Porn Might Get an Unexpected Boost - US lawmakers to push for online piracy bill

[Redrob]

Possibly something new for the tubesites to consider? I saw this today:


WASHINGTON ? Democratic and Republican members of the US Congress pledged Monday to pass legislation that would give US authorities more tools to crack down on websites engaged in piracy of movies, television shows and music and the sale of counterfeit goods.

Senator Patrick Leahy pictured], a Democrat from Vermont who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he would introduce a new version "soon" of a bill designed to combat so-called "rogue websites."

A previous bill co-sponsored by Leahy, called the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act, was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee by a 19-0 vote in November, but never made it to the Senate floor.

Leahy, speaking to reporters on Monday, said: "Online infringement and the sale of counterfeit goods costs American creators, producers, and businesses billions of dollars and results in hundreds of thousands of lost jobs.

"This theft is unacceptable at any time; it is devastating in our current economic climate," he said.

House Judiciary Committee chairman Lamar Smith, a Republican from Texas, said: "The success of our economy is in part tied to the success of America's intellectual property industries.

"From movies and music to software and medicine, IP theft drains our economy and puts lives at risk," Smith said.

Leahy and Smith were joined by other lawmakers at the event along with representatives of the entertainment industry and labor organizations.

"The Internet has regrettably become a cash-cow for the criminals and organized crime cartels who profit from digital piracy and counterfeit products," said Representative John Conyers, a Democrat from Michigan.

The Obama administration has come in for some criticism for shutting down dozens of websites in recent months as part of a crackdown known as "Operation in Our Sites."

Saw this today:


US authorities in November shut down 82 websites selling mostly Chinese-made counterfeit goods, including golf clubs, Walt Disney movies, handbags and other items.

Leahy said the bill would ensure a judicial review for websites accused of engaging in illegal activities and dismissed claims it threatened First Amendment protections of free speech.

The Electronic Freedom Foundation (EFF) last year decried the previous version of Leahy's legislation as an "Internet censorship" bill.

"Blacklisting entire sites out of the domain name system" is a "reckless scheme that will undermine global Internet infrastructure and censor legitimate online speech," it said.

"I'm very concerned about the First Amendment," Leahy said Monday. "I'm also concerned about theft.

"There is no First Amendment right that protects thieves."


No Fear, Just Knowledge!

[u-Bob]

won't do anything to improve ratios...

[Agent 488]

oldish news, but wont change a thing.

[Rochard]

US authorities in November shut down 82 websites selling mostly Chinese-made counterfeit goods, including golf clubs, Walt Disney movies, handbags and other items.

Doesn't seem like porn is high up on their list of priorities.

[JustDaveXxx]

Nice find.

[Phoenix]

interesting, how will they reach across borders to shut sites down though i wonder

be interesting if everything over 1 minute or showing any penetration or liquids, had to be behind a membership area again

[Tempest]

Originally Posted by Redrob

Possibly something new for the tubesites to consider? I saw this today:

Wasn't aware that tube sites actually sell the videos they "steal", or even sell access to those videos... It's all free to view... So I really don't see how this new law would help in any way.

[Agent 488]

would only make any difference if manwin was selling counterfeit golf clubs on pornhub.

[Redrob]

I bet if somebody showed them how easy it is for kids to access the tubes, they'd be motivated to shut them down.

[Agent 488]

Originally Posted by Redrob

I bet if somebody showed them how easy it is for kids to access the tubes, they'd be motivated to shut them down.

different argument. the tubes as they are now with dmca are legal despite what's posted on gfy.

like a "are you 18" page ever stopped any kid. that practice died because it was pointless.

[Failed]

Just more music and motion picture lobbying. Will do nothing but enforce the will of the big bros.

[Redrob]

"There is no First Amendment right that protects thieves."

[GatorB]

Sorry but the government doesn't give a shit if porn is pirated or not. To them it isn't legit anyways. Secondly once you you give the OK for the government to ok shutting sites that are "bad" well eventually porn is going to be on the "bad" list.

[will76]

Originally Posted by Redrob

Possibly something new for the tubesites to consider? I saw this today:

It wont make much of a difference if any. Most of the tube sites have gone legit and working with sponsors directly, and everyone has forgiven them and loves them now.

How many "illegal" tube sites are even left?

[19teenporn]

Originally Posted by Redrob

[COLOR="Orange"]

"Online infringement and the sale of counterfeit goods costs American creators, producers, and businesses billions of dollars and results in hundreds of thousands of lost jobs.

That really sucks big time!!
Let's hope they approve the damn law...

[NetHorse]

This is old news, eventually lawmakers will go after piracy with a sweeping bill, but this isn't it.

My guess is the US government will eventually create a 'panel' that determines what sites are to be blocked by major ISPs in the United States to reduce piracy, (obviously, it can never be eliminated).

Sites like rapidshare, hotfile, megaupload, warez forums, torrent sites and maybe even tube sites could be blocked to US traffic. However, like anything regulated by the government the system will not be perfect. Innocent websites could fall victim with little or no recourse, lobbyist could use the law to their advantage, etc, etc.

[pornguy]

Even if they passed it there is such a thing as enforcement.

[bronco67]

Originally Posted by Tempest

Wasn't aware that tube sites actually sell the videos they "steal", or even sell access to those videos... It's all free to view... So I really don't see how this new law would help in any way.

They must be profitting in some way from their websites. Why run a website with tons of videos in the first place? For fun?

Just because the swiped vids aren't sold individually doesn't mean profit isn't made from them. But it's not really about the profit that the non-creators are making...its the customers their taking away from the people that worked to produce the video.

Now here comes the lame argument "any exposure is good exposure"....

[candyflip]

Can you post a link?

[Agent 488]

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp...fe57a8c2d.14e1

[escorpio]

Originally Posted by GatorB

Sorry but the government doesn't give a shit if porn is pirated or not. To them it isn't legit anyways. Secondly once you you give the OK for the government to ok shutting sites that are "bad" well eventually porn is going to be on the "bad" list.

Unfortunately you are 100% correct.

[CPA37710T]

just do camsites people.. thats the solution

[DangerX !!!]

Porn Might Get an Unexpected Boost - US lawmakers to push for online privacy bill

I fixed it for ya.

[justinsain]

Originally Posted by GatorB

Sorry but the government doesn't give a shit if porn is pirated or not. To them it isn't legit anyways. Secondly once you you give the OK for the government to ok shutting sites that are "bad" well eventually porn is going to be on the "bad" list.

While the Government might not care about porn, whatever laws they make to protect their mainstream favorites like movies and music will also apply to porn because they are all under the same umbrella called intellectual property. Make solid laws to protect intellectual property online and porn gets the same protection whether they like it or not.

As far as your Government shutting down " bad " sites statement you are making " bad " and " illegal " the same and they should be different. While porn may be " bad " in some people's opinion it is not illegal and in most cases it's protected by the 1st amendment which wasn't written specifically to save porn but porn indirectly benefited by it.

When the Government makes a law to protect mainstream intellectual property porn will also benefit from it.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by GatorB

Sorry but the government doesn't give a shit if porn is pirated or not. To them it isn't legit anyways. Secondly once you you give the OK for the government to ok shutting sites that are "bad" well eventually porn is going to be on the "bad" list.

Not that it will ever happen. Larry Flynt has been to the Supreme Court and won on his Freedom of Speech rights.

That covers porn. But let's say they did ban everything beyond penetration sex. Like magazines on general sale were in the US back in 1995. Then sites would be full of medium core porn and men would still be jerking off to it. If they stopped at open leg it would be the same.

People who've only been in porn a few years are fooled that it has to be DP gang bangs and the girl made to choke on a cock. Men paid for softcore porn in 1995 in numbers that would stagger most today.

It's amazing so many are wishing that some miracle will save them.

[DWB]

I wish they would just shut the whole internet down just to teach everyone a lesson.

[escorpio]

Originally Posted by justinsain

While the Government might not care about porn, whatever laws they make to protect their mainstream favorites like movies and music will also apply to porn because they are all under the same umbrella called intellectual property. Make solid laws to protect intellectual property online and porn gets the same protection whether they like it or not.

As far as your Government shutting down " bad " sites statement you are making " bad " and " illegal " the same and they should be different. While porn may be " bad " in some people's opinion it is not illegal and in most cases it's protected by the 1st amendment which wasn't written specifically to save porn but porn indirectly benefited by it.

When the Government makes a law to protect mainstream intellectual property porn will also benefit from it.

Intellectual property is already protected. If and when it comes to enforcement (sites being blocked or shut down, arrests being made, etc). porn will not be a government priority.

[SpicyM]

If some law in the US is passed, tubes will just move their busines to hosting companies in another countries

It will only be effective if the most developed countries enforce the same rules.

[justinsain]

Originally Posted by escorpio

Intellectual property is already protected. If and when it comes to enforcement (sites being blocked or shut down, arrests being made, etc). porn will not be a government priority.

If intellectual property was protected there wouldn't be any piracy

Before the internet the usual media outlets like newspapers and magazine publishers wouldn't dare use and publish intellectual property without permission from its rightful owner. There is no way someone could scan a bunch of images from a magazine and give or sell it to another magazine and that magazine publish them. There would be severe penalties and no problem enforcing them.

If today's website owners were held to the same standards of those magazine publisher which BTW still adhere to those rules, the game would change dramatically and the adult industry would benefit greatly.

The ease of copy and distribution, the user upload loop hole, different laws for different countries and a world wide connection really crushed that protection the media enjoyed before the internet. As I said before, if and when they find a way to once again protect mainstream intellectual property from being abused on the internet porn will also benefit from the same laws.

[Agent 488]

mainstream old media steals shit just as bad. i've had my mainstream stories and jacked many times without any attribution.

fuck them.

[bronco67]

Originally Posted by justinsain

If intellectual property was protected there wouldn't be any piracy

Before the internet the usual media outlets like newspapers and magazine publishers wouldn't dare use and publish intellectual property without permission from its rightful owner. There is no way someone could scan a bunch of images from a magazine and give or sell it to another magazine and that magazine publish them. There would be severe penalties and no problem enforcing them.

If today's website owners were held to the same standards of those magazine publisher which BTW still adhere to those rules, the game would change dramatically and the adult industry would benefit greatly.

The ease of copy and distribution, the user upload loop hole, different laws for different countries and a world wide connection really crushed that protection the media enjoyed before the internet. As I said before, if and when they find a way to once again protect mainstream intellectual property from being abused on the internet porn will also benefit from the same laws.

Exactly the problem. The reason digital theft exists in such a big way is that its free of consequences. People would steal whatever they could, if they knew they wouldn't get tackled by a cop and put in handcuffs.

[escorpio]

Originally Posted by justinsain

If intellectual property was protected there wouldn't be any piracy

Before the internet the usual media outlets like newspapers and magazine publishers wouldn't dare use and publish intellectual property without permission from its rightful owner. There is no way someone could scan a bunch of images from a magazine and give or sell it to another magazine and that magazine publish them. There would be severe penalties and no problem enforcing them.

If today's website owners were held to the same standards of those magazine publisher which BTW still adhere to those rules, the game would change dramatically and the adult industry would benefit greatly.

The ease of copy and distribution, the user upload loop hole, different laws for different countries and a world wide connection really crushed that protection the media enjoyed before the internet. As I said before, if and when they find a way to once again protect mainstream intellectual property from being abused on the internet porn will also benefit from the same laws.

If drugs were illegal no one would use them.

The laws are there, but as you pointed out they are difficult (if not impossible) to enforce on the internet. It's not about protective laws, it's about being able to enforce them and I don't think that the government is in a hurry to protect porn piracy through enforcement.

I personally can think of no real way to stop online piracy, because of the reasons you pointed out in the third paragraph. Governments can make it more difficult by playing wack-a-mole with sites but the genie is out of the bottle.

[Agent 488]

no one even reads the article or bill so these threads are pointless.

[justinsain]

Originally Posted by escorpio

If drugs were illegal no one would use them.

The laws are there, but as you pointed out they are difficult (if not impossible) to enforce on the internet. It's not about protective laws, it's about being able to enforce them and I don't think that the government is in a hurry to protect porn piracy through enforcement.

I personally can think of no real way to stop online piracy, because of the reasons you pointed out in the third paragraph. Governments can make it more difficult by playing wack-a-mole with sites but the genie is out of the bottle.

The whole user submitted, DMCA BS is a huge loop hole that allows site owners to use stolen intellectual property without repercussion.

Make the site owner RESPONSIBLE for everything on their site just as a magazine publisher is responsible for everything between its covers. Just doing that would allow intellectual property owners to use the laws available to them to their best advantage. Then a site owner would have two choices, pay up front for legitimate content or pay out their ass in a civil lawsuit.

[plsureking]

Originally Posted by DWB

I wish they would just shut the whole internet down just to teach everyone a lesson.

then i could follow my dream of rice farming..

.

[Chezter]

Google is US company, just banning those sites from google would help extremely, but it does not seem they are going to do that..

[L-Pink]

Originally Posted by justinsain

If intellectual property was protected there wouldn't be any piracy

Before the internet the usual media outlets like newspapers and magazine publishers wouldn't dare use and publish intellectual property without permission from its rightful owner. There is no way someone could scan a bunch of images from a magazine and give or sell it to another magazine and that magazine publish them. There would be severe penalties and no problem enforcing them.

If today's website owners were held to the same standards of those magazine publisher which BTW still adhere to those rules, the game would change dramatically and the adult industry would benefit greatly.

The ease of copy and distribution, the user upload loop hole, different laws for different countries and a world wide connection really crushed that protection the media enjoyed before the internet. As I said before, if and when they find a way to once again protect mainstream intellectual property from being abused on the internet porn will also benefit from the same laws.

Originally Posted by justinsain

The whole user submitted, DMCA BS is a huge loop hole that allows site owners to use stolen intellectual property without repercussion.

Make the site owner RESPONSIBLE for everything on their site just as a magazine publisher is responsible for everything between its covers. Just doing that would allow intellectual property owners to use the laws available to them to their best advantage. Then a site owner would have two choices, pay up front for legitimate content or pay out their ass in a civil lawsuit.

Good posts

.

[gideongallery]

Originally Posted by justinsain

The whole user submitted, DMCA BS is a huge loop hole that allows site owners to use stolen intellectual property without repercussion.

Make the site owner RESPONSIBLE for everything on their site just as a magazine publisher is responsible for everything between its covers. Just doing that would allow intellectual property owners to use the laws available to them to their best advantage. Then a site owner would have two choices, pay up front for legitimate content or pay out their ass in a civil lawsuit.

yeah if little johnny steals his dad credit card to get access to your site make sure to drag your ass off to jail like all the other scum bags who sell porn to kids.

oh wait.

[justinsain]

Originally Posted by gideongallery

yeah if little johnny steals his dad credit card to get access to your site make sure to drag your ass off to jail like all the other scum bags who sell porn to kids.

oh wait.

Not sure what your point is but I will say it is the responsibility of the parent to govern what their child does on the internet and what their child might use or do like their credit card or watching R rated movies or using the car or getting liquor in the cabinet or raiding Dad's porn stash in his master bedroom closet.

An adult site should have an easy to understand warning page so that anyone offended or shouldn't be looking at it ( minors ) has the opportunity to turn back when appropriate. Other than that keeping kids off any site unsuitable for minors should be the burden of the parents.

[L-Pink]

Originally Posted by gideongallery

yeah if little johnny steals his dad credit card to get access to your site make sure to drag your ass off to jail like all the other scum bags who sell porn to kids.

oh wait.

Actually the porn is being sold to the cardholder. Stopping or reporting the theft or unauthorized use of that card is the responsibility of the cardholder not the merchant.

.

[Angry Jew Cat - Banned for Life]

Originally Posted by SpicyM

If some law in the US is passed, tubes will just move their busines to hosting companies in another countries

It will only be effective if the most developed countries enforce the same rules.

The US government has already proven that they can and will snag domains. That carries some power in itself. Even if they can get control of a domain, if they want to shut a site down bad enough, they can do it. Fact is, they just don't want to "that" much yet. It brings them into the corsshairs just a little too much to go for sweeping control of te internet. It's something they have to slowly pick at until they've strangled the life out of it completely.

[czarina]

I read that as "porn midget"

[Robbie]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

interesting, how will they reach across borders to shut sites down though i wonder

I would suspect through international treaties. And then websites located in countries that don't sign the treaty and engage in piracy would be blocked from the U.S.

[gideongallery]

Originally Posted by justinsain

Not sure what your point is but I will say it is the responsibility of the parent to govern what their child does on the internet and what their child might use or do like their credit card or watching R rated movies or using the car or getting liquor in the cabinet or raiding Dad's porn stash in his master bedroom closet.

An adult site should have an easy to understand warning page so that anyone offended or shouldn't be looking at it ( minors ) has the opportunity to turn back when appropriate. Other than that keeping kids off any site unsuitable for minors should be the burden of the parents.

just pointing out the double standard
you want the host to be responsible for the infringement of their users

demanding that the basically shut down completely until they figuire out a way to perfectly solve the problem

yet you want to shift the responsiblity for your own transgression (you did accept the money and grant access) to the parents.

Originally Posted by L-Pink

Actually the porn is being sold to the cardholder. Stopping or reporting the theft or unauthorized use of that card is the responsibility of the cardholder not the merchant.

.

exactly sort of like how the actual uploader is the one that responsible for the infringement, not the host.

your only contributing to the distribution of porn to the minor by not doing a perfect job of screening out fake orders.

interesting how you support such a double standard.

[gideongallery]

Originally Posted by justinsain

Not sure what your point is but I will say it is the responsibility of the parent to govern what their child does on the internet and what their child might use or do like their credit card or watching R rated movies or using the car or getting liquor in the cabinet or raiding Dad's porn stash in his master bedroom closet.

An adult site should have an easy to understand warning page so that anyone offended or shouldn't be looking at it ( minors ) has the opportunity to turn back when appropriate. Other than that keeping kids off any site unsuitable for minors should be the burden of the parents.

btw since you wanted to extend the magazine rules for content to the internet

how likely do you think it the parents responsibility excuse would work if a newsstand put up a warning sign on xxx magazine but still took the money from a 10 year old who claimed his mom or dad said it was OK.


should the same level of validation be forced on a medium that could not handle that level of validation.

you can kiss all your sites goodbye.

free speech be damned.

[2intense]

interesting

[justinsain]

Originally Posted by gideongallery

btw since you wanted to extend the magazine rules for content to the internet

how likely do you think it the parents responsibility excuse would work if a newsstand put up a warning sign on xxx magazine but still took the money from a 10 year old who claimed his mom or dad said it was OK.


should the same level of validation be forced on a medium that could not handle that level of validation.

you can kiss all your sites goodbye.

free speech be damned.

If the magazine store owner had a back room marked " Adults Only " and then visible let a minor go in there and bring out a magazine and took the kids money at the counter than by all means the magazine store owner is in the wrong and should be prosecuted.

However, if the kids Dad walked into the store and bought an adult magazine and then took it home and gave it to his kid I believe the store owner wouldn't and shouldn't be held responsible for the kid getting the magazine.

[Tempest]

Originally Posted by bronco67

They must be profitting in some way from their websites. Why run a website with tons of videos in the first place? For fun?

Just because the swiped vids aren't sold individually doesn't mean profit isn't made from them. But it's not really about the profit that the non-creators are making...its the customers their taking away from the people that worked to produce the video.

Now here comes the lame argument "any exposure is good exposure"....

Profiting (cams, dating, etc) from having stolen shit on your site isn't the same as actually selling that stolen shit. And since the sites are filled with "user uploaded" content, or stuff provided by sponsors or from content they've licensed, well basically they're free and clear given the DMCA crapolla... It would have to be proven that they were doing the actual stealing.

[gideongallery]

Originally Posted by justinsain

If the magazine store owner had a back room marked " Adults Only " and then visible let a minor go in there and bring out a magazine and took the kids money at the counter than by all means the magazine store owner is in the wrong and should be prosecuted.

in otherwords doing absolutely nothing whatsoever to verify the age of the person but taking the payment (sort of like billy taking his dad credit card example)

However, if the kids Dad walked into the store and bought an adult magazine and then took it home and gave it to his kid I believe the store owner wouldn't and shouldn't be held responsible for the kid getting the magazine.

which would be like the parent buying the membership and then letting their kid access the porn site at home

absolutely nothing like the kid taking the dad credit card and paying for it (see above)

until your willing to live by the same rules you want someone else too, your argument is total BS