ALL Thumb TGPS Are ILLEGAL !!
 

Yep, that's rite, in Apic's eyes that's what they think. The idea is that with pretty much all Thumb TGPs, you have to skim from your thumbs to give out traffic to your trades, thus in doing that, you're illegally using the thumb.

That brings me up to a question. Sponsors that own their own content, do you mind if a webmaster uses your thumbs to promote your galleries even if they skim off a percentage of that traffic to send to their trades ???

What do the rest of you thumb tgp masters think of this ?? Juicy, any words ?? ha ha ha.

I'd say that people who want to shut down sites like this (especially Choker haters) are going to jump on the bandwagon.

Well that's just stupid.

well now im cripwalking while im typing

who the fuck cares what apic thinks, thumbs do not violate your content license and that's all that matters, skimmed traffic or not

I don't skim anything from my tgp. Every click goes to the gallery, and nowhere else.

i tried doing that for awhile. couldnt get my tgp to grow at a decent speed that way though. how do you grow yours that way, if you don't mind me asking?

How does this concern me? I don't have any thumb preview tgps. And it does not matter what APIC says anyway. What matters is the content providers license. APIC does not dictate license requirements to anyone. The license I have for my pics states that I can use the pics to make thumbs and and other domains can use them to link to my galleries or whatever I want them too. People need to examine their licenses VERY CAREFULLY. APIC does not have Carte Blanche to say what a license says is accpetable or not. In a dispute that is what a civil court is for. Do you really think any major content provider would try to shut down sites that do this? If they did who would buy thier content ? Not me.

I really could give a fuck tbh If a sponsor doesnt want me using there galleries to send them traffic then i would be more than happy to pull them off. There loss not mine

Second i do alot more than my tgp's and if i had to pull them done tomorrow due to legal issues , it really would not hurt me financially that much

I don't put any banners at all on it. Surfers bookmark it because they know I won't jerk them around. I have a link list that I use to trade traffic. It grows slow, but the surfers are pretty loyal.

What happend to me is that APIC sent me an email stating that I was illegally using 7 of RK Media (Nasty Dollars) thumbs. What's kinda funny is that of those 7, only 2 of them were actual Nasty Dollar thumbs, while 4 of them were from Bang Bros, and 1 of them was from Extreme Paychecks. I think that they should get their shit straight before they go pointing fingers.

I'm gonna contact Nasty Dollars and see what they say about it, if it'll be ok to do. If not, I guess that I'll have to drop them to make them happy, but i'm sending them a couple of signups per day, so you'd think they'd be happy with that.

lol thats fucked.

Did you fuck E.T. ? :321GFY

What the fuck are you talking about?

Re-read my post. Did I EVER show an opinion on this? Nope. I said that people who dislike these types of galleries are going to jump on the APIC bandwagon.

I DID NOT say I was for or against this.

Is English your second language?

i really doubt is sponsor would care if you are in fact generating signups....to not allow tgps to market with their thumbs is ubusurd and any sponsor who doesnt understand the nature of tgps and their need to trade probably doesnt deserve the traffic anyway...:2 cents:

SORRY MAN.......pressed the wrong one (sorry again)

Last trial:
@Slick
You fucked E.T.

:1orglaugh

ET?

http://www.xtec.es/~xripoll/et.gif

lol exactly. that's why the fuck sponsers make hosted gals to begin with.

BINGO

Hmmmmm, check the Copyright code. There's many fair use exemptions. I wouldn't just take APIC's opinion without checking the relevant code first.

Great point :)

Maybe someone should point that out to APIC, ha ha ha.

Thumbs do not violate copyright.

http://news.com.com/2100-1025_3-1023629.html

http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/20...0211010208.htm

http://www.law.duke.edu/journals/dlt...2dltr0006.html

First off, one shouldn't trust anything they receive unsolicited in email. Much is forged...much is sent in bulk (likely what happened in your situation)...and much is just plain nonsense.

Secondly, contacting Nasty Dollars is a good idea...and if really concerned, either pull the thumbs -or- get a FAX/mailed letter for your files from Nasty Dollars and/or other sponsors granting you permission to use the thumbs/pictures.

Thirdly, use of thumbs to point to the respective image and/or related content is likely fair use...HOWEVER, using someone else's thumbs to point to say a sponsor program or whatever instead, which has not licensed that content, may not be fair use.

Ron

This all boils down to what your content license allows. Most content service have very clearly the amount of domainsyou are allowed to post your pictures on. These must be on the license or they are not valid therefore your license for the content is not valid therefore its illegal.

Also many people use thumbs that "depict" someone who's age is undecernable , this is child porn in the usa. If the age of the person in the picture is not clear , regardless of the age of the person, it can be construed to be cp.

Granted most content providers wont sue you for posting thumbs on a site , but as your license is invalid if you do so, your liable.

Skimming traffic like that is dishonest anyhow. If that dishonesty violates the license you have for a photo, then you shouldn't use that photo in that environment.

APIC needs ppl to harass and need to make bullshit claims or else they have no jobs. who fucking hires these chumps anyhow. are they working for bangbros?

I use 100% hosted gals so I dont give a fuck.

It's just another of example of APIC's god complex gone wrong..

They need to just get their heads out of their asses and learn a few things instead of thinking they're actually somebody..

They proved their ignorance to me when they sent me an email about copyright violations on a domain that I didn't even own, nor ever heard of..
They called me a liar..

I had to laugh as I asked myself how someone so ignorant could be in any position at all.. let alone one of dealing with copyright stuff..

When I proved him wrong, his response was, "Everyone's a tuff guy on the internet"

Gotta love it.. :)

Thats fucking ridiculous!

So long as the pic being used links to the gallery who cares? content providers and sponsors know this is a way of getting traffic on tgp's is to trade off a few hits. big deal. Either way doesn't affect me, when I get my thumb tgp running there will be no skimming anyways

BUT the question is, do you skim, he he he.

You'd think that the sponsors would understand that most thumbnail tgps MUST shave to keep traffic coming in.

Overexposure of pictures, thats why each content provider has different rules regarding using images. Most reputable ones dont allow you to post the pictures on domains that arent on the licence, period. even if it is just a thumb.

Running a thumb tgp is just like any other place you can upload stuff, they can be liable if they display content they dont hold a license too, When a user submits a thumb you have to make it very clear they are the legal owner of the pictures and have the legal right to display them on your domain.

If not you could run a thumb tgp that displays completely unlicensed photos that you hold no rights too just because you didnt submit them.

Nice Site, Melvin the Dude!!!

sine I only post my own stuff and stuff that people have licence to and agree for me to use i'm not concerned.

I don't see the problem with thumb previews, it's "fair use" since the majority of the clicks on a typical TGP (ie 50%+) will go to the gallery that promotes that sponsor.

CJs with no content are another matter, most seem to have stolen images ripped from various places on the net - and they're not all from adult sites. Aside from the issue of content theft there is also the fact that some sites are using images of [clothed] underage girls on a porn site.

<img src="http://www.bodyinmind.com/tubetop009.jpg">

Does this girl look familiar? Maybe the tube top does...

Dear Slick and Others who are sick of APIC's illegal actions:

ICQ me at 336-189-731 for information on a group of people planning to file a lawsuit against APIC/Steve Easton.

I agree with you -- It is my opinion and belief that Steve Easton is desperate for money, so he is continuing to invent these crazy conspiracy theories as to who is breaking 'his' laws and why, in a desperate and I believe pathetic attempt to get people to pay him for his vigilante services.

You all can complain on GFY or you can join up w/ the other people who are doing something about it.

R

If they dont understand that I have to skim to send them the sign ups that I do then they can go fuck themselves.

I can see where they have a point when you buy content and the license is for 1 domain. A thumb TGP means the picture is shown on two domains, the TGP and the gallery.But really, what content provider would care if you used a small thumb from a series for promotion, makes no sense.

it is stupid, it's the biggest bullshit i ever heard

You must not forget without Steve fucking retard Easton there would be no adult internet so everyfore no GFY...he created the whole lot with Al Gore.

Just to play devil's advocate...hear me out ;)

I think the issue at hand is not that you are using thumbs to link to the galleries.

We all know that's legal and does not violate copyright. cite whatever google case here.

However I think the issue is that you ARE "skimming."

In other words you are using copyrighted thumbs to send anywhere but the actual gallery on the domain that the thumb & larger picture are licensed to.

So the google comparison IS NOT ACCURATE. It would be accurate if google was "skimming," as well...but that's exactly what they are not doing.

You are in a sense making money, gaining traffic whatever it boils down to benefitting wihtout paying for that usage...regardless if it's only 50% or 5%.

It's an interesting dilemna. I can see the point he's trying to make even tho' I don't like the guy or his company.

I think if I was running a sponsor, I would be ok with this. This is the time for a sponsor to step in and explicitly state that they are definitely ok with skimmed thumbs using their content...

A. Steve Easton is usually wrong.
B. Not this time. At least he's not COMPLETELY wrong this time.

The problem is in fact with the skim. The customer of the content isn't generally allowed to relicense use of the images to other webmasters. This could be covered in the license agreement. However, if Joe Webmaster submits a gallery to a TGP and provides a thumb to link the galleries, and then the TGP uses that thumb to advertise another website, that TGP is in fact using that content without a license. There has to be a good faith relationship between the content provider and the TGP, which does not generally exist. Furthermore, the TGP owner does not generally even have an idea where that content came from - so why are they allowed to use it as an ad for someone else's site?

Geesh, thanks for all of your comments guys, I appreciate them, it's a good discussion.

As far as people talking about using content and licenses, rite now I'm using all sponsor hosted galleries from sponsors that pretty much have their own content like Nasty Dolalrs, Bang Bros, Extreme Paychecks, Cash From Stars/Teen Mega Cash, so in that case, it's not like they're using licensed content from Matrix or anything like that.

I don't see any problem with the skimming, and NSCash.com partners do it. We do not have a problem with it. I don't see what the big issue is, because the more traffic the affiliate gets, the more signups he could send the sponser, that's the way we feel!

jDoG

popel earning much money with it

As a provider and someone with at least a quarter of a brain I would like to voice an opinion on this.

In regards to skiming i.e. profiting without a license. Nearly every website in the adult industry is for profit in some way. Linking to or getting linked from such a site bennifits both site owners in some way as well.

Now in regards to the thumbnail preview TGP site that skims or not. Shall we keep in mind that nearly every provider has almost the same license terms word for word. So instead of using my license which is very liberal I am going to randomly click one of my provider book marks and check their license real quick. By doing so I quickly find this line in a license "may use up to 10 images from licensed material in banner and promotional webpage design elements on non licensor owned domains".

That line more than covers ones liability for posting to a thumb preview TGP.True some providers do say all material must be hosted on your own website for any usage, generally this will not be the case though. Still read and check your licenses.

The real area of concern for Thumb Preview TGP's is when the snag a thumbnail that shows actual non simulated hardcore sex acts. Yet then it is not APIC's delima but a potential problem with the Justice Department. Since I am damn sure that the TGP owner does not have the title 18 info for every thumbnail image.

since the subject of banners was brought up: were exactly DO banners fall in the discussion? if they want to start "riding" the preview thumbs --wouldn't an advertising banner fall under the same rules? content used in the banner ... served off every webmasters server ( IE --different domains than the ones licensed ) ... shown to make profit. it would seem the arguement theiy're using against preview thumbs could be broadly applied to banners also.

and as far as the content being un-licensed: wasn't lil2rich roasted by Matrix because he didn't have the licenses to the pics that were used in a site design he bought ? in a way --that same arguement could be applied to preview thumbs. the thumb site owner doesn't have the license to the content, but is displaying it. the same arguement Matrix was using could be applied ... no direct license --no showing of the content in any way, shape or form.

This is all covered in the license agreement that you get with your content.

Most content providers dont allow you to use the images for advertising purposes ( i.e. making a page layout )

This leads to overexposure of the content. It devaluates the pics , making them overexposed.

It all boils down to your content license and what they allow. And i personally have never seen one that stipulates, " you may use the thumbnails of your content on an unlimited amount of domains for whatever purpose you may desire. "

pfft, silly webmasters.

porn is illegal for the most part, and youre worried about some assheads with a patent?

'porn

n : illegal activities designed to stimulate sexual desire [syn: pornography, porno]'

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=porn

they are arresting people for selling dildos and hardcore movies all across america and some tie with a patent has you worried?