"Mom, dad -- we're hot twins. Of COURSE we were going to become porn stars"
 

http://www.sunderlandecho.com/getEdF...ImageID=429105

Full Story:

http://www.sunderlandecho.com/news/F...tar.4518135.jp

Anyone seen these girls in flicks before?

Seen it a few days ago on the forum. :thumbsup

oops. double post

Yeah, old..


.............. and, I don't know if it was a typo in your thread title or not but
""Mom, dad -- we're hot twins. Of COURSE we were going to become porn stars""

Might want to fix that.

Got a link?

porn is hot :)

it's just bullshit, they are hookers who made up a porn past

maybe like 1 or 2 low budget UK production

what is porn?

... What is PORN!? baby don't hurt me ...don't hurt me ... no mo........ uohouhouhOOUUUOUUUUUOHH uohouhouhOOUUUOUUUUUOHH OOOOOHHHHHH!!

</:upsidedow>

Actually, they are under contract and have made a few movies with UK studio Bluebird Films. You can see the titles on their web site.

I have a thing for twins...

they're hot!

Congrats to 'em, I guess ...

Nice Nice

Them some eyebrows motherfucker!

de r hot

mmmmmmmmmh kit kat...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...Kat_chunky.jpg

they are ugly as sin, i wouldnt fuck them with pentae's dick

what is there website

I'd love a 3some with them

I'd fuck the shit outta them

If you got to that site, click contract stars and then their names you can find all titles plus pictures etc.

oh i thought he ment "their" as in the twins official site.

Why, you wanna "time shift" some of the Bluebird movies, LOL?

You're not the only one.

It must be really shocking for the family!

I once saw a photo set of 2 hot twins in steamy hot lesbian situations with 2 other hot twins.

well since the only way i would have a right to timeshift the content would be to first buy a right to the content, there is no issue if that what i want to do.

however i noticed their names were available, so i thought i could send the type in traffic to the official site.

oh well say la vie.

Id hit them

Yeah there would be an issue under your stupid theory. The issue would be that one person purchases the movie and "time shifts" it, to use your nonsensical phraseology, to another 10,000 or more other people who didn't pay for it. That's what dishonest people do, right? "C'est la vie", my Francophobic friend.

Can this be real? Anyway, They are very hot indeed.

of course if you were to setup a private tracker tied to the membership database, so only members could access the torrent stream then only people who paid for it could get access.

the only reason 10,000 people who didn't pay for it have potential access is because you don't want fulfil your fair use responsiblity.

Considering you complaining about how people are makeing money off your content, you could easily turn a profit if you did setup such a private tracker. But i suspect you would make less money, than you are currently making charging monopoly prices for fair use distribution (time shifting, backup, recovery) when people choose to re-subscribe to get access to old content they really have a fair use right to access.

Which is the real reason you don't want to address the senerio of setting a private tracker up yourself.

nice media hype here..

I know this is silly of me to keep buying into this double talk and circular (il)logic, but I will play ball with you a little more for the sake of argument. First of all who the fuck has ever even heard of a private tracker? Hardly anyone and I doubt any pay site members are clamoring such such a utility to access content that they legitimately paid for when they can simply log into the site with a browser and download all they want.


But let's say I took your advice and set one up a private tracker that had sufficient security such that only members with a password could use it. Essentially, it's just another way for members with a legitimate password to get access to the content instead of using a html browser to log into a pay site and download the content, right? So if I set that up would that mean you would now agree that a pay site owner had fulfilled his "fair use responsibility", and that they could then start suing the pants off of everyone who used other means to distribute the content like torrents or rapidshare or whatever?

I mean, is this your whole goal with all your stupid arguments, to promote the use of a "private tracker" whatever the fuck that is? I really don't understand your point about me not wanting to set up a "private tracker" as if it was going to hurt my business. I mean, I film some content, I put it on DVD, make a pay site or make video clips available for individual sale and try to give people a good value for their dollar. I want them to be able to download the videos and pics and enjoy it and jerk off to it. Why wouldn't I? The only problem a studio or site owner has is when one person takes the videos they paid $10 or $24.95 for and distributes them to tens of thousand of other people for free. And it sounds to me every time you make a post like that is exactly what you want to see happen. Don't you realize that's how you come across?

They aren't that cute

the private tracker would be exactly like the public tracker except that you would login to get access to the torrent stream. a session cookie would disallow acess to the stream.

if you want an example look at tvtorrents.com i have to setup an account, if i am not logged in then i get the message not authorized on my torrent client. it still free, however to get access for back and recovery purposes/ acess shifting/ timeshifting i would have to signup for a month to your site. AFter i cancel i would still be able to access the content i paid for, however i would not be allowed to have access to the content i did not pay for. See that the difference, the public tracker doesn't care, but exists in a grey area because they don't have access to your membership list to be able to tell the difference, they must trust people to not access the content without paying for it.

those people (the ones who are fraudlently gaining access to your content) are the ones you are complaining about and they can't access the torrent stream thru the private tracker. Since you can now prove that all people who have a fair use right to the content are being serviced fully by your private tracker at the same cost as the public tracker (for free) you can prove there is no fair use right in the public tracker torrent. This make shutting down the illegal distribution so much easier.



and that the point you look at the tracker in the same way as a membership site, something people have to pay you to access. If would be free, just limited to the content you previously bought.

look at bang bros they give you access to like 10,000 hours of porn for you monthly membership. if they setup a private tracker, i could join for a month, which would grant me a right to that 10,000 hours. if i quit i still would have access to all that content thru the private tracker, i would just be prevented to getting this weeks updates. But if the new girl doesn't interest me, i don't have to reup to get my jerk off fix. I still have access to all the content that convinced me to join in the first place FOREVER.

you would carve off all the people who are paying you $10 a month not because they really care about the new porn but because they just want access to the archive of content they really didn't have a chance to get to view in the timeslice you set (the term of the membership).


but that exactly my point, are you interested in stopping those people who are sharing your content to people who never paid you for the content at all, or are you interested in forcing everyone to pay you monopoly prices ($10/month) for fair use access to your content (recovery of the archive THEY PAID FOR after they cancelled).

if you truly believed that 99% of the people were illegally getting access to your content and not recovering access to content they paid for, then setup up a private tracker. You would make a lot more money from the additional signups, then you would lose from the resulting cancelations.

However i believe you are fully aware that you are making more money from charging monopoly prices for fair use distribution even with the lost sales to piracy. And you are actually just pulling the 99% out of your ass to try and justify taking out the only alternative for fair use distribution so you can force everyone to pay you monopoly prices.

Eeek my eyes! Ugly!

LOL, this is your cockamamie theory? I actually engaged you to try and understand exactly what you are always going on about and now that you have explained it in more detail, I realize that you are indeed a certifiable nutball. Of course a site owner is trying to stop people from getting access to the content who never paid for it in the first place and that is their primary concern. After all how many former members could there be who somehow neglected to download the content while they had a site membership compared to the potentially millions of people who never paid for it who can just download it for free?

Ponder this example- one could spend $50k on a site with exclusive content, launch it tomorrow, have a only a dozen or so paying members by the next day and find the material being served up for free to thousands of freeloaders in the same time frame. Sorry Gideon, I tried to reason with you but not one thing you say makes sense and I am starting to feel pretty foolish for even trying to even give you the simple respect of a sober discussion.

so you setup a private tracker,
torrent search engines like mininova can list those torrents and therefore keep making the advertising revenue they are currently making
you can easily convince them to remove the pirate bays versions because your full servicing the need of their clients (better since popularity is a virtue in bit torrent and splitting the swarm makes downloads slower = sueable direct economic loss)
the pirate bays actions would be illegal even under swedish laws, because there would be no fair use to hide behind.

you keep going back to examples of the free loaders, but a private tracker stops the freeloaders cold.

So again why are you not setting up a private tracker ?

still waiting for an answer jim

Not that hot but I'd still hit it! I have a thing for twins.

whats up i no care?? i know your name brah.

The answer could be paragraphs and paragraphs long but I don't have that much the time to waste on it. I have to get back to work actually filming porn in the first place. In brief, a private tracker would stop nothing, certainly not any freeloaders. The whole idea is ridiculous, no one is clamoring for it, no one cares about it. Not one aspect of your theory makes any sense, nor does it address any of the real issues. You are a weirdo with a esoteric agenda and I won't feed the troll anymore. Have a nice day.

one big happy family

I love that song... :1orglaugh

They are kind of ugly, but they both have some big tits and nice bodies.

see i would really like to here this arguement

a private tracker would only be accessable by people who bought a membership to the original site, so i am curious to see how the freeloaders would get access to that source.

MPAA won their case against the dvd ripping software that used DeCSS because they were able to prove that the fair use right of backup was fully services by the free liciencing of "Content SCrable System Decrypt". And the added benefit (the ability to make a copy from a copy) did not fall into the right of back for legitimate copyright liciencees. Setting up a private tracker would represent the same level of fully servicing the fair use right (and no more) as this case, which eliminates the arguement of fair use and make it an order of magnitude easier to stop the public trackers from listing your content. Again cutting off the free loaders from that source.

That cover 100% of the sources, no free loaders, no problem.


Until you put a private tracker and fail to stop the freeloaders then at best your claim that it would suspicion that it would not work, add the fact that you refuse to give any explaination about WHY it would not work make your statement even more questionable.

look at it another way if you were to remove the public trackers without giving former members a way to recover the content you would be forcing them to pay you monopoly prices (membership prices) to recover the content they previous paid for. Even if you were to claim that was not your intent, that would be the consequence banning the content from the public tracker.


which means every request to remove the content can be represented as a greedy copyrightholder who want to charge monopoly prices for fair use distributions like recovery. your now in a position where you have to prove that is not the case before you can successfully win any case in court, and your going to pay a lawyer $300/hour to do that for you.

when you compare that with the zero net cost (you get the advertising revenue the pirate bay is currently getting) of setting up a private tracker, and proving absolutely you are protecting your content from non paying freeloaders.