What is the Pornhub Network? How does this site operate? Are they really stealing?
 

What is this "Pornhub NETWORK" that I see at the top of the page with links to Tube8, SpankWire, KeezMovies, ExtremeTube, Viral Videos, Peeperz, T-Shirts.

• Did PH buy out these sites or are they link mirror sites?
• Is the Porn Hub owned by the Brazzers people or are they just really tight?
• How does this PH make money? Strictly off advertising?
• Are the owners really "stealing" content? I thought the users upload the videos?
• How much money does the PornHub make?
• Is everyone going to have to conform and become a porn tube and will there be an epic war on the forum against the rebels?
• Obviously there's money in it for PH, but what about the average person starting a tube site?
• Who fucking cares?

The Pornhub Network paid for advertising to get more traffic.
I brokered deals in the past to get them that advertising.
Are they stealing? I don't know.

Welcome to the internet.

LOL. You been under a rock the last 3 years or are you a surfer?

Yes they do.I could go on and on how they stealing,but there is no point.There is still plenty of idiots who promote and dont give a shit about other people having loses because of them.

Welcome to the industry of cannibals.

I found your post ironic considering you still promote brazzers who own pornhub.

Well, both. I was surfing when I hit a rock. I was down for about a year.

Idiot. :2 cents:

Free porn sold here.

i just wish they would turn off their goddamn blog comment spam bot or at least remove my blog from their 'hit list' :321GFY

they been buying a lot of large tube sites, but its funny how they can upload 60 min videos of other peoples content without any worries, but they only post 2-3 min videos of their own content.

I think you missed my point. I wasnt saying who you should or shouldnt promote, just how could one be in the industry and not know these things. Thanks anyway.

As for promoting brazzers, I send them a little bit of traffic, nothing major. Just got a check from them today actually, thats saying more then I could for alot of programs. :Oh crap

Carry on.

I have heard that as well from a few people. Sweet justice.
:pimp

Isn't it sad that the "bad guys" of the industry are also one of the only companies who still pays affiliates regularly without any problems?

and you don't seem to realize how having the content producer being just down the fall from the DMCA response guy could make that happen almost "automagically"

that not proof that they are stealing

Idiot

Convenient to say the least:disgust

so now your complaining because they didn't stick their head in the sand like all the "poor" programs who are having their stuff "stolen"

they have the traffic now, so that just sour grapes.

not proof at all, they just let it happen until they get a takedown notice, they know what theya re doing is wrong or else the content wouldnt be there, but its the law, its legal to upload content you dont own until you are told to take it down.

everyone knows this is a bowl of shit, and doesnt help out the people paying to have the content produced.

its like its ok to shop lift, as long as you dont get caught, then when you do get caught just give it back and no harm no fowl.

I find it incomprehensible that people send traffic to anyone who supports Tubes. Just more examples of short term greed winning over long term common sense.

And those companies and people sending them traffic have nothing to do with some sponsors not paying and others converting so badly. :upsidedow :upsidedow

A favorite phrase to illustrate the business today is. "You can't sell hamburgers when someone is giving them away for free."

As if McDonald's would have the business sense to send their customers to the guys giving burgers away. :upsidedow :upsidedow :upsidedow

Not all hamburgers are equal. I, for one, would not eat one from some places if they paid me.

<ironic>They are honest guys...</ironic>

the purpose of the safe harbor provision is to protect free speach.

i have a fair use right to use your content for parody, commentary purposes. without the rules free speach would be censored, and if the choice is between free speach and extra profits from a government granted monopoly, fuck the monopoly.



bullshit shoplifting is not legal, there is no free speach that needs to be protected in the case of shoplifting.

the item is gone from the store so someone who would have bought it denied that ability.

how does free speech have anything to do with uploading the same content unedited, not for paraody, or commentary, and dont say the comments prove it so.

its called theft, the producers didnt agree to the videos being uploaded, why do you think youtube takes down so much content that people dont have the right to upload.

im just trying to see your logic on why you stick up for these people

It's theft pure and simple, there is no debate, but money.

You're absolutely right. Witnessing theft/crime, ignore it, serve it, let it happen, make money off it, is not wrong.

the comments are commentary by definition

this is my favorite quest crew dance routine is valid commentary




and it is commentary that makes no sense without the clip of the dance routine.

no it not it called copyright infringement
it has never been called theft

the exclusive right granted by the copyright act is dependent on respecting and honoring fair use.
tube sites make a commentary that was not possible before possible.
Learn to make money when it happens rather than bitching about it.


free speach good, monopoly bad

simple enough for you.

Bow down :2 cents:

It's called fraud. Fraud or theft, same coin.

wow... just wow

wow great to see your finally getting this
i remember when you were arguing that copyright was theft and had to explain how it was really a fraud.

the point is the fraud is falsely misrepresenting authorization to post the content

now all we have to do is get you to realize that fair sue authorized is still authorized.

as i pointed out before

No, you don't get it. It's the same coin and should be treated same way.

It's like printing money. You do not "steal" by printing it but you are lowering the value of the currency when circulated. Everyone will suffer from it, especially the country (owner of the currency) and that's why it's illegal.
If you take the money and pass it on knowing they are unauthorized, then you are guilty of conspiracy.

no printing money is another crime called counterfeiting

fraud is a completely different crime

the point i was making which you are trying to ignore

is that fair use authorized is still authorized, and therefore there is no fraud in that case.


the problem you are ignoring is that

"this is my favorite quest crew dance routine", is valid commentary

and it is a valid commentary that makes no sense without the clip quest crew dancing.

commentary authorizes a lot of the stuff you misrepresenting as infringement

pornhub wanted to sue me for haven a site that look like pornhub
fuck them and punk as fris

Is it just me, or are gideongallery's Youtube embeds blank?

whats a punk as

If you upload my full paysite movie to pornhub, then you know as well as me if you were authorized or not. Not authorized = infringement.

At once others starts to watch, otherwise potential customers, I lose potential income. The market value of my product decrease, just like you printed money and decrease the value of a currency (not to mention loss of tax income, others employed by the revenue etc)
The crime become more serious if you make money off it, which will also eliminate any criteria for fair use/share. The same with those who offer you the distribution and make money off it, if they have knowledge of the infringement, then they are part of a conspiracy.

The infringer are the one misrepresentating. In 99.99% of the cases.

Racists !!!

show me one upload that is the entire movie all the way to the credits

doesn't happen people upload scenes
the fact that paysites really only showcase scenes as their weekly updates doesn't change the fact that still uploading their favorite scene

and making a free speach commentary about what their favorite scene is.


bullshit, tv broadcasters lost the potential income from re run commercials with the vcr and that was still ruled to be fair use

profits generated from extending the copyright monopoly to medium selection (you only have a right to timeshift using re runs not using a tape cassette) is not an entitled profit of a copyright

you have no right to that money, and arguing that you do is an abuse of the monopoly you have been granted.

and that is exactly what you are doing in this case

in 1972 if taped my american bandstand and put in the tape fast forward to a cool dance routine and said that "cat can really swing" that was my right under free speech of commentary. It was legal because of fair use

posting "orquestra" on my youtube channel with the statement this is my favorite quest crew routine is the modern day version of that old free speech statement.


youtube just gives me the ability to make the same free speech commentary on a larger scale.


your making the same medium limitation arguement (you have free speech in person, but not over the tubes ) as the universal made in the betamax case.

bullshit

vcr sold for 1k each when the case was run
diamond rio made good money selling the first mp3 players
youtube just won the viacomm case
if making money automatically eliminated any criteria for fair use
None of those things would have a happened