DMCA, content removed, now demanding money

[jscott]

I was threatened with DMCA, i removed the photos in question and now they are saying that because they have proof of screenprints that i have to pay some ridiculous amount of money LOL

DMCA fine, remove the pics fine, but now trying to get money out of it, fucking hilarious.

I want to shoot back something with law that protects us, anyone know what the deal is with this? I've been DMCA'd a hundred times and always comply, but then they demanding money, gfy!

Any real infos/replies thank you very much

[avalanche]

This is a pretty normal tactic for a lot of attorneys and Copyright trolls.

They threaten lawsuit unless you don't pay, then when that deadline passes they give you a new amount, new deadline, final chance, blah blah blah, rinse and repeat.

They send this to thousands of people and many do pay.

CEG Tek is one of the biggest.

[OneHungLo]

I strongly encourage you to seek out legal counsel concerning your current exposure.

/barry

[Nitzer Ebb]

Put it back up and tell them to eat dirt

[L-Pink]

Put it back up and tell them to eat dirt

Yea, fuck the guy that owns the content.

[Nitzer Ebb]

Yea, fuck the guy that owns the content.

How do you know he owns it? Like OP said he has never heard such demands before. neither did I.

[Barry-xlovecam]

</ignore>? he sent you the DCMA and not a C&D.

You complied with his DCMA ...

Ouellette v. Viacom International Inc.
Main article: Ouellette v. Viacom International Inc.

In this case of Ouellette v. Viacom International Inc., the court denied plaintiff's attempt to find liability for YouTube and Myspace's takedowns of the plaintiff's homemade videos. Despite potential fair use claims, the court found it impossible to use the DMCA takedown provisions as a foundation for liability. The court found that the safe harbor provision serves "to limit the liability of internet service providers, not to create liability that could not otherwise be imposed under existing law independent of the DMCA."[26]

Digital Millennium Copyright Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

search: 'dmca and release of further liability'

**not legal advice references given for conversational and educational purposes only. >:OP

[The Porn Nerd]

They can ASK (or demand) you suck a bbw midget's left tit but that means jack squat unless a judge orders you to do so.

You complied, now move along little doggie.

[woj]

How do you know he owns it? Like OP said he has never heard such demands before. neither did I.

does it even matter who owns it? Lets assume it's some scam, what does that change? absolutely nothing... OP certainly doesn't own the content, and yet he is profiting from it and at the same time devaluing the content for the copyright owner...

of course this is completely normal now a days, nothing unethical or wrong about it at all, fuck the content owner like L-pink said...

[Goethe]

A screen shot is nothing. The content could have been hot linked or embedded. If they can't prove that the content was on your server, they can't prove a thing. Ignore and move on.

[blackmonsters]

Kim Dotcom

[247mg]

Just site quite and do NOT respond to them. They have proof ok let them do what ever they want.

[Ferus]

Then stop using content you dont have the right for...

[Paul Markham]

I strongly encourage you to seek out legal counsel concerning your current exposure.

/barry

He can't afford to buy content. So paying for a lawyer isn't going to happen.

My advice is, pay for the content you use and never have to worry about DMCAs. Strange no one suggested that.

Sorry Ferus, missed your comment.

[jscott]

For those of you that didnt read the thread in full, the content was removed ASAP and always will be.

For those of you that are so ignorant to content partnerships (forums, imgur etc, for example, users post content, moderators and DMCA's is what is needed to make sure legal content only is posted), we need moderators or people can kindly email for removals and things will get taken care of.

Ferus and Paul (not sure you guys are going for troll of the year or?) you are both great examples of people in this business who are not very competent, it shows by your posts in this thread.

[JimmyStephans]

Actually, most of the people in this thread have it slightly wrong.

1- To be protected by the Safe Harbor provisions of the DMCA you MUST register your site and agent with the copyright office. Here is a link to the form, and a link to some of the listings.

http://copyright.gov/onlinesp/agent.pdf

DMCA Agents - Index A | U.S. Copyright Office

2- If you are not registered at the Copyright office you simply can't hide behind the DMCA.

Many may not know that, many might think I'm wrong, but no matter - its true and it means that you can be sued if you displayed some persons photo(s) or video(s) without permission.

Those that have been around a while might remember the Liberty Media v Oron case. That issue came up in that case and Oron had to pay - and in fact it put Oron out of business.

Here is a good article about that issue written just last month.

Getting DMCA Safe Harbor Right - Plagiarism Today

[SilentKnight]

I was threatened with DMCA, i removed the photos in question and now they are saying that because they have proof of screenprints that i have to pay some ridiculous amount of money LOL

DMCA fine, remove the pics fine, but now trying to get money out of it, fucking hilarious.

I want to shoot back something with law that protects us, anyone know what the deal is with this? I've been DMCA'd a hundred times and always comply, but then they demanding money, gfy!

Any real infos/replies thank you very much

Why are you distributing content you don't own the copyrights for?

[videobunch]

We all know the DMCA is all BS. It is just a way for people to take other peoples content and then hide behind a DMCA. But what does hurt is when you DMCA or C&D and then they sue and do not just threaten like they did. Your only hope is they do not sue because even if you are in the right it will still cost a ton to prove it.

Why small people/companies even take a chance with their livelihood is beyond me. Content is cheap and is just morally wrong to take what does not below to you.

I have several studios that are suing more and more after sending DMCA's and C&Ds. They will settle for a few grand but putting a stop to it is their only hope to survive. They have copyright companies that act on their behalf and take a large %.

As a content seller I guess I am biased. As a human and business owner I am not. The internet for some reason rules do not apply. Most (using this lightly) would not walk into a store and steel but find the internet the exception.

[JimmyStephans]

videobunch is correct. The original intent of the DMCA might have been fine, but they never envisioned the number of people that take advantage of it and the damage it allows people (most from outside the USA) to do to small business.

It just didn't work out as they hoped. One big issue is how damn slow they (Congress) has been to respond and correct the flaws in it.

[DBS.US]

Ignore and move on.

[Goethe]

Why are you distributing content you don't own the copyrights for?

I don't think he is, knowingly. There was mention of a forum etc. in an earlier post. I'm guessing the issue relates to UGC which can be difficult to police on a large site.

[mikesouth]

How do you know he owns it? Like OP said he has never heard such demands before. neither did I.

instead of how do you know he owns it how about dont steal shit its pretty obvious the OP knows he DOESNT own it...I got no sympathy for content thieves...fuck all y'all as we say here in the south.

[SilentKnight]

instead of how do you know he owns it how about dont steal shit its pretty obvious the OP knows he DOESNT own it...I got no sympathy for content thieves...fuck all y'all as we say here in the south.

[jscott]

SilentKnight and Mikesouth, also not very smart people


There are things in this world called "forums" or user uploaded content, or profiles , and others of the sort.

you are not intelligent enought to read and understand threads like these.

I hate content theft, i've been an affiliate of legal content sponsors since before you dickfucks owned a domain.

So anyways, stfu and get out of this thread.

those of you who answered decently, thank you

[jscott]

btw, mikesouth i did kinda think you had a good thing going, but now i know you're only intent is digging and instigating lol

[jscott]

I don't think he is, knowingly. There was mention of a forum etc. in an earlier post. I'm guessing the issue relates to UGC which can be difficult to police on a large site.

thanks man, yes, i would never allow stolent content. I have lost sales directly as an affiliate because of this, so yes, i hate it

[SilentKnight]

SilentKnight and Mikesouth, also not very smart people


There are things in this world called "forums" or user uploaded content, or profiles , and others of the sort.

you are not intelligent enought to read and understand threads like these.

I hate content theft, i've been an affiliate of legal content sponsors since before you dickfucks owned a domain.

So anyways, stfu and get out of this thread.

those of you who answered decently, thank you

Firstly, you weren't intelligent enough to mention in your OP that this had anything to do with "user uploads" on a forum.

So go fuck yourself.

Secondly, you're stupid enough to make assumptions about our domain longevity based on...what? Oh, an assumption. As for your little pissing contest, sure I'll play - just as an FYI - I owned/operated adult BBSes with my own original content long before the internet existed...and before my first domain reg'd in '99.

So go fuck yourself again.

You "hate content theft" - yet operate a website where it can proliferate. Oh, but it's other people uploading it...so that's okay.

Again, go fuck yourself.

[JSWENSON]

Firstly, you weren't intelligent enough to mention in your OP that this had anything to do with "user uploads" on a forum.

So go fuck yourself.

Secondly, you're stupid enough to make assumptions about our domain longevity based on...what? Oh, an assumption. As for your little pissing contest, sure I'll play - just as an FYI - I owned/operated adult BBSes with my own original content long before the internet existed...and before my first domain reg'd in '99.

So go fuck yourself again.

You "hate content theft" - yet operate a website where it can proliferate. Oh, but it's other people uploading it...so that's okay.

Again, go fuck yourself.

GFY is a website where "it can proliferate" you fucking chode.

[SilentKnight]

GFY is a website where "it can proliferate" you fucking chode.

Proliferate this.











Insignificant cocksucker.

[Goethe]

You "hate content theft" - yet operate a website where it can proliferate. Oh, but it's other people uploading it...so that's okay.

Again, go fuck yourself.

Like most galleries or freeones or well pretty much any forum, gallery or tube? WTF?

[Google Expert]

For those of you that didnt read the thread in full, the content was removed ASAP and always will be.

For those of you that are so ignorant to content partnerships (forums, imgur etc, for example, users post content, moderators and DMCA's is what is needed to make sure legal content only is posted), we need moderators or people can kindly email for removals and things will get taken care of.

Ferus and Paul (not sure you guys are going for troll of the year or?) you are both great examples of people in this business who are not very competent, it shows by your posts in this thread.

Man, you live in some bumfuck 3'rd world asian shithole and worry about DMCAs?

nigga please

[Rochard]

Why are you distributing content you don't own the copyrights for?

Seriously, you signed up for GFY in 2005 and you are asking this question?

I'll give you a hint.... I have 100 blogs and I don't own the copyright on any of the tens of thousands of pictures on the blogs.

[mechanicvirus]

Why are you distributing content you don't own the copyrights for?

Does this apply to legit affiliates who post actual approved content but get caught in a DMCA sweep years later? For example: http://gfy.com/fucking-around-and-pr...ve-easton.html

[SilentKnight]

Seriously, you signed up for GFY in 2005 and you are asking this question?

I'll give you a hint.... I have 100 blogs and I don't own the copyright on any of the tens of thousands of pictures on the blogs.

Seriously...you're on an industry forum and don't see a problem with copyright infringement? That's okay, Rochard. I already had enough reasons to not have much use for you. Didn't need any more.

Might want to read through this thread and understand I'm not the only one defending copyrights.

[SilentKnight]

Does this apply to legit affiliates who post actual approved content but get caught in a DMCA sweep years later?

Of course not. We're not talking about legit affiliates using authorized content from the program owners to promote sales.

I'm talking about those who knowingly hide behind 'user uploads' - who sit around and wait for DMCA notices to be sent before they take down the content. I'd hazard to guess that half the time it's forum owners themselves posting the content...claiming its being done by users. Or at the very least turning a blind eye to what they know amounts to illegal distribution of copyrighted images.

[venus]

actually most of these site owners are pretty smart, you not agreeing with them does not make them ignorant, it only means you wont hear the truth. anyways, where is your site..I would like to go look for any of my stolen content

SilentKnight and Mikesouth, also not very smart people


There are things in this world called "forums" or user uploaded content, or profiles , and others of the sort.

you are not intelligent enought to read and understand threads like these.

I hate content theft, i've been an affiliate of legal content sponsors since before you dickfucks owned a domain.

So anyways, stfu and get out of this thread.

those of you who answered decently, thank you

[Rochard]

Seriously...you're on an industry forum and don't see a problem with copyright infringement?

It's not about copyright infringement.

Jscott got a standard DMCA for content he does not own. You asked Jscott "Why are you distributing content you don't own the copyrights for?". Simple - he is an affiliate promoting someone else's site.

Why would someone in our industry being distributing content they do not own? Because they are an affiliate. The program owns the content, and gives the affiliate permission to use the photos to promote the program's sites.

[Jigster715]

It's not about copyright infringement.

Jscott got a standard DMCA for content he does not own. You asked Jscott "Why are you distributing content you don't own the copyrights for?". Simple - he is an affiliate promoting someone else's site.

Why would someone in our industry being distributing content they do not own? Because they are an affiliate. The program owns the content, and gives the affiliate permission to use the photos to promote the program's sites.

Thats one answer but not the whole answer. You assume it was affiliate content. Maybe, maybe not.

[SilentKnight]

It's not about copyright infringement.

Jscott got a standard DMCA for content he does not own. You asked Jscott "Why are you distributing content you don't own the copyrights for?". Simple - he is an affiliate promoting someone else's site.

Why would someone in our industry being distributing content they do not own? Because they are an affiliate. The program owns the content, and gives the affiliate permission to use the photos to promote the program's sites.

Where does he say this in his original post?

I was threatened with DMCA, i removed the photos in question and now they are saying that because they have proof of screenprints that i have to pay some ridiculous amount of money LOL

DMCA fine, remove the pics fine, but now trying to get money out of it, fucking hilarious.

I want to shoot back something with law that protects us, anyone know what the deal is with this? I've been DMCA'd a hundred times and always comply, but then they demanding money, gfy!

Any real infos/replies thank you very much

If, as you say Rochard - he's promoting an affiliate's site using pics by permission - why would he comply with a DMCA takedown notice as he states above?

[Paul Markham]

Ferus and Paul (not sure you guys are going for troll of the year or?) you are both great examples of people in this business who are not very competent, it shows by your posts in this thread.

SilentKnight and Mikesouth, also not very smart people

There are things in this world called "forums" or user uploaded content, or profiles , and others of the sort.

you are not intelligent enought to read and understand threads like these.

I hate content theft, i've been an affiliate of legal content sponsors since before you dickfucks owned a domain.

So anyways, stfu and get out of this thread.

those of you who answered decently, thank you

So tell us exactly what was happening. Was it you taking content from "forums" or user uploaded content, or profiles, and others of the sort." Or running a site that allowed this?

Whatever by taking it down you know you were in the wrong. So buy content or only used watermarked sponsors content.

Of course, if you're worth suing, in the country of the plaintiff and he can find you. Lawyer up.

As for you being in the business before me, shows how fucking clueless you are.

[SomeCreep]

I was threatened with DMCA, i removed the photos in question and now they are saying that because they have proof of screenprints that i have to pay some ridiculous amount of money LOL

DMCA fine, remove the pics fine, but now trying to get money out of it, fucking hilarious.

I want to shoot back something with law that protects us, anyone know what the deal is with this? I've been DMCA'd a hundred times and always comply, but then they demanding money, gfy!

Any real infos/replies thank you very much

Just ignore their emails. They'll go away.

[GamblingDomains]

why have stolen content in the first place? If money was made from it, why not lawsuit

[jscott]

Rochard these guys need things explained super simplified. They dont know or cant figure things out on their own.

1. affiliate marketing, we add photos of legal content owned by others, but promoting others sites.

2. sometimes they quit, models "find god" or whatever reasoning.

3. DMCA's are sent

4. content is removed, in compliance with DMCA

5. girl decides to hire lawyers who probably work on commissions to seek money, in damages

6. I did comply with DMCA and always do..... but they now say that removing content is not enough, and that i already broke DMCA law, (i guess because it took me 5 hours to remove it, and they expected quicker?)

go figure

[woj]

fair enough, sounded like something else might be going on...

you should have said what's up in the beginning and avoided the confusion though...
"heads up guys, xyz model found god, and her lawyer is harassing site owners"...

so which model quit? Who is the lawyer pulling this "scam"? ... so we can all pro-actively remove the content and avoid the drama...

[jscott]

Wow, i re-read through this thread... wow SilentKnight, you gotta be the dumbest motherfucker LOL

i was mad before but now i just find it funny lol

let me spell it out for you

content owners give permission to use content, content owners can also remove the right to use that content, thus the DMCA.

if you need another lesson in webmastering i'll have to charge you buddy lol

[CamTraffic]

Wow, i re-read through this thread... wow SilentKnight, you gotta be the dumbest motherfucker LOL

i was mad before but now i just find it funny lol

let me spell it out for you

content owners give permission to use content, content owners can also remove the right to use that content, thus the DMCA.

if you need another lesson in webmastering i'll have to charge you buddy lol

Would you be please stop feeding the trolls?

[in2cams]

How much did they ask for for? I would considering paying them, then put them behind bars for blackmailing.

[L-Pink]

How much did they ask for for? I would considering paying them, then put them behind bars for blackmailing.

[SilentKnight]

Wow, i re-read through this thread... wow SilentKnight, you gotta be the dumbest motherfucker LOL

i was mad before but now i just find it funny lol

let me spell it out for you

content owners give permission to use content, content owners can also remove the right to use that content, thus the DMCA.

if you need another lesson in webmastering i'll have to charge you buddy lol

You failed at explaining any of that in your first post - and I'm the dumbest motherfucker.

Was your helmet too tight as a child?

[celandina]

I was threatened with DMCA, i removed the photos in question and now they are saying that because they have proof of screenprints that i have to pay some ridiculous amount of money LOL

DMCA fine, remove the pics fine, but now trying to get money out of it, fucking hilarious.

I want to shoot back something with law that protects us, anyone know what the deal is with this? I've been DMCA'd a hundred times and always comply, but then they demanding money, gfy!

Any real infos/replies thank you very much

If you get caught "DMCA'd" in your 7/11 store with multiple packs of Marlboros in your pocket you would be 3 x and striken out for life up the "pokey"... Being DCMA'd 100 x is akin to being a thief 100 x over... Stop crying and pay up because otherwise some smart lawyer will get you to cool your heels in jail.

It is simple... Content is king... So buy it,or create it but do not steal it...if you think you will get away with it in the long term move to China or Even better to North Korea.

Why would it be up to content owners to police thieves... Yes we all do but we ar e getting tired of it.