If Guba is stealing content ....
 

...then why hasn't anyone shut them down? I know they been around for years and no one has shut them down yet. So why are they still up if they are stealing content. I know a few webmasters and getting mixed opinions on the whole thing. Too me if they are doing this they should of been shut down by now.

Gary

Loopholes. For the most part, a lot of this is still uncharted Legal territory

someone needs to grab them by the balls

Gary, Guba made the mistake this week - they exposed themselves to the people they steal from.

There have been any number of "usenet resellers" out there that have sat very close to the border line of copyright violation. They come and go like the breeze.

Guba stands out because unless I truly misunderstand how their product is working, they appear to strip the newsgroup material away and they store only the images and videos. Further, it would appear that they are performing format conversions now to allow this material to be moved to ipods and PSPs.

I think they may have upgraded or changed their interface in the last year, and that their technology might have moved since then.

I would truly be interested to see what they lawyer has to say about all this.

Alex

Ok understand that. Ok another question. If sponsor A provides me content to promote them with and I use that content to promote sponsor B then I am clearly breaking the TOS of sponsor A. Isn't this along the same lines as what Guba is doing basically except they are selling memberships to their own site? Just trying to understand this.

Gary

They're not intentionally stealing it. It just appears on their servers, gets transcoded, etc..

this story is longer and older than even this message board. ^^what he said too.

See if everyone can understand this..

Newsgroups are legal, Guba is legal. Anyone wants to take them to court will lose. Guba is one of 1000+ newsgroup feed sites, all legal in the United States as long as they follow a few guidelines.

Hell, they said they would filter your content if you asked.

If you want to waste your money and sue Guba, I can provide you a list of 1000+ other domains that steal your content daily too.

One more thing to note, newsgroup feeds are pretty common in paysites. Funny that I saw someone bitching in another post about Guba yet I know for a fact they have news services within their own member areas.

This isn't drama anymore, it's gay. Move on.

my uncle has a bunch of stolen tvs in the garage. He didn't steal em, someone else did who was a member to a tv club. you want one? nothing wrong with you having one, you didn't steal it right?


more people need to understand there is letter of the law and there is just plain wrong. the same laws that are enacted to protect copyright holders are the ones being manipulated by companies like Guba. Loopholes make it ok right? As long as they jump through their little hoops?

me thinky that the online adult community isn't going to go for that. content dirves the very backbone of this business, more Gubas = less revenue for paysite owners. Letter of the law correct doesn't make it right or demand that producers of content have to accept them and get fucked. Thats the facts, and they are undisputable.

By removing the harsh learning curve it takes to leech free shit from the newsgroups they are accomplices to accelerating the decline of paysites utilizing their little loopholes.

I'll take on please, I need one in my computer room.


:winkwink:

hahaha, this coming from the guy who claims to own google search engine result pages on generic terms.

you got the hookup on plasmas airek? i have my homeboy network shopping card.

FAR bigger problems in this business than newgroup archivers.

ronnie

I didn't claim to own it, I said I branded it, which I did, that's a fact. Such power to pull that out of your ass.



Yeah, I do kinda know a lot about them, I once owned one. Notice, how many people/owners don't bitch, just the ones without newsgroup feeds bitch.

I took mine down about 3 years ago, after the people started to do some nasty tricks and staying up on the filters was a huge bitch. They are 100% legal. Newsgroups are legal, newsgroup feed sites are legal, they have been to court and back and they all still stand.

Newsgroup sales, single days.

69 1:316 $387.89
40 1:555 $294.44
62 1:350 $489.34
79 1:298 $469.29


My thing is, if you don't want traffic from them, ask them to filter your content. Otherwise, it's free CREDIT CARD holding traffic.

Newsgroups have an amazing source of traffic if you can work within its rules.

The simple fact of the issue:

Those who stand up and defend Guba's copyright infringement practices are the same people who don't invest their own blood, sweat, tears and money in creating original content.

Ok, here is the deal. Since everyone involved with these newsgroup-interface companies (like GUBA) keep pushing the point that it's completely legal, I would like to see one of them start posting ripped DVD (MPAA) Movies and Music (RIAA) CD's. They ARE out there on the Usenet, so why not offer access to them as well? I'll tell you why. Because everyone involved knows that the MPAA and RIAA would rip them a new asshole with all of the piracy suits and would shut them down before you could shit yourself (same way that got many of the BT sites shut down). The bottom line is that these companies think that it's ok because none of the porn companies have gotten together and thrown BIIIIIG money at a lawsuit (not to mention, many don't have the pull that the MPAA and RIAA have).

hahaha. no it was an example.

Simply put you're very, very wrong and have no clue on the subject it seems, as with many posting about it or even involved in it. The stuff Guba is doing is NOT legal, however to prove that point would cost far more than probably any of those affected would be able to afford. There's a huge difference between legal and simply too expensive to prosecute. Guba are NOT simply providing access to newsgroups - try reading the threads or even joining them and seeing for yourself.

For fucks sake you only have to look at something like Napster which was pulling FAR less crap than Guba as far as copyright goes. The difference is the companies Napster hit had almost bottomless purses as far as court action went. Not true of the companies Guba are hitting.

But then that's the way of things these days. People get away with all sorts of dodgy crap simply because they know that nobody can afford to stop them. Acacia was a great example although in the end they hugely underestimated some of the more professional companies in the Biz which will find to their cost soon it seems.

wonder what norm from perfect10 has to say about guba?

If more people made $10k per month with Guba, they'd probably fiercely support it too. However, wouldn't all that effort talking others into pushing them too, beging to affect your own Guba income ?

I think what's in order is a class action lawsuit, alot of content producers do joint content promotions and shoots, so I don't see why some of them can't get together and a file a class action against these scumbags.

I saw alot of comedy central, mtv, conan obrien, entire movies, etc on their search.

check this url

http://www.guba.com/image/Erotica/Am...s/Feb20/page36

isn't that some of teen revenue's content the milton twins and hrmm whats that watermark on the bottom of the images there.... and when you click on an image what happens they show you a thumb of someone else's content not theirs even if it is promo content to promote they're service...

i have a bunch of other urls that were brought to my attention of jayman cash content and a few other sponsors...

this is absolutely ridiculous... anyway you shake it it's thievery

Tipsy, actually, it wouldn't be very hard at all to show that Guba is "reselling images".

Just get a court order to look at the data structures on their servers. Unless the posts and images are integral (IE: they have preserved the usenet) then they are violating copyright.

Selling access to it online would be no different from burning it onto a DVD and selling it.

Once you remove the usenet context and materials, it isn't just "providing usenet access" but it is harvesting and reselling the material you take from the usenet.

Sponsors and content providers around here would be really smart to take action against Guba and their ilk.

Alex

the least valuable content producers can make gubas members area, the least amount of buzz it will be to people, and they will get lesser volumes of traffic because the perceived value of their members area will go way down if everyone makes them filter your content out.

mark my words. fight this new trend or end up with 30 gubas by the end of the year. there are some really smart people watching just waiting to see if everyone forgets about it. identify the trends that can be harmful to content producers or its the end of ya.

I think the Guba discussions are necessary. The questions need to be asked, and the reasoning worked through to see how it's outcome will be. A lot of people take their stances based on their income from Guba more than anything else. If I promote them, and was making $10k/month from them I might sing a different tune too, so there's the perspectives of each viewpoint to consider. From what I've seen so far, Guba makes it incredibly easy to promote almost anything you want whether it's mainstream or adult, and they have some great content (altho it's not theirs, it's not mine either).

Do the sponsors mind ? If they don't care that I can push their content with Guba and convert it better and retain longer than I can with their own paysites, why should I mind ? Thoughts ?

yeah it is I checked that all out too, there's TONS of their content there, as well as jaymans (sent him an email already), bangin becky, katvixen, and I think alicia and ashley, also found some from sterlingcash and let them know about it too.

It's not so much that it would be hard it's simply the cost involved. If Guba have any sense (although I'm willing to admit they may not) then they already have GOOD lawyers. If so then any possible action could take a long, long time to drag through the courts even if it appears clear cut on the surface.

However, all that said Guba could simply have bad legal advice and/or not very deep pockets themselves having spent so much on advertising. Either way it'd be interesting to see somebody with the balls and money to pursue this through the courts.

One of the main points remain valid though - the way that they are operating is far from legal and they can't simply be compared to yet another shadey company giving less restrictive/easier newsgroup acces than that offered by ISPs. The service they give certainly seems to go far beyond that. Because nobody has taken action against them yet does not make them legal - a handful of people seem to get confused on that point.

no no no, those aren't Guba numbers :)

Those are from our own newsgroup postings, nothing to do with Guba.

A comment which is self-servingly obtuse at best...

Whatever the legalities of signing up affiliates to promote a source of (largely) stolen content, making it more accessible, etc., doing so runs contrary to the interests of everyone not profiting directly from such activities.

Take competitiveness to its absolute conclusion and we would all end up promoting one sponsor. If that sponsor were, for illustration, Lightspeed, most of their affiliates might not be making much, but Lightspeed would be booming. However, long before we could all get around to promoting Guba, they would have gone out of business with no new content to offer. With no pay sites to loot, Usenet groups would be reduced to third-rate magazine scans and DVD screencaps.

In reality, we will never get more than a few steps along that road, even if Guba manages to become the most successful sponsor out there. But the fact remains that whatever success Guba does have encouraging surfers to be satisfied with stolen content, is damaging to all other sponsors and their affiliates: in other words, to the vast majority of visitors to boards like this.

That is what made it particularly insulting to visit GFY yesterday and see Guba's name plastered all over it...

Look, I'm not defending them. I haven't ever seen how they set it all up to be honest. However, I know first hand they are legal as long as you follow a few rules. Things like the posted header, posters email, and body, at least through a text link and you filter the content.

Even if Guba doesn't do that way, people will still lose because it's all from the newsgroups and they can state, once they contacted us we removed the content and added them to the filters, just like an ISP.

These sites have been to court before, a few times. Napster and Guba are on different playing fields. Napster is people uploading and trading known stolen software, music, etc.. Guba provides a service that can read from many of locations, every ISP has one, many have readers like Guba.


Someone above said we need to stop Cuba before more open, Cuba is just in the mix with 1000's of others.

Newsgroup services like Guba have been around for 10 years. I can name owners of programs that own a few.

How do you know which sale are from NG's ?

bullshit how can they get away with playing the negligence card... they know what they are doing and thats how they attract members to their service.. i doubt the would have as many members if they dropped all the porn newsgroups... and it's not just porn it's warez, movies, music... BULLSHIT :)

Thedoc - if guba just offered newsgroup access, there would be less issue.

They don't.

The exercise editorial control. They filter, extract, manipulate, compile, organize, and transcode content without permission. Because they pick and choose what they are offering, they are not offering unfiltered usenet access, but in fact are taking the content and reselling it away from the usenet, and just hanging the usenet name on their business hoping nobody comes knocking at the door.

I suggest you go join Guba and see - and compare that to your ISP's newsgroup access (which many ISPs have completely dropped).

Alex

I tried to make that point but still he rambled on with obviously no research or knowledge of the subject he's posting about at which point I gave up. Hmmm...yep, just re-read my posts and I was very clear on that point. At that stage it seemed better just to let him ramble. :winkwink:

Here is a better way to put it.. Guba isn't the only site, doing it EXACTLY how they do it, even if they don't post the headers & such. These sites have been taken to court before, they win. The service isn't Napster, or open content theft like people think. You are so right, take them to court. It's $20k just to walk into a court room, once they filter you rcontent out, your fucked in court. So good luck, I know 100% first hand about these sites. Ask a few owners how and why I know..


RawAlex, the filters is what helps make it legal, sad as it is.

Tipsy, get a group together and take them on. Only only way to beat sites like Guba is to fight all the way to the Supreme Court to make them rule on these services and ng services. Until then, these sites will stand legal, even if they bend the rules. Even though I think the SC did make a ng rulling a few years back.

if all the sponsor's got together and went after guba it would probably be more effective as they'd have less content to push on their service... i doubt they could filter out all of a sponsors content... how would they go about doing such a thing? by filtering the images by filename... i'm sure a lot of the images filenames are changed... and i doubt all the images are tagged with any text related to the sponsor...

Landing pages :)

They can't filter it all, even more so when the people posting know about filters and do things to be sure they beat the filters.

However, they only have to "try" and filter the content.

Not necessarily true.

I didn't think I was affected by this issue, and I have my hands really full with other things, so I had reserved judgement on the issue. Then, last night, I did a search and found almost my entire member's area..not from my current paysite, but from my old AVS site. So, clearly I needed to give the issue higher priority.

I slept on it, and I decided to contact Kathleen about it. I asked about removing my content, and she not only did it immediately, but she blocked the main search term associated with my content. She was prompt, professional, and wonderful to deal with.

Now, of course I hate the idea of my content being out there for free..but the fact is, it is *still* out there. removing the images from Guba does not remove them from the newsgroups. So I have a few options..I can police the newsgroups myself, use DRM on my content, or pay/reward someone to police the groups for me. I am a single mom to three, and to be honest, I don't think I can cram much more work into my day...certainly not the amount of work it takes to police the newsgroups. DRM is a possible solution, but I know that it will likely affect my retention, and that will affect the affiliates that are counting on me to ffer their traffic a product that they will want, and want to keep...so it's not an easy decision there. That leaves the third option, which is what I've decided.

I can post a sample here and there myself on the newsgroups-just like I do pic posts and such, and I can add that if anyone reports unauthorized pics of me being posted, I will give them a short-term free membership. Maybe it will work, maybe it won't. But I feel it's a more proactive approach then complaining. Your content being on Guba is a symptom of a deeper rooted disease that only YOU can solve. It's your content, so protect it at the root of the problem, or use the problem to your advantage by releasing teaser content yourself, and/or working closely with Guba to ensure only authorized content is in their database/system (they've proven to me, at least, a willingness to do so)...people who have joined Guba have proven they will buy memberships. Turn lemons into lemonade and use that to your advantage.

I do really understand why so many of you are pissed...I hope it doesn't sound like I am dismissing your concerns. But the fact is, they are within the law, and you can either complain and stomp your foot about it, or do something about it. I choose to take action, and to work the system to my own advantage.:2 cents:

Nice post... Can't really solve content theft though with pictures though when people join your site and just rip it.

Guba is nothing really, message board rippers are WAY worse. They rip your entire members areas, every picture, every video, every udpate, and post it on locked boards. However, both do make sales.

i smell a new business model.

I really don't think you do.

For whatever reason and however you did it, you rationalized the need to check and contact a commercial site before its operators would remove links to content which they have to know is copyrighted. That they do not host the content itself is in this context irrelevant: they base their entire business on easing access to content which you and others paid for, and compete with you not only for sales but also for affiliates.

Just because the law may not have caught up with technology and just because it likely isn't worthwhile chasing individuals who pass your content around, should not make for complacency towards those who build their businesses this way. And it doesn't matter whether someone is a sponsor, a content producer, or an affiliate, the nature of this business is such that most of us will always make our money promoting legitimate content. As such, we are damaged by the likes of Guba and even if we cannot stop their activities, it is short-sighted in the extreme to support them or excuse them in any way.

Well said, although I quite disagree with the bulk of it.

Again, this solution places the onus on us as content producers to proactively police our own content - at our expense. It puts the burden of responsibility on the victim and seeks to lessen or absolve the perpetrator of the infringement and wrongful redistribution of copyrighted intellectual property.

I am glad to hear you were able to reach an amicable solution for yourself through your contact with this organization. Unfortunately, after 10 years of production that includes upwards of 60-70k pics with a wide variety of filenames, sets and series in many different genres and categories - it would be next-do impossible for us to establish the extent of our content on Guba in a similiar manner. Our images have been posted and reposted on Usenet for nearly a decade by others. The logistics simply make it an impossible task to track.

And you are in error about them being "within the law". Although I'm not a lawyer, I've had many years of dealing with copyright laws and issues through our own company lawyers. Years ago I also ran a Yahoo discussion group that dealt primarily with copyright issues relating to the adult industry and several of our contributing group members were copyright attorneys at the time.

I didn't expect anyone to agree with me, really, but I felt that I had the right to express how I feel about the situation after finding out how it affected me personally. I always try to find a way to make the way things are work for me, and I've done that. I hope all of you are able to find a solution for you, too.

I have always felt that it is my own responsibility to ensure my content stays where it is supposed to be. I wouldn't think twice of contacting someone's host who was using stolen pictures, and I don't see this as anything different...when I find unauthorized use, I take action against it. It's my content, not the hosts's..it's my content, not Guba's..so it's my job to police it. I guess your perspective is very different. I respect that, but I don't have to change mine to match yours.

The assumption by Guba is "it's in the public domain unless you prove me that it isn't". This flies in the face of all logic. We as an industry wouldn't tolerate it from some ignorant person trying to start a paysite with stolen content, and there is no reason to allow this to fly with anyone else.

Further, Guba flies in the face of 2257 - they are exactly the sort of place that the new 2257 rules were intended to squash. They cannot indentify any of the primary producers for the images presented on their site and located on their servers, therefore by logic, they are primary unless they can show otherwise. They wouldn't face this issue as a "pass through ISP" provided just access to the usenet, but because they choose to filter, classify, edit, and re-encode what is on their site, they are no longer just an innocent ISP but in fact a membership site selling access to images and video.

The FSC could do our industry a HUGE favor and suggest that the DoJ go have a closer look at GUBA and their business model. There would have to be millions of undocumented images on their servers, and they have no way to show that they are not the primary producers.

Alex

Well isn't Guba doing the same thing as fusker is doing? Fusker harvests off websites where as Guba harvests off of newsgroups.

Gary