Private Media Group vs drtuber.com
 

Anther suit against illegal tubes: http://www.xbiz.com/news/137886

Soon to be settled out of court and then Private will be buddies with them.

The thing is none of the operations are never shut down. I thought that was what this infringement litigation was about... to inflict as much financial damage to force a closure. None of that has happened so far as I have seen. They are just rolled into a third party's reselling ad program. Corbin Fisher did the right thing by seizing domains. Enjoy.

these suits are money making schemes... don't you know how things work?

I do... and the clandestine ad networks as well. :1orglaugh

I demand this scheme explained! :)))

please illuminate for us thanks. :)

This does not apply to all cases of course but let's speculate here:
- Sue said tubesite
- Demand said tubesite utilize third party software to remove infringement
- Isolate usage of software only to paying studios
- Make money from those studio ads
- Lock out others with exclusive non-compete agreement

/End illuminate/

Re: clandestine

Internet version of 'war of the worlds'.

Maybe we settle, maybe they start to play ball?

You left out:

- Get some publicity out of the deal
- Have our content removed from the site
- Other tubes will take notice and remove our content
- affiliates sell more memberships to Private.com since there isn't an abundance of free Private content on the tubes
- Tube owners start thinking twice about putting other copyrighted content on their sites

Why not go after the file lockers which inherently damage equally as well? Mainstream broadcast studios are already streaming their content for free online. I guess that wouldn't leave any room for ads then would it? :2 cents:

Anyways good luck on your case.

On a side note, hats off to Randazza Legal Group. They are doing so many things right it's amazing.

Randazza is awesome! :winkwink:

and guess who doesnt steal our content anymore?

Those damn rogue user uploads. :thumbsup

Those damn rogue user uploads. :thumbsup :winkwink:

No they won't settle. Just like xhamster, the owners are from former ussr and have no means of settling out of court. :2 cents:

File lockers are on the to do list and...

Court cases take time; nothing is settled overnight when the Defendants want to fight but there is an actual end. Cases do not go on indefinitely even though it may seem that way.

There are somewhere in the neighborhood of 12 active cases right now with another group on the way.

As far as the comment about owners being from the former USSR and not wanting to settle...see above. There is always an end and they may not like the outcome. Time will show.

:2 cents:

:thumbsup

owners will never think twice, they leave content up until they get caught, then upload it again with another user account.

http://www.xbiz.com/news/137938 I am curious why the whois service was not subpoenad for the registered owner information? I am not a lawyer though. Jason might know further.

Damn that is a huge site. Ive been trying to contact them to buy ads on that site. Huge site..

Sites like Dr Tuber and Xhamster do they not respond to DMCA requests? Why would they ignore them? You would think they would want to avoid this kind of headache no?

No problem so long as they get paid...

You can look at it like prejoins... Sue them, get $1.2 million up front. Sue others get that 4 million up front... over time you make the same millions a year, but now you don't have to create content anymore...

and look at all the cunt sponsors working with drtuber!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

fucking bunch of shit sucking maggots who would do anything for a dollar

papill0n, people go with the flow. I'm not surprised at all.

The most you're going to get out of it is default judgment. Try hard enough and you will get their domain, but its going to be useless after 2 months if you take down whats there now.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh
Dreaming much? 1.2 mil from some guy in Russia ?

Congrats to Private, and wishing you the best possible outcome for this lawsuit :thumbsup

Yes they do but that's not nearly enough to qualify for safe harbor protection. Hence the lawsuit, and the good chances of winning or at least settling for a nice paycheck.

Good of xbiz to provide another backlink to them.

Settled or not, each lawsuit at least makes pirates more cautious and reasonable.

Hotfile and Rapidshare are the most famous examples - after they were dragged through the courtroom they had to implement some anti-piracy measures and both are rarely used by thieves nowadays as the result. Pornhub is another example - after Topbucks sued them there's visibly less of blatant stealing going on at this site now. We used to find new stolen video every day there, now they steal from us about once a month - yes they haven't left their stealing habits completely even after they were sued, and never will, but at least there's less of it now.

In contrast, sites like xhamster and xvideos that weren't dragged into the courtroom yet are running wild and steal enourmous amount of stuff from us and from gazillions of other producers.

I strongly believe that each anti-piracy lawsuit, no matter the outcome, is a good news both for producers and for the industry as a whole.

Lawsuits are about settlements.

I have got a ICQ number for them if you want it.

I think they are based in Thailand does that make it anymore awkward to get them in court or something?

Hamster has been and Private won default judgment because xhamster never replied to court motion. Now what? Site still up and doing business as usual.

They are also about injunctions to make sure the shit doesn't happen again. Where are those?

Who told you they won? Xbiz article reports otherwise:

"CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa ? A federal judge on Thursday ordered Private Media Group to amend its copyright infringement suit against the operators of XHamster, dashing the company's hope for a default judgment against the tube site."

http://www.xbiz.com/news/137938

Hm, I stand corrected. I thought I saw something here about default judgment. :thumbsup

Thanks.

RE: XHAMSTER - The complaint has to be amended to include additional parties who claim to own the site. There is still a motion pending. I think this is one case that will be fought till the end. We are completely prepared to do so if for no other reason then the actions they have taken thus far have earned them the right to be made an example of. My :2 cents:

Settling cases early is the smartest business move and YES it can bring solutions that work for the parties involved. For those who say its just about money...FYI the whole world is just about money...you are in this business for money...but...it is also about making sure that our content is not getting slaughtered! Private or any company that owns rights to intellectual property has to protect their assets. This is worse then someone coming into your home, stealing your stuff and giving it away because they can give it away over and over and over and over again and you, the owner, never see any benefit.


Nautilus - Thank you for the kind words.

so can someone give cliffnotes of how this might affect a webmaster that runs a "user uploaded" site that diligently takes down content within a few days of receiving a dmca notice?

are these types of sites still facing potential lawsuit if their "users" continually upload 'stolen' content even if the webmaster is careful to continually remove content within timely fashion of receiving dmca notices? :question

lawyer question

no surprises a fucking tryhard loser like you would want to work with a bunch of thieves :2 cents:

To fall under safe harbor protection, it is not enough to simply remove stuff upon request. You need to implement some kind of proactive anti-piracy measures such as:

1. Ban repeat offenders.
2. Prevent new uploads of once removed materials using at least file's MD5 signature, or even better digital fingerprinting.
3. Do not reward uploaders (unless they're PROVEN copyright holders).
4. Do not promote infringments, and make it clear that copyright violations are not tolerated.
5. Do not engage in user's activity, unless it is to police for stuff like cp, spam and copyright infringments. Do not have editorial policy (at least do not use stuff for it that wasn't checked for legality) etc. The more neutral your service is, the better your chances are to walk free out of the courtroom.

According to the court cases of the past several years, if you follow somewhere alone those guidelines (as, for example, YouTube does, and more recently RapidShare and Hotfile started to follow them too), you're almost certainly safe from prosecutions by copyright holders.

thanks for the answer

are there any huge porn tube sites that you can think of as an example that at least publicly do all of those things so are pretty much safe?

Redtube and Youporn.

After Manwin takeover things may change at Youporn though, but at least pre-Manwin they were strictly legit, and still are now.

As opposed to a money losing scheme? :1orglaugh

Yes those in business know how money making schemes work.

Let me gues your motive. You want all the big guys who can afford to sue these illegal Tubes to spend a lot of money taking them down (in effect chasing their tails in ever decreasing circles) lose money and all to make life easier for you. Who can't afford to sue them. :1orglaugh

Why not give them some of your full length movies to give away for free.

Can you tell me how you stay withing the DMCA law and don't have child porn on your site?

Can you tell the difference between a 17 year old and a 19 year old?

Do you check uploads to see if the models look dubious?

Without a massive change to the laws governing these sites the problem will remain.

The change that's needed is to make advertisers liable for damages as well as the site owners. Or even sponsors with links.

The whole piracy thing is about making money. It's not what the people like Gideon want to believe it's about. It's about taking other peoples hard work for free and profiting from it. By selling ad space, selling traffic, buying ad space, buying traffic and even being a "partner", someone whose allowed to submit content with a link of watermark to sites with pirated content on.

Those who think the Internet should be free of regulations. Take a long hard look at what that means.