Quote:
Originally posted by Rick Latona
I just quit smoking so I'm going to do my best to stay cool here.
JMM, you go out of your way to post in every thread that is about us. Clearly you are on the front lines of the copyright wars and have a vested interest in speaking your voice and making it clear to the thousands of webmasters here what your opinion on the matter is.
The bottom line is we are not exactly going to shut the site down and call it a day. We've got a lucrative business here that continues to grow. You should be happy that we own it and not this chuck chump whom I would have eaten for lunch had I seen this before Marc. We realize and respect the fine line we walk every day and take every pain possible to make sure we cater to the adult industry as best we can.
As a content company you are best to watermark your images and DRM your videos so people like us know it is your content. Don't expect that you can change the file sharing nature of the Internet. You can't change the world on your own. What can be digitised can be shared for free. Its that simple.
So, stop picking fights with the one company who always listens to concerns and works with nearly everyone in the business. There are certainly better fights to pick out there. We can work with you or against you. It is your choice at this point. We can be a great friend or a excellent adversary.
As for the chuck chump, he's an idiot. I wonder what he would do if his site takes off and he faces the same ethical business decisions we face every 20 minutes?
|
Rick: You seem like an intelligent person. If you stepped back and read your post objectively, I think you would be able to see how ridiculous it is.
You seem to think because you listen to webmaster concerns and take pains to cater to the adult industry that it is ok for you to break the law? Fact: IT IS NOT. Fact: You are breaking the law.
You tell me that as a content company I should watermark my images and use DRM on videos, otherwise its fair game? RIDICULOUS. Federal law DOES NOT require that a copyright notice appear anywhere on the content. It is YOUR obligation to obtain legal rights or legal license to content BEFORE YOU USE IT. If you are unable to do so, the solution is simple, YOU DONT USE THE CONTENT, PERIOD. You put the burden on the IP owner, which is RIDICULOUS. The burden is yours Rick.
Your statement that what can be digitized can be shared goes against the EXACT principle of law that protects rights holders. You are breaking the law. You are using content that you do not have legal rights to use or distribute. The fact that you work with the industry and listen to it's concerns means nothing. The law is the law. This industry tolerates copyright infringers if they throw great parties or have great drugs, that is not news to anyone.
I will give you a clear example. I don't often appear in court on our cases. I did in the beginning because I was learning and curious. In 1998 I obtainted a $230,000 judgement against a website using our content. I was in court and I heard this with my own ears, so this is not second hand:
The lawyer for the defendant said to the judge: "your honor, none of the pictures contained any copyright notice or referring text whatsoever. My client could not have possibly known who the copyright holder was."
The judge responded: Mr. Davis, that is correct, there were no copyright notices or referring text on the images. Without exhaustive research your client could not have known who the copyright holder was. However, AT ALL TIMES, your client knew who the copyright holder was NOT, him.
Judgement for the plaintiff. We ended up settling for half. It was a good day.
See my point Rick. This is NOT the wild wild west. With the exception of some of the porn that is given to you to use LEGALLY, much of the content on CJ is owned by someone, and you do NOT have permission to use it.
That is copyright infringement. That is illegal. That is bullshit.