Manwin and Pink Visual Answer Your Digital Finger Printing/Filtering Questions

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • tony286
    lurker
    • Aug 2002
    • 57021

    #331
    What happens if the tubes who signed up for this decide to not follow the agreement?

    Comment

    • Allison
      Confirmed User
      • Jul 2001
      • 2068

      #332
      Robbie, I must disagree with your assessment of why I might be posting in a non-emotional manner and you might perceive that TopBucks or Pink Visual is not as attached to the work. Here are all my reasons to give a shit and care and be all emotional:

      -The 60 employees here in the office that I see day to day
      -The other 60 employees that used to work here 4 years ago
      -The producers we've worked with and that I've met that I've seen struggling
      -The fact that I have loved being here at this company for the past 10 years from the work I do to the people, to the creativity and use of technology.

      I've already let all of those factors get me frustrated, annoyed, sad, bitter, etc and it didn't accomplish anything.

      So, I let all of those factors inspire me and our company and instead act (not react) with intent, knowledge and good business decisions. And ever since I made that change in how I was on June 9th, 2009 & the people here also changed, Pink Visual and TopBucks have been impacted and for the better.
      Allison
      President
      TopBucks.com| PinkVisual.com|
      [email protected]
      Follow Me on Twitter:
      http://www.twitter.com/PV_Alli

      ICQ: 120353154

      Check out PVLocker.com

      Comment

      • Atticus
        Confirmed User
        • Dec 2004
        • 1051

        #333
        Originally posted by Robbie
        Now the revshare thing doesn't sound bad. Mainly because it won't make any money for the tube site which I'm VERY happy about. How can I say that? Well...Pornhub is my affialiate. I put up several videos on there, fully watermarked. They then put up a single small text link with their affiliate link.

        But of course since tubes rely so heavily on prepaid ad spots, the page is so spammed from top to bottom with dating and cam ads and Live Jasmin popping up everywhere...that after several months my vids have had millions of hits. But Pornhub as an affiliate has only made 6 sales. LOL!
        Do you put up a different URL watermark on the vids so you can track any type ins or just claudia-marie.com?

        Just curious if its possible those spots generated type ins in addition to the 6 sales? I know if I'm surfing on a tube and I see something that catches my eye I would most likely type in the URL versus click a text link.

        Comment

        • Paul Markham
          Too old to care
          • Jun 2001
          • 52942

          #334
          Originally posted by Nautilus
          So to the question of whether you're going to delete all videos uploaded by a user who's got 3 strikes, the silence is the answer.

          How predictable.
          Originally posted by Half man, Half Amazing
          So tell your BFF Fabian to adopt:

          11. UGC Services should use reasonable efforts to track infringing uploads of copyrighted content by the same user and should use such information in the reasonable implementation of a repeat infringer termination policy. UGC Services should use reasonable efforts to prevent a terminated user from uploading audio and/or video content following termination, such as blocking re-use of verified email addresses.

          Do it right here, right in this thread. If he won't...ask him why he won't adopt this policy.
          As Robbie and Half man, Half Amazing have pointed out this is there business plan. To remove these uploaders and their content would seriously effect the Tubes bottom line. They use pirated videos to sell ad space.

          And the FSC has jumped into bed with them. Think about it. The organisation that hails itself as protectors of Freedom are now in league with those who profit from piracy. And want others to jump into bed with them and pay for the privilege.

          Are the FSC jumping on the same bandwagon by joining them?
          Last edited by Paul Markham; 10-08-2010, 10:19 AM.



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

          Comment

          • robwod
            Confirmed User
            • Nov 2005
            • 2540

            #335
            Although I have no horse in this race, I have been in this business an awfully long time and frankly, what I see happening is this (realistically or otherwise, it is the perception by many at this point):
            • A system that is basically asking content producers to pay for the privilege of not having their content stolen -- by the same people stealing it.
            • A system of pay us (FSC) if you want us to protect you from theft -- but only if you join us.
            • A system us pay us a monthly fee to monitor an extremely small number of your video content on an extremely limited amount of sources

            The bigger producers probably will just jump on board, but this will likely have a negative impact on smaller producers and in general, provide a seriously negative attitude towards TopBucks, Pink Visual, Manwin, and the FSC in particular.

            Prior to this, PinkVisual was damn near put on a pedestal for championing a cause closely regarded by many as one of the most serious to face content producers in a long time. Many were hopeful of PinkVisual following through such that a precedent could be set. Thus, for many, the settlement has already tarnished that reputation somewhat, and certainly disappointed many. Granted, it is not PV's job to set a precedent, but it was indeed hoped by many that PV would be the one to finally do it. Thus, that's probably a big reason why so much negativity right now around this as it as it pertains to PV. The FSC has long been a topic of credibility, or lack thereof, in this business, so no surprise there.

            One thing I do find interesting though is the idea of swapping an advertised video of 20+ minutes for a 2 minute trailer. Personally I think this is going to backfire. In fact, it's likely going to be the fuel to create numerous "illegal" tubes who refuse to get on board with this "protection scheme". Once that happens, and I think it very much will, surfers will simply go to where they're not jerked around. They'll just migrate to other tubes that give them whatever they click on and continue to hide behind the DMCA. Anyone willing to bet money that some of those tubes operating under this scheme will also create illegal ones under aliases in order to capture that crowd too. If so, then its just business as usual, but now with added revenue stream from those who pay the monthly protection fees.

            And then if that happens, and surfers migrate, the "FSC associated tubes" will see lower page views and ultimately lower ad revenues. How long before changes are made then?

            It'll certainly be interesting to see how this all plays out. My gut feeling is that this is not a solution at all. The real solution, in my opinion, would have been for the FSC to instead focus on some actual legal work, such as addressing the loopholes being exploited in the DMCA.
            Last edited by robwod; 10-08-2010, 10:28 AM.
            NSFW

            Comment

            • DWB
              Registered User
              • Jul 2003
              • 31779

              #336
              Originally posted by Robbie
              But for those of us who actually have all the skill sets to do everything from casting to lighting to editing to uploading to site design to updating to marketing etc., etc.
              I would like to add paying off 3rd world police and sometimes running from them, to that list.

              Comment

              • Robbie
                Leaner, Meaner, Faster
                • Aug 2002
                • 20960

                #337
                Originally posted by Allison
                Robbie, I must disagree with your assessment of why I might be posting in a non-emotional manner and you might perceive that TopBucks or Pink Visual is not as attached to the work. Here are all my reasons to give a shit and care and be all emotional:

                -The 60 employees here in the office that I see day to day
                -The other 60 employees that used to work here 4 years ago
                -The producers we've worked with and that I've met that I've seen struggling
                -The fact that I have loved being here at this company for the past 10 years from the work I do to the people, to the creativity and use of technology.

                I've already let all of those factors get me frustrated, annoyed, sad, bitter, etc and it didn't accomplish anything.

                So, I let all of those factors inspire me and our company and instead act (not react) with intent, knowledge and good business decisions. And ever since I made that change in how I was on June 9th, 2009 & the people here also changed, Pink Visual and TopBucks have been impacted and for the better.
                I know y'all have been impacted. I'm an affiliate since forever.

                My point is that until you actually dig the ditch yourself with your own hands and you actually own that ditch...you can't feel the anger that the people in that position feel.

                I can stand back and be a little bit detached because I already have my situation in hand and have for the last two years. It was a HUGE burden off of me. I literally couldn't sleep when my content was being devalued like that.

                Matter of fact it was a couple of years ago when I first hired removeyourcontent and had not yet figured a way to successfully protect my streams in the members area, that Eric at RYC told me that Claudia-Marie was the most pirated girl out there.

                It was sick. And it made me physically sick.

                And yes, I have had to let employees go too. I hated it. But I could no longer justify keeping them on. This is a business. And pretty much anything that has to do with my tgps and affiliate work is now just me. There just isn't enough money as an affiliate anymore to justify having a group of employees working for me.

                But I'm just explaining to you...try and tell a guy like Tony and his wife Mandy Blake. Or Buzz and his wife Rachel Aziani. Or Dave and his wife Chica. Or our own Scott and his wife Celeste Fox...and the list goes on and on and on...just try telling those people that you understand where they are coming from.

                Cause you really don't. You're not the one having to explain what you do to your family. Or try to protect your kids from finding out. Or try to keep stalkers and crazed fans from finding where you live. Or worry about the police kicking your door in at your home. Or worry about a million other little things like that.

                People like that are putting EVERYTHING on the line. And they damn sure don't appreciate...and never will appreciate anybody stealing from them OR shaking them down (which is how they are going to view it)
                -Robbie
                ClaudiaMarie.Com

                Comment

                • DWB
                  Registered User
                  • Jul 2003
                  • 31779

                  #338
                  Originally posted by signupdamnit
                  You'd almost think this was some bad joke.
                  I just had a bunch of videos removed from them about 2 weeks ago, I think this was one of them as it's not showing now, however.... note the message: This article is temporarily unavailable.

                  Comment

                  • borked
                    Totally Borked
                    • Feb 2005
                    • 6284

                    #339
                    Originally posted by Robbie
                    Well in all fairness...of course they want to make money. Who doesn't?
                    Not everyone Robbie - I for one am doing my small bit on the side not to make money from it. I'm doing it to help others. That said, of course there will be some costs involved if people want to implement it, since it will take me time to put it on their servers and customise it for their needs. But the costs will be minimal.

                    I am doing it because I like doing things like this that keep my grey matter churning over. That actually IS my job. I get compensated for things like that, not paid.

                    This setup is different though, because the technology IS expensive (you can thank the MPAA for pushing up the price on that one). However, there are companies involved that need to make money to make profit. I think (I may be wrong) that the only partner in this that is not-for-profit is the FSC.

                    I think it's great that mainstream technology has been brought over to the adult world, since it is proven technology that works. The problem is the price which will only be affordable to the major labels.

                    For coding work - hit me up on andy // borkedcoder // com
                    (consider figuring out the email as test #1)



                    All models are wrong, but some are useful. George E.P. Box. p202

                    Comment

                    • Paul Markham
                      Too old to care
                      • Jun 2001
                      • 52942

                      #340
                      Originally posted by Nathan
                      DWB, if $450 USD a month is not worth it for you to nolonger have to police your 10 newest videos on 16 of the biggest tubesites, then what would ever be?

                      I understand that there are mom & pop shops around everywhere, but $450 USD a month? EVERYONE here complains how all the tubes steal their content and cause them to make less money, if $450 USD a month is too much, how much less money are you making because of the tubes stealing content?

                      Or are you now saying you are making less money simply because the tubes exist? If that is the case, then your problem is not piracy, its the fact that tubes are in your opinion hard to compete against.

                      $450 USD is basically 10 sales a month or 1 sale every 3 days. Are you losing less sales than that because of the tubes in your opinion thus its not worth it? I am trying to figure out where the problem specifically is.
                      Shows how little you know about this business or any business if you think $450 = 10 sales a month. So let me explain to you what it costs to take $450 a month. Less processing feed of 10% ($45) less affiliates payouts of 33% ($150) So an extra $450 is $255. Where did you learn your business management and accounting skills?

                      Originally posted by Nathan
                      DMCA has become a cost of doing business in this and any other media industry. And as you said yourself, its not mainly the tubes, its the filesharing sites and torrents. I understand that it pisses people off, but me closing our tubes would not a) make anyone more money and b) lower the amount of work DMCA wise you have to accomplish. It will simply shift our traffic to tubes and other sites which are much harder to deal with than we obviously are.
                      DMCA has become an enormous cost of doing business because of you and people like you who profit from others hard work and paying them nothing.

                      Originally posted by Nathan
                      I can not change the past, and blaming me for it does not help anyone either. I think I have shown plenty of times by now that I am willing to work with everyone and I am by far the least of your problems piracy wise. You should actually prefer me controlling these tubes than most other big tube site owners out there.
                      You can change the present. And you have absolutely no intention of doing so. Unapproved uploaders can have limits on the length of scene they can upload. Serial offenders can have ALL their videos deleted. You won't do either because it will hurt your ability to sell ad space. Selling ad space because you have pirated full length videos on your Tube sites TODAY is your business plan. Yes you want to work with everyone, every serial pirate you can find.

                      It might bite you in the ass if you really cared about piracy. Hang on you do care about piracy, you love it to death.
                      Last edited by Paul Markham; 10-08-2010, 10:49 AM.



                      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
                        • Jun 2001
                        • 52942

                        #341


                        This is my thoughts on this situation.

                        Anyone who thinks the problem with Tubes can be solved by a program is a dreamer. It won't work and this is why. If anyone knows otherwise I will stand corrected.

                        Large traffic tubes sites exist because they can publish full length scenes and reap hundred of thousands to millions of viewers a day. Without the full length videos the traffic will migrate, to the other Tube sites with full length videos. It took Pornhub and a few other Tubes 2-3 years to go from practically nowhere to be the top porn traffic sites.

                        In that time they have educated the customer he doesn't have to pay for porn, in fact Tubes offer a better deal than most porn sites. So if the top 20 Tubes take up this scheme with a vast majority of the porn producers/owners AND delete all the full length UGC videos and their profiles. The surfers will soon realise and go to the 21 to 40 top Tube sites of today. Which will become the top 20 in a very short space of time. Because the surfer is now educated and will go looking.

                        So Top Bucks, FSC and all the others who jumped on this band wagon can you see how it will not work? If you hamstring 20 Tubes with a program another 20 will take their place. Same goes if you do it to 2,000 tubes. And those that replace them will see the folly of signing up to this and will be in countries you can't chase them so easily.

                        I bet Manwin have realised this as well so have no intention of making it work.

                        And if Top Bucks have such marvelous content that the viewer has to have, as no other content will take it's place. I'm going to be surprised.

                        Edit And another thought. If Manwin or any other top tube comply with this scheme and see another tube coming up to their level, they can't keep buying them out. Because once they get the new tube to comply, the next one in line gets their traffic and becomes a threat. They can't keep buying tubes because their traffic is migrating. Then change the new one to the reason the traffic is migrating. Running around chasing their tails.
                        Last edited by Paul Markham; 10-08-2010, 11:20 AM.



                        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
                          • Jun 2001
                          • 52942

                          #342
                          Originally posted by Nathan
                          Robbie,

                          the part I do not understand is simple... first everyone complains about tubes, how evil they all are, how much they suck and so on... then people bring a solution, and the only thing yo ucan do is bash the solution.
                          It's not the solution and you know it. It won't clear Pornhub of EVERY full length video on it. And if it did you would lose traffic to the next tube down the line with full length videos on.

                          You're trying to fool us or/and not got a clue how it works.



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

                          Comment

                          • DWB
                            Registered User
                            • Jul 2003
                            • 31779

                            #343
                            Originally posted by Nathan
                            counts against their number allowed before they are banned. I think that currently is 3 infringements. What happens to their old videos is a good question, I can not say right now, have to find out.
                            http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth...5#post17588485

                            I just listed 7.

                            Comment

                            • Half man, Half Amazing
                              Confirmed User
                              • Feb 2008
                              • 372

                              #344
                              Originally posted by Paul Markham


                              In that time they have educated the customer he doesn't have to pay for porn, in fact Tubes offer a better deal than most porn sites. So if the top 20 Tubes take up this scheme with a vast majority of the porn producers/owners AND delete all the full length UGC videos and their profiles. The surfers will soon realise and go to the 21 to 40 top Tube sites of today. Which will become the top 20 in a very short space of time. Because the surfer is now educated and will go looking.
                              This EXACT thing happened when torrent sites like Mininova went legit. The downloaders just went elsewhere and other torrent sites moved up the traffic list.
                              Is this gonna get ugly, now? Huh? I hope not. Because I thought what we were here, racial differences notwithstanding, was just a couple of old friends. You know, just both of us Californians.

                              Comment

                              • Atticus
                                Confirmed User
                                • Dec 2004
                                • 1051

                                #345
                                Originally posted by Paul Markham


                                This is my thoughts on this situation.

                                Anyone who thinks the problem with Tubes can be solved by a program is a dreamer. It won't work and this is why. If anyone knows otherwise I will stand corrected.

                                Large traffic tubes sites exist because they can publish full length scenes and reap hundred of thousands to millions of viewers a day. Without the full length videos the traffic will migrate, to the other Tube sites with full length videos. It took Pornhub and a few other Tubes 2-3 years to go from practically nowhere to be the top porn traffic sites.

                                In that time they have educated the customer he doesn't have to pay for porn, in fact Tubes offer a better deal than most porn sites. So if the top 20 Tubes take up this scheme with a vast majority of the porn producers/owners AND delete all the full length UGC videos and their profiles. The surfers will soon realise and go to the 21 to 40 top Tube sites of today. Which will become the top 20 in a very short space of time. Because the surfer is now educated and will go looking.

                                So Top Bucks, FSC and all the others who jumped on this band wagon can you see how it will not work? If you hamstring 20 Tubes with a program another 20 will take their place. Same goes if you do it to 2,000 tubes. And those that replace them will see the folly of signing up to this and will be in countries you can't chase them so easily.

                                I bet Manwin have realised this as well so have no intention of making it work.

                                And if Top Bucks have such marvelous content that the viewer has to have, as no other content will take it's place. I'm going to be surprised.

                                Edit And another thought. If Manwin or any other top tube comply with this scheme and see another tube coming up to their level, they can't keep buying them out. Because once they get the new tube to comply, the next one in line gets their traffic and becomes a threat. They can't keep buying tubes because their traffic is migrating. Then change the new one to the reason the traffic is migrating. Running around chasing their tails.
                                You're wrong.

                                Manwin has every intention of making this work and it's a brilliant move on their part. Part of the DMCA law states that to comply a tube has to take advantage of available tech. If not they can be sued for infringement. Since Manwin operates the biggest tubes out there they are in the lead position. They already have the traffic and by pushing this new technology forward into the adult space they are giving copyright holders legal rights to go after tubes that do not take advantage of available technology. If every tube has to comply then they will remain the biggest traffic holders in the industry. With this move, and TB and the FSC's help, they are crushing the competition.

                                Comment

                                Working...