As pornographers, what are your thoughts on file sharing?
 

Do you think the government should crack down on people who share copyrighted material?
Do you think that file sharing helps or hurts your bottom line?
What strategies do you use to deal with the fact that file sharing exists?

Personally, I'm torn on the issue. It pisses me off that so much free porn is available, and I know that there are many people out there who rely only on free porn to jack off.

On the other hand, I have been giving out watered-down versions of my own videos on Kazaa to use as advertisements. However, I have no way of knowing if this helps or hurts sales.

I think it hurts our business to much free shit out there and kids can get their hands on it which is not good. . I think it really didnt hurt the music business. I think what hurts the music business is cd's being too expensive for kids to buy. Also music is now a visual medium which makes it alot more expensive to produce.

No I don't think the government should play any part in what I'm allowed to see, or what I'm allowed to share with other people. I think the government is just looking for ONE more way to control us, and this is one more rule to use to fuck us over in the grand scheme of things.

You could say file sharing helps or hurts, depending on your agenda... but the bottom line is that it's here. There's no way around that. So thinking in terms of what you can do in the meantime, you can simply adapt.

Think DRM.

Yes, there's people that use free porn to get their wack on. But, there's also people that continue to whip out the credit card regardless of free porn. The people that pay, buy memberships over and over. That's just what they do. So I'm not worried.

Ultimately through the distribution of all this free porn, is the method people are using to find YOUR porn. So ultimately if all this other "free porn" didn't exist, I doubt yours would either. So in a way, yes it hurts that there's other free porn out there, but ultimately you wouldn't have any eyeballs looking at your site if it didn't. And either way, there's still the same amount of PAYING eyeballs out there. They'll always continue to pay, for some people that's just what they do.

Either way, you can hop on the file-sharing bandwagon, or you can just get run over by it. :glugglug

Well, there are about 40,000 p2p file sharing applications, and every time one gets shut down a more effective and complicated one is created (ie, compare the sophistication of napster to kazaa).

In short - take the free advertising it will provide. It's like TGP on someone else's bandwidth.

What exactly would the government be able to do about it anyway?

Funny, when these discussions come up, the one thing that's NOT discussed is the most salient one: Is it right to ignore the wishes of the OWNERS of the material.

It's an uphill battle to convince people that a performance or a photo might actually belong to someone the way a car or lawnmower might. When I produce a photo with my camera, the photo belongs to me just like my camera. Anyone can understand that to using my camera without my permission is theft but it seems the dimwitted can't understand that using a photo without my permission is theft also.

I must slightly disagree with you.....I just got my cable modem and kazaa and I know for sure there are a lot of sites that I won't join for research purposes because I have kazaa....now I won't say that I'd be buying full memberships but for sure some sites have at least lost a trial membership...It takes less work and it costs less money to type up some of these sites in the search part of kazaa than to to go the site, pull out my credit card and pay for it...

Copyright's original intention was to protect artists and the modernized "content creators" from people stealing their work and claming ownership.

The mainstream music and entertainment industry has twisted it to being a tool for "protecting profits", not the content creators.

It's not like we have a say either way, so why not look on the bright side.. if your name is attached to all the files being shared, it's free advertising.

That may be, but I don't detect much enthusiasm for protecting photographers, for example, and so people who want to abuse the copyright just use any excuse that comes to mind (like a crooked or greedy entertainment industry) to go ahead and do whatever the fuck they feel like.

If my name were attached, but my customers don't want to buy content with my name attached.

I downloaded 100 songs yesterday! yeah!

Just ask the music industry

the only difference is that porn does not contain named or distinct products like songs

it's alittle more difficult

The bottom line is nobody can stop file sharing. Nobody, not even the government. There's just no way. There's nothing stopping me from getting whatever I want, whenever I want... there will always be Usenet, there will always be P2P networks that are unknown to the government... and in the future there will always be better and more innovative, and more efficient ways to share files with everyone.

You're not going to create any more laws, rules or regulations in any government entity that is going to stop the process at this point.

It comes down to this: Either you adapt, or you're fucked.

To deal with file sharing some broadband ISPs in Canada are handing out piece of shit stripped down GVC modems that will disconnect you if you exceed 10 in/out connections.

Or, the other monopolies are starting to implement bandwidth caps.

ISPs can choke this off in a hury if they wanted to.

I think once they drag a few crying college kids in handcuffs and make a big show. It will affect file sharing.

No, it's not a little more difficult. You can name porn just like you can name anything else. Anyone not watermarking their videos and their pictures before putting them on their site is doing themselves a huge disservice. Surfers WANT this. They WANT to know where to get more. Paying surfers want to pay... but they can't do it if they can't find your site.

I don't think it's a big deal... you look at the most effective ways to market that crowd, just like tgp, cj, avs, any other type of surfer.

Nothing will ever stop Joe FREE Porn Surfer from getting his shit for free. People that get their shit for free will never pay, and they never will. Slapping cuffs on them isn't gonna make them pay, and society seeing them get locked up isn't going to make people pay either. You're not LOSING sales necessarily to free porn, because there will also always be people that will pay for it regardless of also being able to get it for free.

Sure, I can't stop it, so the only approach left is the appeal to people's conscience and their sense of right and wrong. I think we all know in our hearts that if we could steal whatever we wanted, that wouldn't make obtaining things that way right.

The thief is someone who's inauthentic, and every theft is a vote for a world that embraces thievery.

It's a sad bird that beshits it's own nest.

You are telling me, with a straight face, that most (or even quite a few) file sharers are just looking for which sites to subscribe to? Pardon me, but that doen't pass the giggle test.

It is not free. First rule of economics "There is no such thing as a free lunch."

Let's say If I pay $500 for models and $500 for production (Photographer, Editing, Etc...). I am at a balance of -$1000. Some kid downloads the vid off kazaa. He is now +$Whatever the video is worth to him. I am still down $1000. He is not going to go to any sites, because he will just download more porn free.

Am I worried about it, No. Mainstream White Middle Aged American does not file share. He will still pay to look at teens sucking cock. Kids will either download free shit or whack off to a TGP. Such is life.

LOL You're right, they're not LOOKING for sites to subscribe to, they're looking for free porn. If there wasn't free porn there, they wouldn't be there. But keep in mind, Tom, that these people on Kazzaa and Napster, or whatnot... are NOT your customers. These people are there for the free stuff and that's it, they've never paid for porn and they never will. So you haven't lost anything by your content passing through their hands, you're only more likely to be seen by that one guy that happens to REALLY like your shit, and go to your site to sign up for more.

likely watermarking isn't going to do anything, for example it does not stop people from downloading movies or songs for free, despite there being a known producer and copyright holder

and they are too many to be sued by the copyright holder

as far as naming porn, it's more difficult, unless it's a celebrity

ie; blonde_girl_with_really_wet_pussy_and_big_hooters0 1.jpg

despite the long name description, there is really no way of knowing what it is, until you download it, and look at the picture

as opposed to

lordoftherings.mov

People say the same thing about TGP's. Yet, I'm sure many people here can vouch that they make good money from TGP's.

Oh wait, they're just free loaders with no intention of ever buying... right...

My friends are heavily into music. They hear a new band, and they want the CD. They don't buy CD's anymore, simply because they don't have to. Kazaa saves them big bucks.

Would they buy the CD if Kazaa didn't exist? Absolutely.

It's not about whether they can identify the girl, it's about identifying the site the material came from. It's about helping them discover where they can go to get more of this good shit they just downloaded. Like I said before, it doesn't matter if they're getting it for free. Joe FREE Porn wasn't going to pay for it either way. People just need to stop fretting about lost sales because these aren't lost sales, these are just freeloaders doing what freeloaders do. The most you can do is either invest in DRM, or watermark your pictures and videos to steer them in your site's direction if they might want some more.

Where in the world did you get this from??? Copyright law was created so that artists would be able to maintain COMPLETE and TOTAL control of the work that they create. That certianly INCLUDES the rights to ALL PROFIT generated from that work. Profit is TRUELY a central point of copyright law. In addition, copryright law was created so that artists would have complete and ultimate say so as to how, when, where, and why, their work was distributed.

As for the original question, yes, I think government should step in and stop the illegal distribution of other people's property. They already do that on MANY levels. Robbing a bank is illegal. Stealing a car is illegal. Committing fraud is illegal. Forgery is illegal. All of those involve the misappropriation of someone elses property and the government acts to stop that every single day. Would you have them back away from that as well?

All of these examples involve significant financial loss and are illegal because of the damage it creates. Having your picture passed around a million times by a bunch of freeloaders that would NEVER pay for it anyway isn't anything that would qualify as being a "loss".

So you want the government to create more laws against this type of thing? Do you really THINK a law is going to stop this from happening? Is a law going to stop me from walking next door and handing a disk to my neighbor? No. Or how about photocopying a Newsweek article for a friend at work? Do you think it would be such a wonderful thing for the government to then have permission to come slap the cuffs on you simply because you wanted to share something? Of course not.

I don't think we need to be giving the government any more reason to be violating our privacy, and be censoring what we can or cannot see, or do... or share with other people. That's absurd.

As long as someone else isn't profiting off the sweat of my labor, I have no problem with file sharing.

they will never stop trying to protect ?'s thats a given, should they? no.

? is good for the artist.

You don't think the illegal distribution of my content involves significant financial loss? You don't think that when I shoot a set of say 100 images of a model, and within days that entire set is on the p2p networks for millions of people to obtain free of charge instead of buying from me , involves significant loss? It absolutely does. If you can't see why then you don't understand how business works.

Photocopying newsweek is illegal. Handing a disc to your neighbor is illegal. Comparing that to the p2p networks is a horrible analogy. That is like comparing apples and oranges. Someone else may not be profiting off the sweat of your labor, but you are not profiting anywhere near what you could be or should be from the sweat of your labor either. That to me is the same as taking money out of my pocket.

Yes, I know they're all illegal. But this was my point, was your neighbor ever going to buy that Newsweek anyway? NO. Was he ever going to go out and buy that software you just gave him for free? NOPE.

Making this analogy to P2P is exactly the same thing. They're both examples of people getting something for nothing, that they wouldn't have paid for either way. Freeloaders are freeloaders by nature. No law is going to stop it, it's only going to make life hard for you and everyone around you... and give the system one more way to screw you over.

I haven't lost anything? Do you realize that a person shopping for content on my site will look at a girl and say to himself, "Geez, why should I pay $xx.xx for a set of Helga? I just saw this entire series up on JoeBob's Teen Forum (just to choose a random example)." Don't kid yourself it doesn't hurt me.

And I point out once again, that you also don't want to talk about the issue of property and instead want to convince me that theft benefits me. When did that become YOUR decision?

I'm curious as to how you know people wouldn't buy things?

Ok, fine, maybe they wouldn't buy it. Then I guess they don't need it, do they? Fuck 'em.

I bet (and I think most people who are honest about it will confirm) that the average guy who is downloading shitloads of content not only doesn't care what source it came from, but wouldn't know how to read a watermark even if he knew such a thing existed, which he probably doesn't.

In fact, I bet the sad thing is many of these guys are just wasting tons of bandwidth on material they're not even going to look at and will end up deleting someday to make room on their HD's.

That's right: if the central reason for copyright was to protect creative people, the reason for protecting them was to guarantee them the benefit of their investment of time, money, and effort in their work.

I actually have a serious problem with any site other than the sites I've licensed distributing my content. I'll send my lawyers after them in cases like that. I never said it was right for OTHER sites to use my content with an obvious interest in profiting. I'm merely saying I don't think the government should be all gung-ho about shutting P2P's down, because creating laws such as those create more problems than they solve. I don't think I need the government in my face telling me what I can and cannot do, or who I can or cannot share my stuff with. That's my decision.

i think sometimes content is like music in regards to the more you listen to a song you can either play it more or be done with, same can be said for content, its hot when its new and no one else has it then its on all the tgps and frontdoors then the value drops.

You're not thinking on the bright side here. There is no way to prevent it. Period. So why worry? It's called getting your name out to the masses. Companies spend millions of bucks every day just to get their name out to the world. If your shit if floating around to hundreds of users and it's good shit, then it's all about name recognition from there.

I say you can complain all you want about some things, but it wont change them. The key to everything like that is to look for the positives. Slap your name on everything and get some word of mouth going, bro!

One of the fundamental differences between P2P as regards photo/video content and music is that who did a popular song is well-known. A lot of photo/video content is fairly anonymous when presented on Kazaa, in a newsgroup, or on Joebob's Teen Forum. It's just some girl showing off her body or some couple copulating. Even if watermarked, the average person would still be clueless as how to read a watermark.

i used to be a on free lunch.

:(

Any of my customers here actually want me to slap my name on my content? (Not to mention that with something like 75,000 photos for sale, that's not a very practical solution for me at this point.)

This is exactly what I'm talking about. You can't stop it, you might as well use it to your advantage.

Thanks for completely missing the point. I'd reiterate but I smell a troll.

When I referr to a watermark, I'm referring to the label in the bottom right hand corner of the video that says "StudioContent.com" or "Unseenworld.com". Joe surfer likes to know where to get more of the good stuff.

There is always a way to stop it. If someone can come up with a way to do it, then someone can come up with a way to stop it.

Get your name out to the masses? Ask your boss how many CD's I have found with Airwood content, minus the airwood copyright notice or url?? Plenty. It's easy to crop images, its easy to change the names of images on p2p networks. Very little of what I have seen on the p2p networks has any url or name on it anywhere.

But my customers (or many of them) would not want me to tell them.

i smell something too.

And how would a content provider apply a watermark to the work that he sells?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! You smell a troll? Good comeback. As I recall, that used to be the standard response on the newsgroups when the content pirates couldn't think of anything intelligent to say.

Please, reiterate.

Porn is getting the same way as the music industry. Rather than working with and trying to use a good marketing tool people would rather bitch and sit back, watching their own profits drop lower each day. However I suppose the music industry still outdoes porn on the stupidity front in that it will also spend millions going to court to be no better off even when they win their case. It's not going anywhere so work with it rather than fighting and bitching about it.

What for the most part stops signups these days is not tools like kazaa, but people failing to evolve as the Internet and porn markets do and totally failing to use them in a profitable way. If you sit back and stagnate and/or spend all your time bitching about something rather than working with it of course sales will drop.

So are you ok with the fact that the p2p network itself profits?