My question about GUBA involves Verisign
 

how the fuck does Verisign allow this company to process with them?

fuck suing Guba - I' thinking about sueing Verisign for allowing processing on a company that doesn't have licence or agreement to use it's content. and has MINE on it.

always sue the person with the money.

Verisign - do you care to comment on this. I'd like an answer.

I have sceen EXCLUSIVE sleazydream content on guba, as well as tons of other companies and I know I never gave them a release or permission to use my content and put it on their servers and RESELL it to their members.

The only answer i can see if Verisign wants to keep their reputation is to pull their account. I assume their terms and conditions - possibly not but I'm assuming here - doesn't allow clients to use content that they do not have licence or permission to use.

Class action? I'm in. :)

your content on there too?

I want names who's behind Guba. That shit ain't normal smell like some fucked up operation.

they are def taking "fair use" a bit far by hosting the images and selling memberships while showing/hosting copyrighted material as "examples".

Just to clarify they arent actually hosting the "end product" ( as far as i know ) just the xamples, much in the same fashion google images does.. the difference is how they sell the memberships in conjunction with those displays.

I dont think nearly as many people would be pissed off if they simply offered guba for what it is , but the whole "selling" part of guba is the ability to search for copyright material and see it before you buy..

If they simply sold it as a program to access usenet easier , they would have no buyers or alot less anyways. By hosting and displaying copyright material as "examples" of what you will get when you buy a membership , it makes it an easy sell .

Please fucking sue them. Everyone is talking about it, just fucking do it and watch as you accomplish the same thing as sending a C&D. A slap on the wrist and an order to take your shit down, pretty much what a friendly phone call would accomplish come to think of it. GUBA cannot police every damn item on newsgroups. Does this mean that no company in the world can start the service they have? Nope it just means you're an idiot.

and COMPLETELY illegial

Yep. It's like if Google started to charge for their images search.
Guba's been around for a while so how come peeps are just now getting upset about it?

the GFY nick is lesbodojo i think...

there are legal ways to boycot a company beyond suing too.

all you have to do is hit them in the wallet.

http://pub.pictureview.com/pvidx/gro...-Alpha100.html

PictureView has been selling memberships for years. Everyone's content is on there too.

They use the "we're just providing a viewer to access newsgroups" cop out.

:1orglaugh

1) Hatred aimed at Guba isn't a new thing. Its been going on for years. We've had altercations with them dating as far back as the late 90s.

2) People are upset today in particular when GFY chose to skin the forum with their ad - thus putting it all in our faces.

another company we need to shut down.

just cause someone else is doing it doesn't make it right.

Ah, missed seeing their skin. What were they thinking?! haha

Probably falls under non compliancy with 2257. Makes ya wonder how they got an account in the first place.
GUBA oughtah be turned off like a long ass time ago.

So clearly dudes with money got to together and planned this out.
To steel from hard working people of course.

When you RE-ENCODE content off the newsgroups into Ipod and PSP formats... that's when they aren't just providing access to the newsgroups anymore. There's NO defense to them re-encoding videos into another format. That's theft... plain and simple.

That's because it's the best copout to use from a legal standpoint. Everyone here acts like these people were sitting around in their moms basement coming up with this shit. Don't they think they have lawyers too? GUBA has tens of thousands of members, I'm pretty sure they welcome any knucklehead suing them over something they pay people to stay on top of 24/7.

http://video.google.com

I haven't really checked but don't they encode their own shit?

Chadgini, can I ask you a question? What is your stake in this issue? You've taken a rather rabidly opposing viewpoint here in defence of GUBA, I'm wondering why.

to be honest i don't give a shit about anyone else.

but i want my shit off there - and i'll be a hella pain in the ass to them till it's removed. in and out of court - all legally.

videos on google are manually submitted by the copyright holders and nobody else is allowed. If notifed they will remove copyright material, furthermore they aren't giving away part of the video and selling the rest..

Those videos are submitted by the copyright holders.

Who can upload a video?

The Google Video Upload program lets anyone who owns the necessary rights (including copyrights, trademarks, rights of publicity, and any other relevant rights for your content) submit videos electronically to Google Video.

To learn more about the Google Video Upload program or to sign up, please visit https://upload.video.google.com/.

http://video.google.com/support/bin/...204&topic=1488

Yep. :(

As you replied to my post in the other thread, I'd be interested in why this is as well :winkwink:

has anyone written or called verisign about this?

I told you about it when I was in Winnipeg. It was just a matter of time before it got the public's attention. I imagine GUBA's wallet is pretty deep by now, after all, they don't have content to license :)
WG

Perfect10 already tried this approach to sue CCbill/VISA for processing for websites that were using his content... and lost. Court found that the credit card processor was not liable.


Fight the been there, done that!

I have absolutely 0 stake in the issue. Was working all day and came to the board to see 5000 retarded threads about a retarded subject and figured I'd say my piece. This is the most hypocritical bunch of people I have ever seen in my life, hell just look through the signatured of any thread and see how many people respect copyrights around here. Same goes for 2257 with pr0n posted daily and nobody crying about it. It's retarded to get all in a huff about an 8 year old problem that nobody has or will do shit about.

I imagine that much of the content I produced from '99 to 2002 is on there as well. Haven't looked, but since it's been up on my former client's website for 5 years now I wouldn't be at all surprised to find some of it there. Of course, I already made my money from it, but that former client of mine might be a tad pissed to find any part of that rather expensive custom conent he purchased back then was being used by GUBA, with them charging fees to see them.

Oh good heaven's, am I starting to lean towards one side of this argument?? :(

How many people have sued google for copyright infringement and won monetary settlements? I figure you for the guy that would know that. Also, why doesn't google and every other big site stop, surely all these "lawsuits" are causing them trouble. :upsidedow

We welcome you in to the light of reason :winkwink:

bump for a "good" idea

GUBA would probably tell you to send them a DMCA notice of your exact content for the takedown (http://www.guba.com/copyright.sgba)

This means that it is your job to document every instance of your copyrighted material (assuming you filed copyrights, which many people don't. $30 or so application fee and a CD and you could do it).

IMHO, guba has lost their "ISP" or "online service provider" exemption that they feel are covered as being a "conduit" to newsgroups, when they take the videos and re-encode them into other formats.

This is clearly copyright infringement in its purest sense.

There is also a big difference between being an "ISP" and requiring the end-user to use their own newsgroup reader and having a web-interface.. but that's all just opinions, since it seems no one has taken it up with them legally in court so far (or that i am aware of).

You can't sue for damages unless you have filed for copyrights. You could DMCA-to-death any company that has your content, and if it's not taken down "in a reasonable period of time", then you would have legal recourse, but DMCA has put the responsibility on the copyright owner to police their content when they see it outside of the licensing agreements.

Being in California, Guba could have some serious trouble with CA laws about unfair business practices, where they are able to distribute content, that other websites have to license (hence all the many threads that have sprouted up since the skin went up).... but what do i know, i'm not a lawyer.



Fight the .02!

Listen if you are serious. Talk to your lawyer or one on this matter.

Before your shit even goes to court they will apologize and remove that content.

Thats only a few pictures out of its 4million dattbase.

You think all 1000+ webmasters are going to sue.

Just my :twocents

Talk to a lawyer

Most of those are considered "fair use" , that being a parody of the original work. Offering copyright material as "examples" of what you will recieve by paying is alot different that someone using a picture of jean claude vandam in their sig..

Using copyright material as a "parody" or "news story" has and is considered "fair use" , what guba is doing is very different..

Obviously its a "shady area" of the law or they wouldnt exist (guba ), but questioning it shouldnt make everyone hypocrites.

You see nothing wrong in this ? http://com.webspacemania.com/playboy/

Similar cases have been taken to court, and google seems so far to be exempt (tho interesting approach by Perfect10, rather than suing google, they get websites de-listed), because they provide the thumbnail view from the original site (and linking to it), and don't do any conversions of the image.

This EFF page is good reading on this subject about google:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Linking/199603...statement.html

http://www.eff.org/IP/Linking/Kelly_v_Arriba_Soft/


Fight the cliff notes!

You know, there is hypocrisy in many arguments and issues in and out of this industry. I acknowledge that there is some in this particular issue, but I'm unconvinced that that justifies what GUBA is apparently doing.

If something is wrong with a company's method of operation, doing nothing about it and ignoring it simply for the sake of not being labeled a hypocrite is probably the thing that's more useless. If some want to at least try to take action how is that any skin off your ass?

Yes, I am still seeking enlightenment here. :D

That fair use hurts peoples feelings just like the unfair use everyone here is so morally against all of a sudden. Just ask teh star wars kid.

All of which goes to say - the logistics alone of mounting a legal attack would be next-to futile.

Even *IF* you had filed your copyrights with the Library of Congress, laboriously combed through the entire Guba catalogue, carefully recording and matching stolen content......you'd still be left with the financial burden of hiring lawyers, flying back and forth to court dates, spending an enormous amount of lost production time attending court, etc.

Who in their right mind would even briefly consider that as an option?