Nathan / Fabian - Please step inside. Time to step up to the plate.

He's laughing at everyone.

A few quotes from Nathan:

his backpeddling is part of the public record

he went from agreeing to handle all the day to day operations of the join venture

to demanding that i do the day to day submissions to the tube sites /torrent sites,
the day to day maintance of the private tracker, hell he even wanted me to hire and shoot the content.

given the fact he claimed he had done product placement before (and then later admitted that when he tried no one would even consider doing the deal because he stupidly tried to get mainstream companies product placement) i suspect doc thought i was just going to show him stuff he already knew how to do, he do all the work (which he already knew how to do ) and he have to give me 50%.

I'd wager that number to be significantly higher. 20% might be accurate for the content added over the last couple of months, but not even close for the pre-existing libraries.

You call 1 (one) video = all? If it was copyright infringement, then the video wouldn't be there for your "proof".

Alprazolam is right. They can remove 'all' videos, and they do, if they ban a user when their policy is the three-strike. They 'can', which is the point, no law prevent them from doing that with a "consequense" as claimed.

Try it yourself: Upload 10 movies, where 8 violate their TOS/infringe, and I can guarantee they will also remove the last 2 after you are banned

That the point you moron, youtube does not remove all the videos from an account when they ban someone

yes that person can't post anymore, but non infringing videos stay up

they appear orphanned just like the example i gave you

Only the offending videos are remove period

you can't be that stupid

you actually trying to claim that you can TOS criminal and civil liablities

news flash when the law conflicts with TOS the TOS loses.

as i pointed out if TOS supercede the law eharmony would have spent 2 million dollar defending/settling a case for not providing their service to gay people


if youtube dropped the non offending videos, the videos that in no way shape or form violated their TOS,

1. present the proof that they didn't do for a white person posting
2. ask them to explain why they suddenly decide to treat a visible minority differently

and if you don't think i could sue them for being inconsistant when race is they only difference (all my videos got banned, only the offending ones did for the white person) you are a world class moron.

If gay people can force eharmony, to pay them thousands of dollars, and setup a money losing business just to comply with anti discrimination laws, imagine the pain a visible minority can cause.

youtube couldn't act inconsistant like your claiming they can, the fact that i produced one example of a video staying up proves that youtube policy is to only remove the offending videos and to leave the non offending ones up until they have a community complaint to blame.

gideongallery are you stupid? Nathan claims they can't remove all movies from a banned user because that could "bring legal trouble".

Bullshit.

This is what they write on TOS at PornHub:

They write it themselves: For ANY or NO reason at all. They can do WHATEVER they want!

They are saying to uploaders they can, but here they say they can't?

No law or no laywer will tell you that you can't moderate and remove user submitted content if they violated TOS. Like PornHub says; you do NOT need a reason. Youtube can remove, Rapidshare can, you can remove all spam from one spammer on your blog without looking at all posts. It happens every day. So stop bullshitting.

Again more or less ripped out of context dean, but you know that yourself.

The best part though is, that most people understand how I meant this and why I said it.
As your paste says, it cokes with the territory, it is not done on purpose. If we want to run tubes, then we need dmca protection, we have no other choice. And as the paste also said, it 'might' be stolen content. We simply do not know.

I think at some point in the future I might have to talk at one of the next shows about why dmca exists and what finer repercussions it brings with which most people posting here do not understand.

Why does your TOS say something different than you say here:

You can remove submission for NO reason at all, but here you say you can't?

Please do. That would be the icing on the shit cake.

However, at this point we have moved beyond DMCA and are talking about your TOS. Why have terms at all and state you can remove anything for any reason, if you now say DMCA forbids you from following your own terms? That doesn't make much sense.

Your own terms were not taken out of context.

This was really the reason of this thread to begin with.

we have had this arguement before when you attempted to claim that you could use the TOS away fair use right like backup

you can't TOS away your legal liablities under the law, if your TOS violate the law, the LAW wins and the TOS is invalid.

try it yourself, put in your TOS your allowed to distribute Kiddie porn
and none of the content can be used as evidence against you in a trial

see how quickly your ass goes to jail




it court cost inflater, it will not win in court, it just will increase the cost of bringing a lawsuit.

You would have to prove that the TOS violates the law to get around the blanket we can do anything clause.

see above post for explaination

TOS does not nor will it supercede the law

if the law says something is wrong, and your TOS says that it ok, your TOS becomes invalid PERIOD.

That how the law works.

imagine a world where TOS supercede the law, you could get with any crime you wanted.
Bury a clause that says you can charge anything you want to a persons credit card, and you could bang a customers card for hundreds of dollars, for a site you advertise as free.


want to commit murder, just put it in your TOS that your allowed to kill them,

fair use would be totally useless, since you could simple TOS any fair use you wanted.

Hell the fair use cases i keep showing you guys prove that TOS can't supercede the law

if TOS could over write the law, then universal could have put a TOS warning at the begining of all their shows, and the timeshifting of that show would be illegal.

If TOS could over writhe the law, sony could have put a TOS on the back of the CD and it would have been illegal to rip them to MP3.

in fact the original microsoft TOS disallowed making copies of Windows 95 and they got sued were forced to change it to "making illegal copies" and had to pay out millions in damages to Americans who had to buy backup for 19.95 from microsoft (something like $75 per person after legal cost were included)

The whole fucking point of this tap dance gideon and nathan is that you PROFIT from STOLEN content. It is NOT in your BEST interest to do the RIGHT thing. You know very well an INDIVIDUAL surfer posting stolen content is not going to drag you into court for banning his account after multiple dmca complaints. There is absolutely no benefit for him to do that. BUT, it gives you perfect cover to rip, ravage and rape your competitors.

As I said before, I would have tons of respect for you if you said this was a business decision. We are going to stretch the laws to our benefit and try to put as many of our competitors out of the business before the laws are changed. But I guess your "attorneys" told you to deny deny deny. They probably told you to shut the fuck up too and quit posting on this board. But you won't do that because you have some sort of inner need not to be "a bad guy". Nathan/Fabian... you are the bad guy. You are the one hurting more people than you could ever imagine. Own the bad guy in you and tell us to fuck off and quit whining. You are the big dick in the room. You have the cheese bro, own it.!

I truly believe if someone with balls and enough money could take you to court (and not bow down to suck your cock with a nice pay day settlement) it would change this industry for the better. The days of getting your employees to rip off entire member areas would be over if someone ripped you a new one publicly. But money talks and now we have some useless digital thumbprint that the people you are killing with your UNETHICAL business practices could never afford to use(and you probably profit from with some back room agreement made during your last payoff).

Anyways, kudos to you man. You rock Dont worry about karma or hell, that's why you over-pay your lawyers. Sleep well knowing you are a fucking leech.

Comparing allowing kiddie porn to disallowing repeated infringement abuse is mumbojumbo. No one have never gone to jail or lost their safe harbor for booting a member for violating their TOS (which is another reason than the infringement itself)

No one have to prove anything, everyone know their TOS doesn't violate the law and that's the point: They can remove user submissions for ANY or NO reason (as they state). But here they claim they can't. It's not about law but policy, so saying two different things is lying.

You can't have it both ways, gideongallery. That's what bring people into trouble. The best example is piratebay, first they said fuck you to DMCA, next day in court, they argue and beg for DMCA protection. It doesn't work that way...