A fake nick speaks up about GUBA, for those of you who are tired of the propaganda
 

What is Usenet?

- Usenet allows people to start messageboards where they can post whatever they want to post. Text, media, anything.

- Usenet has existed since 1979.

- Usenet is decentralized.

- Navigating Usenet has a relatively steep learning curve.

What is GUBA?

- GUBA provides a front-end to Usenet that flattens the learning curve. Kills it, really.

- GUBA charges a monthly fee to users who wish to use this front-end.



That's it. Discuss.

Your sig is wrong, it should be "I *sell* executive summaries of threads"

harrison, sorry,but you are wrong. If that was all that Guba did, there would be nothing to it.

However, they extract the images, store them seperate from the posts on their own servers, and sell access to THAT service. Further, they will even encode videos taken from the newsgroups into other formats (such as pod format) to satisfy it's end users.

They don't just give access - they manipulate, organize, filter, clean, strip, and otherwise exert editorial control over what appears on the site. That isn't just "giving access to the usenet", that is using and reselling content without a license.

Wonder why the skin disappeared so fast? Hmmm?

Alex

Translation: Guba takes stolen usenet content, and repackages it for you in a nice spam-free easy to use interface.

http://com.webspacemania.com/guba/

Now define loss of livelihood and copyright infringement.

Usenet is not flaunting itself here on gfy, nor attempting to put people in there places. people that have valid opinions.

we know usenet is there. thats why we police it ourselves. guba is trying to get in bed with the very same community that they are milking the content off of.

what makes them any different than any other cheater site that we catch selling memberships to sites with content they dont own? these are the facts.

loss of livelihood=castration copyright infringment=the american way?

Agreed. :)

Exactly.. Don't see all the whiners complaining about all the ISPs providing access or the companies that make software to access it and to download all that content easily.

Sometimes, a thing can be legal in all aspects according to existing laws yet at the same time be morally wrong.

That's all I'm going to say on this subject.

I agree with most of your statement.

However, this part is not cut and dried:


I am not sure that you can make this assertion (my emphasis, in red).

The whining in my opinion is that it is bad for all other porn buisness. I don't have anything about the GUBA program, or Usenet or any of the p2p programs, i use them all the time. I just don't want to educate my visitors, which makes them not having to pay for porn like they should..

I wouldn't promote it. After someone has signed up for GUBA, tell me one reason why they should go back to whatever TGP, or website which reffered them ever again? They don't need to go searching for porn when they can use GUBA to get it all.

termpest, you truly are ignorant.

Yes, the usenet is a cesspool of content theft and CP.

Yes, you can access it and download the material to your own computer (full posts) and then you can manipulate it yourself any way you like.

No issues.

GUBA does the manipulation for you. They toss out the posts and keep only the images - and then they resell access to them.

Think about it this way: if they were burning the content onto CDs and reselling it, would it be a violation of copyright? Damn straight.

The usenet in and of itself lives on the edge of questionable legal ground, but because it is effectively impossible to figure out who runs what, it is a free zone (and really sucks). However, just because an image or movie appears on there doesn't mean you can turn around and resell JUST THE IMAGES.

Guba just made itself VERY well known... they are going to be handling C&Ds for a long time to come.

Alex

harrison, they present the images without the posting information, without the headers... they do not provide the usenet, they provide the end user only the images off of the usenet. They are not giving usenet access, they are reselling the content off of the usenet.

Bring me back the headers from the Paris Hilton video post... ooops, you can't do it, there are no headers on Guba.

Alex

Alex, is this an opinion or a legal assertion (the red part)????

Here's how it works.

You signup to promote a sponsor. You grab some content. You take the time to make some TGP galleries and freesites and submit them. You burn some bandwidth. You do this to profit from a partnership with that sponsor.

Some kid likes it, downloads it and then posts it all over the place.

GUBA goes out and sucks the shit in, posts it on their site and charges someone to see it.

The sponsors may profit if someone decides to signup by typing in the sponsors watermarked URL. The sponsors will not have to share that revenue with those who promoted the site legally.

Most programs will not allow an affiliate to post those same images in a member's area for which the affiliate charges a membership fee.

Perhaps all affiliates should adopt GUBA's business model and not become affiliates. They should just charge people to see stuff they steal from other people. Except that wouldn't work because where would they get their content without affiliates who are promoting the program?

Do you see a problem here?

harrison, look at the site - the material is presented WITHOUT headers (manipulte) - without posting information (strip), and without the spam and whatnot. What you get is images, videos, and music - but no posts. (clean)

Sorted into sections (organized)

Remove child porn and anyone who sends a C&D (editorial control).

usenet access is that - access to a usenet feed.

Selling access to only the content from usenet in a filtered manner could be construed as reselling images without a license.

Further, as they are putting the materials on their website, they would be a primary producer unless they can show who the primary producer is. They can't show themselves as secondary producers, because, well, they don't know who the primary really is.

heh-heh.

Alex

It's a fact.

manipulate - they provide thumbnails, and transcode video formats
organize - they provide images in galleries
filter - they strip the content from CP and content proven to be copyrighted
clean - see filter
strip - they remove posts and headers, providing pure content

using and reselling content - they host the content and charge for access to it. therefore, they are using and reselling it.

^^ Yowsa!

Mikey,

This is what debate nerds call a "straw man argument." What you described is NOT what GUBA does. It may be what you believe GUBA effectively does, but it is not what GUBA does.

If this is an open and shut case, where are the lawsuits? Why is GUBA still in business?

Regards,
H. Richard

Check out this traffic scale (volume) over a 2 year period: http://www.alexa.com/data/details/tr...l=guba.com#top

The arguments against Guba were being made when all they did was provide access.. All that's happened is that there's more amunition now. You'd STILL be on here complaining about it even if they didn't store/change the content. Remember when other programs used to include newsgroup access? They stopped because of the heat, not because of ethics or morals. It's all about the money for 99% of the people in this business. Sad, but that's the way it is.

hello, did I hear a person who sounds like they know what they are talking about???

yes, i did.

good comment for the argument

:1orglaugh

selling cocaine is illegal too.... but people do it. And they continue to do it until they get caught or quit. Maybe its only a matter of time before this issue is tackled.

Its funny though, Guba has been around for awhile, and people are just now bitching about it??? maybe its more becuase they are now operating an affiliate program???

I think this will also say alot about the people who are promoting this.

I think if people really wanted to do something about this... maybe the best option is class action???

one guy going up against them isnt enough. Maybe they need several companies to hit them all at once???

Some sponsors are allowing GUBA to display their copyrighted material because they do not have to pay a commission to an affiliate when someone types in their URL.

The programs who appreciate the efforts of their affiliates to participate in a partnership will ensure that their content is removed. Those that don't, won't.

Affiliates will stop promoting those sponsors who are not having their content removed. Those sponsors will then need to promote their URL watermarked content themselves.

I concur

Well said!

Two very good points here.

All of the yelling and screaming today is based on a straw-man broken mental model of what GUBA does. People seem genuinely to not understand.

And indeed, where are the lawsuits? So far as I know, there haven't been any. Lots of the folks posting anti-GUBA sentiments today can afford lawyers; if they haven't sued, it's because their lawyers have explained that they would lose. Which means GUBA isn't committing any of the crimes or torts they stand accused of.

I was wrong in the other thread.

I think you're an ass-kissing brown-nosing idiotic accomplice to theft.

I am 99% sure that Forkbeard is a puppet. He's copy'n'pasted his defense of GUBA in every single thread.

However, that does not invalidate his point that GUBA sells a service, not content.

BTW, I am here to clarify. I am not taking a stand-- I want to see more knowledgeable people debating the legality of GUBA's business model.

Regards,
H. Richard

They host the content themselves, which crosses the line between selling a service and selling the content.

In court who ever files will win.

It would be a shut and closed to a done deal faster than Boneprone could put a pancake on his head.

BoneProne loves Pancakes.

Hey nimrod. AKA Mr. Knowledgeable.

If they are storing the content on their own servers and selling access to it that means they are liable for copyright infringement. It's theft. Period.

The last thing I claim to be is knowledgeable. I want more geniuses like yourself to step in here and offer an opinion.

I would like to see "It's theft. Period." offered as the damaged party's opening and closing statement.

Do you consider Akamai to be a drooling band of thieves for caching the web (a subset of which includes stolen content)?

Get back to me when you are done googling for Akamai, cowboy.

Regards,
H. Richard

I wonder who HAS NOT consulted a lawyer about GUBA in the past few years.

It's not like they are the new kid on the block.

Read my earlier post. Any sponsor who allows their content to be displayed on GUBA have chosen to do so because they believe it is in their interests and not because what GUBA does adheres to copyright law.

I could promote GUBA, but I won't because I do not think it would be right.

I am not wasting any more time debating the issue nor am I going to promote any sponsor who allows GUBA to use their content.

Good luck, GUBA. You're going to need it. Either you're no longer going to be able to use stolen content or you are going to have many competitors that use this "business model".

From a legal standpoint, once you remove the images from the usenet posts and present them seperately, you have removed the context and are therefore no better than people who download content from the usenet and open a paysite. You can dress the pig up any way you like, but it is still a pig.

I look forward to every content provider possible sending the C&Ds, and further, sending you client programs C&Ds about allowing your content to be given away or redistributed in this manner.

Alex