb, dont they simply say nothing is hosted at our site or its users post the links, sure it may get them to take down the links/threads/posts for a week but if the content is worth while it will be back the following.

Your not worried about pissing some of these people off, I would think you have a lot more to lose besides content.

gideongallery · 09-14-2010, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveLightspeed

"I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed man."

right remind me again who owns the domain raimimiller.com

i haven't been wrong yet.

gideongallery · 09-14-2010, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chronig

Not for a particular program, but maybe in total

Get those 500 producers with a similar DMCA department and you got your 500,000 notices/takedown requests....

but that the point about the timelimit i was talking about, there is none, if 500,000 take down requests are sent in, a tube site has no responsiblity to put more people on it.

so instead of seeing a response in 1 week , you now have to wait a month for them to get to it.

and if there is one tiny mistake (url is wrong, declaration is valid, etc) they can put you at the bottom of the pile.

TheDoc · 09-14-2010, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gideongallery

but that the point about the timelimit i was talking about, there is none, if 500,000 take down requests are sent in, a tube site has no responsiblity to put more people on it.

so instead of seeing a response in 1 week , you now have to wait a month for them to get to it.

and if there is one tiny mistake (url is wrong, declaration is valid, etc) they can put you at the bottom of the pile.

Your time limit theory isn't relevant... already defined in many court cases, they must act expeditiously, hours is plenty of notice to "expect" it to be removed. If they don't take it down, the amount of infractions stack up, it's really simple.

So if it takes 1 month, and he sends 30 notices, the copyright infringement will be x30 or maybe it goes on days, either way it stacks up.

NetHorse · 09-14-2010, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by topnotch, standup guy

Lay down with dogs and you get up with fleas.

Keep fishing.

Your analogy makes no sense considering you failed to understand the context of my comment.

It's a win / win situation for both parties. Offending tube site replaces full length content with sponsored content and owners of copyrighted materials get valuable affiliates promoting their product.

Now, if you DON'T believe that these file sharing / tube sites aren't willing to work with you, think again. Yes, tube/file sharing site owners are scumbags, (not saying otherwise) they are getting away with displaying your content within the confines of the law, which means they have absolutely NO incentive to remove it. Give them an incentive and they will work with you. They want to make money just like anyone else.

Business 101. You have a potentially valuable asset, you can either fight a losing battle or you can come up with an amicable solution that benefits both parties. You also have nothing to lose, if it doesn't work, go ahead and send out a million DMCAs and drag them to court. We've all seen how effective that's been though.

If you don't believe me about tube sites / file sharing sites willing to work with ya hit me up on ICQ. I've been working with a few programs, and it's been working beautifully. Don't want to go into specifics, but feel free to contact me.

noekk · 09-14-2010, 08:28 PM

Isn't the DCMA only valid in the United States ?

SteveLightspeed · 09-14-2010, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NetHorse

Your analogy makes no sense considering you failed to understand the context of my comment.

It's a win / win situation for both parties. Offending tube site replaces full length content with sponsored content and owners of copyrighted materials get traffic, and no small amount of traffic either.

Now, if you DON'T believe that these file sharing / tube sites aren't willing to work with you, think again. Tube/file sharing site owners are scum bags, they can get away with displaying your content, which means they have absolutely NO incentive to remove it. Give them an incentive and they will work with you. They want to make money just like anyone else.

Business 101. You have a potentially valuable asset, you can either fight a losing battle or you can come up with an amicable solution. You also have nothing to lose, if it doesn't work, go ahead and send out a million DMCAs. When your content goes away and then comes back a few weeks later, well, go ahead and send them some more DMCAs.

If you don't believe me, hit me up on ICQ. Don't want to go into specifics.

"Pay us or we will steal from you." --- that is extortion, my friend.

PXN · 09-14-2010, 08:28 PM

Pobably the best option is take them down regarding USC 2257 law. As they don't own the videos, there is no way they have IDs of these girls. Without proper doc, the host are more than willing to take down the videos.

I know a lot of people just sue to get their own videos down only, but that doesn't help. In order to stop the bleeding you need to choke the whole site.

Robbie · 09-14-2010, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NetHorse

Business 101. You have a potentially valuable asset, you can either fight a losing battle or you can come up with an amicable solution. You also have nothing to lose, if it doesn't work, go ahead and send out a million DMCAs. When your content goes away and then comes back a few weeks later, well, go ahead and send them some more DMCAs.

If you don't believe me, hit me up on ICQ. Don't want to go into specifics.

Are all of you guys completely missing what Steve is doing?

He doesn't WANT them to honor his DMCA. That's why he's sending so many. Jesus Christ...this isn't about the bullshit of these fuckers playing that dmca game with a content owner. This is about lawsuits, making money, and tearing pirate sites down.

The DMCA is just sent in hopes that they won't comply. And since there are so many fucking thieves that have stolen Steve's stuff...he is sending out the dmca's in mass.

See, the pirates always thought that the sheer numbers of files they stole from people was their strength (because it would overwhelm a hard working person who doesn't have time for that shit)...the beauty of what Steve is doing is he is turning that very "strength" into the pirates biggest weakness.

And he will own them. Hope that makes it clear to all the folks not seeing the big picture who are still babbling about how futile it is for Steve to send out the DMCA's.

He is COUNTING on it being "futile"

Good job Steve. Kudo's to you and your legal team.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PXN

Pobably the best option is take them down regarding USC 2257 law. As they don't own the videos, there is no way they have IDs of these girls. Without proper doc, the host are more than willing to take down the videos.

I know a lot of people just sue to get their own videos down only, but that doesn't help. In order to stop the bleeding you need to choke the whole site.

If that worked there would be no tubes or torrents. It doesn't. They are protected and not required to have 2257 because it's "user uploaded" This shit has been discussed over and over and over for the last 2 years. You should be up on this kind of thing before entering the discussion with people who have already explored every legal avenue that you can possibly think of...especially the most obvious ones.

Blingbaby · 09-14-2010, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chronig

Another surfer idiot that at the end of the day is worried he'll no longer be able to masturbate to free porn (or find a woman) - or runs a few illegal blogs for the same 100-200$/week 'rewards' himself

I think this is a big step in the right direction by Steve, and could possibly sway others to get involved. He won't be able to defeat piracy himself, but once him and others get active in it, more and more faggots will think twice about pirating.

Even a "dent" in the otherwise bane-of-adult-webmaster-existence current state of piracy would definitely increase porn sales overall.

Please! You're clueless, young or all of the above. Internet porn model was born on piracy, what the fuck is a linklist? Even some of the *big shots* these days started out that way, I remember when The Hun would actually give instructions on how to get around galleries.

Steve's effort is a big waste of time and smells more of desperation than anything else. You want to get ahead in a tough economy, try coming up with something new, people still pay for that. Don't expect to sit on the same tired content and keep getting richer and richer, it just won't happen..

Slutboat · 09-14-2010, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blingbaby

Please! You're clueless, young or all of the above. Internet porn model was born on piracy, what the fuck is a linklist? Even some of the *big shots* these days started out that way, I remember when The Hun would actually give instructions on how to get around galleries.

Steve's effort is a big waste of time and smells more of desperation than anything else. You want to get ahead in a tough economy, try coming up with something new, people still pay for that. Don't expect to sit on the same tired content and keep getting richer and richer, it just won't happen..

BLINGBABY:

mlove · 09-14-2010, 08:49 PM

Don't you mean steve easton sent out 100 dmca's for you?

PXN · 09-14-2010, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

If that worked there would be no tubes or torrents. It doesn't. They are protected and not required to have 2257 because it's "user uploaded" This shit has been discussed over and over and over for the last 2 years. You should be up on this kind of thing before entering the discussion with people who have already explored every legal avenue that you can possibly think of...especially the most obvious ones.

First there are quite a few big tube that are hosted in the US. I'm not worry about torrnet as that's where all the spyware are installed. People don't trust them to download the videos. They go to tube because it streamed right from their computer. The tubes are require to follow 2257 rules. Even in some countries where it do not have 2257 they have something similiar most host comply with the 2257 laws away.

An uploaded video is NOT a reason you don't need 2257, but you can get away with DMCA with that. 2257 clearly stated you must have proper doc of all the girls age. The problem is even if they say the models on Steve LightSpeed site have the doc, Steve or the site owner then can claim they never gave permission for the videos to display on there so it now is theft as you need proper doc to show proof of model age on your website. And the only way they can get that doc if Steve release them which he most likely won't do for those assholes.

2MuchMark · 09-14-2010, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blingbaby

Steve's effort is a big waste of time and smells more of desperation than anything else. You want to get ahead in a tough economy, try coming up with something new, people still pay for that. Don't expect to sit on the same tired content and keep getting richer and richer, it just won't happen..

Blingbaby,

Don't you think that you would feel the same way that Steve does, if you found content that you spent money creating, ripped off, re-branded and being sold and / or given away and / or benefiting someone else without any payback to you?

mlove · 09-14-2010, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by noekk

Isn't the DCMA only valid in the United States ?

Correct. Hell, the tube site could not even remove the file from their servers. They could simply setup a VPN connection, config apache to bind a vhost to their VPN ip address, and distribute from that vhost.

Steve, you're a stupid sack of shit, and you don't know anything about the internet.

V_RocKs · 09-14-2010, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

Are all of you guys completely missing what Steve is doing?

He doesn't WANT them to honor his DMCA. That's why he's sending so many. Jesus Christ...this isn't about the bullshit of these fuckers playing that dmca game with a content owner. This is about lawsuits, making money, and tearing pirate sites down.

The DMCA is just sent in hopes that they won't comply. And since there are so many fucking thieves that have stolen Steve's stuff...he is sending out the dmca's in mass.

See, the pirates always thought that the sheer numbers of files they stole from people was their strength (because it would overwhelm a hard working person who doesn't have time for that shit)...the beauty of what Steve is doing is he is turning that very "strength" into the pirates biggest weakness.

And he will own them. Hope that makes it clear to all the folks not seeing the big picture who are still babbling about how futile it is for Steve to send out the DMCA's.

He is COUNTING on it being "futile"

Good job Steve. Kudo's to you and your legal team.

If that worked there would be no tubes or torrents. It doesn't. They are protected and not required to have 2257 because it's "user uploaded" This shit has been discussed over and over and over for the last 2 years. You should be up on this kind of thing before entering the discussion with people who have already explored every legal avenue that you can possibly think of...especially the most obvious ones.

Finally someone that gets it.

Robbie · 09-14-2010, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PXN

First there are quite a few big tube that are hosted in the US. I'm not worry about torrnet as that's where all the spyware are installed. People don't trust them to download the videos. They go to tube because it streamed right from their computer. The tubes are require to follow 2257 rules. Even in some countries where it do not have 2257 they have something similiar most host comply with the 2257 laws away.

An uploaded video is NOT a reason you don't need 2257, but you can get away with DMCA with that. 2257 clearly stated you must have proper doc of all the girls age. The problem is even if they say the models on Steve LightSpeed site have the doc, Steve or the site owner then can claim they never gave permission for the videos to display on there so it now is theft as you need proper doc to show proof of model age on your website. And the only way they can get that doc if Steve release them which he most likely won't do for those assholes.

You are 1000000% WRONG. Tubes are NOT required to have 2257. They are completely protected. I'm hoping that will change one day. But for now, that's the way it is. User upload = NO 2257

Sorry friend...you are wrong. If you were right, we would have already gotten rid of every tube. Don't you think we all thought of that first a couple of years ago? Open your eyes. None of them have 2257 info because they don't have to.

V_RocKs · 09-14-2010, 09:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by noekk

Isn't the DCMA only valid in the United States ?

Sure... Do you remember why Neteller stopped doing Gambling transactions and why pretty much everyone else followed suit?

Well.. Let me refresh your memory if you aren't getting it...

One day Congress gave the President a bill. No... Not a bill he had to pay, a bill he had to sign... and he did. This bill made it illegal to process banking transactions for gambling web sites. Nobody gave a shit and everything went as usual until...

Years later the two guys that started Neteller decided to travel to Canada through the United States on their way to a conference for the electronic transaction industry. They ended up being charged with money laundering. Something that was only illegal to do in the US (by your context)...

Immediately after their arrest Neteller stopped processing transactions for US clients of gambling sites and not long after everyone else doing it followed suit.

So any company based outside the US that fails to adhere to US law might find its associates needing legal defense at the next Phoenix Forum. I can see it now actually... Everyone is in a packed conference room where Wired Guy is set to deliver the speech of all speeches on SEO, Chris Mallick is there to tell us why ePassporte got their VISA cards denied and Lensman is going to pick 1 lucky attendee at random to work for Playboy by remote! Who wouldn't want to attend that conference?

So as Steve makes his opening address to the crowd it is to inform nine people in the crowd that they can place anything in their hands on the floor, put their hands in the air and comply with the commands of the FBI agents there to escort them out.

tiger · 09-14-2010, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CunningStunt

I fear it's futile Steve, but I applaud your efforts.

It's only futile if everyone accepts it but what if there were 50, 100 or 1000 Steves. Piracy will never be eliminated but it can be controlled and limited.

Imagine 1000 people sending out 1000 DMCAs per day = 1,000,000 DMCAs.

Just an example but I imagine that would cause quite a bit of problems for people receiving them trying to keep up with the removal requests.

Argos88 · 09-14-2010, 11:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

You are 1000000% WRONG. Tubes are NOT required to have 2257. They are completely protected. I'm hoping that will change one day. But for now, that's the way it is. User upload = NO 2257

Sorry friend...you are wrong. If you were right, we would have already gotten rid of every tube. Don't you think we all thought of that first a couple of years ago? Open your eyes. None of them have 2257 info because they don't have to.

You are completely wrong dude.. It looks like you live on a BOX, really.

Maybe you didn't know we are in year 2010, don't you?

Just to name two: extreme-board.com and pornbb.org...

Maybe you didn't know MGM is Broken? Maybe you will say that it has nothing to do with adult and with pirating.. Then, don't bother to answer me, you have no IDEA. Get a clue and then come back, muchachito.

.

mlove · 09-15-2010, 12:11 AM

All the tube site needs to do is declare itself a service provider (which, it is a hosting service), and they are fuckin' set.

SleazyDream · 09-15-2010, 12:20 AM

I love you steve

Nathan · 09-15-2010, 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Argos88

You are completely wrong dude.. It looks like you live on a BOX, really.

Maybe you didn't know we are in year 2010, don't you?

Just to name two: extreme-board.com and pornbb.org...

Maybe you didn't know MGM is Broken? Maybe you will say that it has nothing to do with adult and with pirating.. Then, don't bother to answer me, you have no IDEA. Get a clue and then come back, muchachito.

.

Uhm, your reply does not at all fit Robbie's post <G>

Regarding Robbie's 2257 post, he is 100% correct. United States Code Title 18, §2257, paragraph (h)(2)(B)(v).

But I just had to reply to you even though you completely messed up the quote... because sorry man, MGM broke and that's because of pirating? OH MY GOD.. You can not be more wrong... MGM was played with by Sony Pictures and then dumped into the hands of complete and utter idiotic private equity firms who can not fucking agree with each other to do anything about their utter failure of running MGM...

They have more INTEREST TO PAY EACH YEAR than they MAKE in profits! The private equity firms do not want to inject another dime of money into them which is why James Bond and such failed, which is why MGM is no longer making NEW movies, which is why the only way MGM can make money is with selling their library. And sorry, that will just not work indefinitely...

Really, do not claim you have a single clue about what is going on with MGM if you blame it on piracy, thats a fucking joke.

Argos88 · 09-15-2010, 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nathan

Uhm, your reply does not at all fit Robbie's post <G>

Regarding Robbie's 2257 post, he is 100% correct. United States Code Title 18, §2257, paragraph (h)(2)(B)(v).

But I just had to reply to you even though you completely messed up the quote... because sorry man, MGM broke and that's because of pirating? OH MY GOD.. You can not be more wrong... MGM was played with by Sony Pictures and then dumped into the hands of complete and utter idiotic private equity firms who can not fucking agree with each other to do anything about their utter failure of running MGM...

Really, do not claim you have a single clue about what is going on with MGM if you blame it on piracy, thats a fucking joke.

Maybe you completely missed the point of the thread? Or? Do you know what a DMCA is at all?

The way MGM does business is the same way they did business during the last 50 years... Try to read some history books of Hollywood.

Also, maybe you don't travel the world. Bockbusters are closing on a daily basis.

Ok, now if you are not able to associate and link 2 or 3 points together, I won't do the job for you "Sire".

You are a fucking joke, seriously. I can't stop laughing.

And the best part of all is that your Site (in your sig) is not even related to the business... Funny. Manwin, What the fuck? LOL.

.

topnotch, standup guy · 09-15-2010, 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by **********

Blingbaby,

Don't you think that you would feel the same way that Steve does, if you found content that you spent money creating, ripped off, re-branded and being sold and / or given away and / or benefiting someone else without any payback to you?

Asking a freeloader like Blingbaby or any of the tube boys here who profit off of stolen content to understand ethics is like asking a bear to shit in a toilet.

They're simply incapable of such.

.

helterskelter808 · 09-15-2010, 03:03 AM

While even Bruce Lehman admitted it's flawed, the DMCA is not all about 'The Man' stomping on consumers and infringing free speech/fair use rights. If you're a 'service provider' (that includes being a Webmaster), the DMCA's safe habor provisions mean you are not liable for copyright violations posted/uploaded by your users.

That's a Good Thing.

Have a designated DMCA contact, preferably registered with the US Copyright Office, and all you have to do is comply in a timely manner to properly formatted DMCA requests to either remove, or remove access to, the content.

Even posters/uploaders of the material have rights. Unless you're a 'repeat infringer' you're unlikely to get in any trouble, and if someone issues a spurious or contentious DMCA claim against something you posted, you have the right to counter it.

Either way, it's between the poster and the copyright claimant and, if you're a service provider/webmaster, not your problem.

The DMCA was an issue on Usenet (which is my main background; not adult) for both users and providers even before it became law in the late 90s. Still carrying terabytes of binaries today, Usenet was a place to share files long before torrents and tubes were even dreamed of.

As a related aside, I know for a fact that some porn site owners that in the 21st century have taken an aggressive stance WRT their own copyrights being infringed, started off in the 1990s on Usenet/BBSs 'stealing' copyrighted material, or scanning it from magazines and capping from videos, spamming it back to Usenet and selling/giving it away it on their websites. I doubt that's news here though.

I'm a bit surprised at the hostility from some people to Steve Lightspeed's actions. Grandstanding aside, all he's doing is taking action against unauthorised use of his work.

There's nobody here who can claim it wouldn't stink if someone 'stole' something of theirs or that they would happily sit back and take it. OTOH, I also doubt there's anyone here who can genuinely claim they really care about other people's copyright.

Anyone who has downloaded anything that is copyrighted, be it porn or software from Usenet in the 1990s or mp3s and DVDs in 2010, is a hypocrite to complain about their own material being 'stolen'.

That doesn't mean they have no right to, or shouldn't, go after the people 'stealing' it though.

Nathan · 09-15-2010, 03:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Argos88

Maybe you completely missed the point of the thread? Or? Do you know what a DMCA is at all?

The way MGM does business is the same way they did business during the last 50 years... Try to read some history books of Hollywood.

Also, maybe you don't travel the world. Bockbusters are closing on a daily basis.

Ok, now if you are not able to associate and link 2 or 3 points together, I won't do the job for you "Sire".

You are a fucking joke, seriously. I can't stop laughing.

And the best part of all is that your Site (in your sig) is not even related to the business... Funny. Manwin, What the fuck? LOL.

.

Dude, seriously, are you a complete idiot? Do you even know who I am? Jeez...

Yes, I know what a DMCA notice is... but it has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with MGM going bankrupt... MGM is going belly up because they were sucked dry by private equity which got tricked into buying it from sony 2 years ago and are now completely fucked because MGM can nolonger pay their fucking interest payments on the loans.

And this is not because of PIRACY.. MGM makes 500 MILLION USD in profits EACH YEAR from their library.. and _STILL_ they can not survive.. because private equity is not pushing in more money...

Seriously, stop pretending you have a clue before you look even more like an idiot than you do already.

BTW, in case anyone is wondering, I fully support what Steve is doing, I would do exactly the same thing if I were him (and we do, just that we do not send out 1000 a day, its more like 100 or so)...

james_clickmemedia · 09-15-2010, 04:14 AM

Good luck Steve.

Robbie · 09-15-2010, 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Argos88

You are completely wrong dude.. It looks like you live on a BOX, really.

Maybe you didn't know we are in year 2010, don't you?

Just to name two: extreme-board.com and pornbb.org...

Maybe you didn't know MGM is Broken? Maybe you will say that it has nothing to do with adult and with pirating.. Then, don't bother to answer me, you have no IDEA. Get a clue and then come back, muchachito.

.

Bro, I have no idea what you are trying to say. My point in my post is that user upload = no 2257
That's the way it is legally. Whatever else you are talking about has nothing to do with anything. But if you think you know more than me and every other content owner in the world as well as every lawyer in the world...then what can I say?

And what do you own again? And how many tube sites have you put out of business via them not having 2257 as the person I was replying to was trying to say could be done?

I'm just gonna go out on a limb here from your post and say: You aren't a producer of content and you've never took down a tube site via 2257 (since nobody ever has)

When YOU get a clue then YOU come back "muchachito" (whatever that means lol )

Agent 488 · 09-15-2010, 06:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

I'm just gonna go out on a limb here from your post and say: You aren't a producer of content and you've never took down a tube site via 2257 (since nobody ever has)

don't know the details but some gay producers have shut down some tubes. gay producers are much more aggressive and successful at protecting their content than you guys.

maybe that will change.

Robbie · 09-15-2010, 06:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agent 488

don't know the details but some gay producers have shut down some tubes. gay producers are much more aggressive and successful at protecting their content than you guys.

maybe that will change.

They definitely have. And they did it via copyright infringement...it was the company Titan.

But don't lump me with "you guys" when you talk about protecting my content. I've been actively protecting my stuff for over 2 years while "experts" like Shap told me right here on GFY that I was going to make my members angry at me for treating them like "criminals" just because I protect my content.

Well, time has proven me right as we are having a record breaking September in both new sales and rebills, while I'm watching lots of other companies go down.

And here is an article on the Titan lawsuit: http://business.avn.com/articles/Tit...tor-54226.html

If you will notice...2257 IS mentioned in the suit. But not because a tube has to have it (it doesn't, again: user uploaded), but because it creates unfair business practices because Titan DOES have to have 2257 and can't compete against a site that is not only stealing, but also isn't restrained by 2257 record keeping.

This is how things are going to work. Using what WAS a pirate's "strength" against them and turning it into their biggest weaknesses. It took a while to figure out the correct attack angle, but now? It's on.

gideongallery · 09-15-2010, 06:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoc

Your time limit theory isn't relevant... already defined in many court cases, they must act expeditiously, hours is plenty of notice to "expect" it to be removed. If they don't take it down, the amount of infractions stack up, it's really simple.

So if it takes 1 month, and he sends 30 notices, the copyright infringement will be x30 or maybe it goes on days, either way it stacks up.

you want to provide a link to th case where expeditiously has been defined as hours.

you keep making claims that court rule (ie Parody are only valid if they are a sample) a certain way but never seem to produce the court case that proves it.

think about your logic for a second i could resend the dmca notice for the same content every minute clogging the mailbox and basically preventing them from dealing with all the legitimate complaints.

even if the first one was valid, the xxx that followed would be a mailbox attack, the liablity of which would be total cost of dealing with all the other failed to respond to DMCA letters.

doing it once a day, and cordinating it with all the other producers (a la proposed solution) would have the same effect.

Dirty Dane · 09-15-2010, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gideongallery

think about your logic for a second i could resend the dmca notice for the same content every minute clogging the mailbox and basically preventing them from dealing with all the legitimate complaints.

Good idea. If the host can get away with making money off hosting thieves and other illegal activities, raise their administration costs

- LOL - · 09-15-2010, 06:55 AM

No one promotes or buys Lighspeedcash sites so Steve is grabbing at straws.

Steve, you are a has-been. Deal with it.

09-14-2010, 02:02 PM	#110
RAM They're all hookers, but mom! Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Right now Shelby Twp MI Posts: 7,047	Nice one Steve !!! You must stand up for what is yours __________________ RAM Fucking Machines are like CASH MACHINES See RAM on these quality sites!! Rightofftheboat.com EuroBrideTryouts.com

09-14-2010, 05:32 PM	#117
Tippy Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 1,772	If your going after boards like pornbb, dont they simply say nothing is hosted at our site or its users post the links, sure it may get them to take down the links/threads/posts for a week but if the content is worth while it will be back the following. Your not worried about pissing some of these people off, I would think you have a lot more to lose besides content. __________________ VPS 1 - 1.5 GB RAM, 10 GB SSD - 11.88 euro/year VPS 2 - 4 GB RAM, 40 GB SSD - 60 euro/year Alexhost.com - your access to the best hosting services VPS.

09-14-2010, 08:49 PM	#128
mlove the guy Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 764	Don't you mean steve easton sent out 100 dmca's for you? __________________ If you won't feel as good, I won't feel as cheap.

09-15-2010, 12:11 AM	#137
mlove the guy Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 764	All the tube site needs to do is declare itself a service provider (which, it is a hosting service), and they are fuckin' set. __________________ If you won't feel as good, I won't feel as cheap.

09-15-2010, 12:20 AM	#138
SleazyDream I'm here for SPORT Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phone # (401) 285-0696 Posts: 41,470	I love you steve __________________ This dog, is dog, a dog, good dog, way dog, to dog, keep dog, an dog, idiot dog, busy dog, for dog, 20 dog, seconds dog! Now read without the word dog.

09-14-2010, 02:05 PM	#111
jimmycastor So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 342	maybe sponsors should pay for blackmailing pirated content forum posts. whenever a philipino blackmails 100 links with pirated content he should get 3 $ , would make those philipinos think about their business model

09-14-2010, 02:06 PM	#112
signupdamnit Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 6,697	Nice to see. If only more sponsors made such an effort perhaps conversions would be better for all.

09-14-2010, 08:28 PM	#122
noekk Registered User Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 48	Isn't the DCMA only valid in the United States ?

09-14-2010, 08:28 PM	#124
PXN Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 1,548	Pobably the best option is take them down regarding USC 2257 law. As they don't own the videos, there is no way they have IDs of these girls. Without proper doc, the host are more than willing to take down the videos. I know a lot of people just sue to get their own videos down only, but that doesn't help. In order to stop the bleeding you need to choke the whole site.

09-15-2010, 03:03 AM	#142
helterskelter808 So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 3,405	While even Bruce Lehman admitted it's flawed, the DMCA is not all about 'The Man' stomping on consumers and infringing free speech/fair use rights. If you're a 'service provider' (that includes being a Webmaster), the DMCA's safe habor provisions mean you are not liable for copyright violations posted/uploaded by your users. That's a Good Thing. Have a designated DMCA contact, preferably registered with the US Copyright Office, and all you have to do is comply in a timely manner to properly formatted DMCA requests to either remove, or remove access to, the content. Even posters/uploaders of the material have rights. Unless you're a 'repeat infringer' you're unlikely to get in any trouble, and if someone issues a spurious or contentious DMCA claim against something you posted, you have the right to counter it. Either way, it's between the poster and the copyright claimant and, if you're a service provider/webmaster, not your problem. The DMCA was an issue on Usenet (which is my main background; not adult) for both users and providers even before it became law in the late 90s. Still carrying terabytes of binaries today, Usenet was a place to share files long before torrents and tubes were even dreamed of. As a related aside, I know for a fact that some porn site owners that in the 21st century have taken an aggressive stance WRT their own copyrights being infringed, started off in the 1990s on Usenet/BBSs 'stealing' copyrighted material, or scanning it from magazines and capping from videos, spamming it back to Usenet and selling/giving it away it on their websites. I doubt that's news here though. I'm a bit surprised at the hostility from some people to Steve Lightspeed's actions. Grandstanding aside, all he's doing is taking action against unauthorised use of his work. There's nobody here who can claim it wouldn't stink if someone 'stole' something of theirs or that they would happily sit back and take it. OTOH, I also doubt there's anyone here who can genuinely claim they really care about other people's copyright. Anyone who has downloaded anything that is copyrighted, be it porn or software from Usenet in the 1990s or mp3s and DVDs in 2010, is a hypocrite to complain about their own material being 'stolen'. That doesn't mean they have no right to, or shouldn't, go after the people 'stealing' it though.

09-15-2010, 04:14 AM	#144
james_clickmemedia Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Texas / London Posts: 2,204	Good luck Steve. __________________ $ CLICKMEMEDIA.COM $ CONVERTING ETHNIC TRAFFIC SINCE 1998 ~ $30+PPS BLACK-X.COM - NEW BLACK EX-GF SITE CLICKMEMEDIA.COM ~ ICQ - 8788771

09-15-2010, 06:55 AM	#150
- LOL - So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 396	No one promotes or buys Lighspeedcash sites so Steve is grabbing at straws. Steve, you are a has-been. Deal with it.