The New Yorker article about X-Art & Copyright Infringement Lawsuits

[marcop]

Read all about it: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blog...-web-site.html

From the article: "In 2006, Colette Pelissier was selling houses in Southern California, and her boyfriend, Brigham Field, was working as a photographer of nude models. Colette wanted to leave the real-estate business, so she convinced her boyfriend to start making adult films. ?I had this idea, when the real-estate market was cooling?you know, maybe we could make beautiful erotic movies,? she said."

[slapass]

2 million a month and they were paying 2 million a year on production. Not bad.

[adultmobile]

Very interesting article. Especially:

"To sue an I.P. address is a huge problem,? that this identification system can ensnare the wrong person, as some defendants have argued. "
"as of early May, they had filed about thirty-eight per cent of all copyright suits (in USA?) in 2014."

[AdultKing]

Meanwhile sites like UltraMegaBit, operating 100% in the USA, are being ignored by the likes of X-Art because it's easier to sue downloaders.

There are several well qualified corporate defendants to pursue that are involved in the large scale piracy of X-Art material, where are the actions against them ?

[Captain Kawaii]

Originally Posted by AdultKing

Meanwhile sites like UltraMegaBit, operating 100% in the USA, are being ignored by the likes of X-Art because it's easier to sue downloaders.

There are several well qualified corporate defendants to pursue that are involved in the large scale piracy of X-Art material, where are the actions against them ?

^^^^

Doesn't make Lipshitz (sic) and X-Art look very good does it? High profile cases against the "corporate thieves" are whats needed instead of hammering "little people" who may or may not be guilty.

[Mutt]

Originally Posted by AdultKing

Meanwhile sites like UltraMegaBit, operating 100% in the USA, are being ignored by the likes of X-Art because it's easier to sue downloaders.

There are several well qualified corporate defendants to pursue that are involved in the large scale piracy of X-Art material, where are the actions against them ?

Because it's much harder, much riskier and much more expensive to sue the file sharing operators and tubes, thanks to the DMCA and offshore locales. Companies making millions of dollars can afford top notch litigation attorneys. What X-Art is doing costs them nothing, this lawyer is taking his cut of what he wins.

[AdultKing]

Originally Posted by Mutt

What X-Art is doing costs them nothing, this lawyer is taking his cut of what he wins.

I understand the mechanics of this and the cost/benefit proposition.

What I am saying is that let's call it for what it is, it's another money making scheme for X-Art, not a crusade against piracy.

[PornDiscounts-V]

Monthly installment.

[slapass]

Originally Posted by Mutt

Because it's much harder, much riskier and much more expensive to sue the file sharing operators and tubes, thanks to the DMCA and offshore locales. Companies making millions of dollars can afford top notch litigation attorneys. What X-Art is doing costs them nothing, this lawyer is taking his cut of what he wins.

Some smart lawyer could do it on the come and create a money machine if he does enough of them.

[blackmonsters]

Originally Posted by AdultKing

Meanwhile sites like UltraMegaBit, operating 100% in the USA, are being ignored by the likes of X-Art because it's easier to sue downloaders.

There are several well qualified corporate defendants to pursue that are involved in the large scale piracy of X-Art material, where are the actions against them ?

"Suing downloaders" seems like a broad description of something that isn't that broad.
Have they sued 200 million downloaders, because that's how many "downloaders" there are.

Seems like they are just picking on a few downloaders.

[signupdamnit]

The site attracted a few hundred subscribers in its first year, then a couple thousand the next; it became profitable by 2010. The couple married in 2011; Pelissier changed her last name to Pelissier Field. That year, she noticed a change at X-art.com: the number of subscribers?the site had about fifty thousand by then?had stopped growing. The Fields hired an outside company to investigate whether people were watching their films without paying. They concluded that, each month, three hundred thousand people were watching pirated versions of their movies?including eighty thousand in the U.S. ?We felt like we had to do something,? she said. ?I don?t want to wake up in five years and have everything be free.?

By 2013, subscriptions had declined to below fifty thousand. The Fields ramped up their annual production budget to around two million dollars, hoping to lure more subscribers with fresher material.

Interesting. 2011 seems to be about the year where most of the big guys started feeling the fallout from the DMCA tube model and piracy. Kink also reported it's first loss in 2011 according to another article where they interviewed the owner.

[The Porn Nerd]

How the fuck do you even GET fifty thousand members??

[SGS]

Originally Posted by The Porn Nerd

How the fuck do you even GET fifty thousand members??

With good content

[JimmyStephans]

I think the idea that they are only suing downloaders is incorrect. Many, many (most) of the Malibu Media cases are bittorrent users.

That means they are downloading AND distributing the content.

DMCA protects so many of these sites that just filing a lawsuit doesn't do anything. You MUST have evidence that the site is operating outside the wide latitude the DMCA gives them. If you sue without that evidence the court will dismiss the case and likely sanction the lawyer.

Think back to Spring 2012. Oron.com was the big file locker everybody hated. Over on the XBiz forum there was discussions about what to do, can we sue, etc. In that case a few determined people worked very hard behind the scenes, took some risks, and eventually came up with the evidence that showed who the owners were, that they hired people from India on freelancer sites to post (for pennies per post), that they also owned a couple of the biggest forums, that they made deals with other forums, etc.

By June, one company took the lead and filed a lawsuit but others had donated behind the scenes - with cash or labor or both. And within days Oron was gone.

Just blabbing here on GFY doesn't help at all. It takes action... AK does what he can, a few others have done what they can, but most spend more time whining than they do acting.

[JimmyStephans]

And some companies do take on the big guys - even if they often lose. They at least try and set precedent for future cases.

http://www.xbiz.com/news/179195

[InfoGuy]

Today, they average more than three suits a day ... Nearly every case settles on confidential terms, according to a review of dozens of court records. Malibu Media?s attorney, Keith Lipscomb, said that most defendants settle by paying between about two thousand and thirty thousand dollars.

lawyers are expensive, so the system is stacked in favor of companies that can file a lot of suits against people who can afford to settle but can?t afford to hire a lawyer.

As odds are heavily stacked in favor of the plaintiff, why aren't more adult content owners taking this approach to deter piracy?

[DamianJ]

Originally Posted by AdultKing

Meanwhile sites like UltraMegaBit, operating 100% in the USA, are being ignored by the likes of X-Art because it's easier to sue downloaders.

There are several well qualified corporate defendants to pursue that are involved in the large scale piracy of X-Art material, where are the actions against them ?

Quasi-blackmail is just SO much easier than actually having to go to court...

[DamianJ]

Originally Posted by JimmyStephans

I think the idea that they are only suing downloaders is incorrect. Many, many (most) of the Malibu Media cases are bittorrent users.

That means they are downloading AND distributing the content.

In piracy, 'downloaders' are people who are getting stuff from sites. Be that torrents or file lockers or usenet.

'Uploaders' are the people that originally steal and upload the content.

Seeding via a torrent isn't really uploading, (I mean, it is technically) but most people probably don't even know they are uploading.

The point is that it is very easy money to blackmail torrent users as they never have to go to court. Going after the source of the problem, the original uploader is much harder technically and would require going to court. Which they don't want to do when they can just send out a blackmail letter and get cash.

[JimmyStephans]

Originally Posted by InfoGuy

As odds are heavily stacked in favor of the plaintiff, why aren't more adult content owners taking this approach to deter piracy?

That is very easy to answer....

1- Most are too fucking lazy and find it easier to stay on GFY all day and bitch about it than to take action.

2- Most are liars and don't make enough money to hire lawyers.

3- Most are liars and don't make enough money to register their copyrightable works in the first place - and to claim statutory damages that needs to be done.

[JimmyStephans]

Originally Posted by InfoGuy

As odds are heavily stacked in favor of the plaintiff, why aren't more adult content owners taking this approach to deter piracy?

Odds are NOT stacked in favor of the Plaintiff at all. Copyright violations are a "strict liability offense".

That means its simple: Either the defendant did it or he didn't. The Plaintiff has to prove that the defendant did it.

[The Porn Nerd]

Originally Posted by SGS

With good content

Takes more than just good content, it takes traffic.

I should've asked:
"How much daily traffic does X-Art get?"

[Roald]

Originally Posted by The Porn Nerd

Takes more than just good content, it takes traffic.

I should've asked:
"How much daily traffic does X-Art get?"

But then again with good content comes good traffic ;)

[SGS]

Originally Posted by The Porn Nerd

Takes more than just good content, it takes traffic.

I should've asked:
"How much daily traffic does X-Art get?"

99% is good content that people actually *want to pay to see* rather than burned out crap you can see everywhere.

[SGS]

Originally Posted by Roald

But then again with good content comes good traffic ;)

Exactly

[Captain Kawaii]

Originally Posted by Roald

But then again with good content comes good traffic ;)

Agree 1000% - Whenever I fly by a tube site to see whats the latest stolen, illegal crap its always generic hardcore or illegal content like kids and chicks and horses.

The best sites I work with avoid tubes like the plague.

[PXN]

I bet they get more profit from sueing pple then they indicate in the article.

[tony286]

Originally Posted by JimmyStephans

And some companies do take on the big guys - even if they often lose. They at least try and set precedent for future cases.

http://www.xbiz.com/news/179195

its about time with leaseweb.

[Markul]

Originally Posted by DamianJ

Quasi-blackmail is just SO much easier than actually having to go to court...

but it might - eventually - land you in prison.

[JA$ON]

Originally Posted by The Porn Nerd

How the fuck do you even GET fifty thousand members??

Big programs get that many sales a month. Now ACTIVE members is another story, lol

[JimmyStephans]

Pre-Litigation settlement offers are normal and have been going on for years. Its standard procedure in civil lawsuits for the sides to trade letters and offers before going to court.

The truth is that the courts encourage it. Settling things before filling up the court docket is encouraged by the Judges, clerks and entire legal system.

Every single time there is a car crash with injury the lawyer for the injured party contacts the lawyer for the "at fault" party (or their insurance company) with a pre-litigation offer.

This stuff is normal.

It got a tiny bad reputation recently BECAUSE THE PIRATES WANT IT TO HAVE A BAD REPUTATION and make all sorts of claims on pro-piracy blogs about "I never did it but they are theartening me".... (when stats show 95% or more did do it but they don't realize how detailed logs and other things are so they think they can lie their way out of it).

And, of course there was ONE batch of bad lawyers that treated copyright litigation as a profit making adventure and started sending letters discussing suits and settlements for copyrights they or their own clients did not own (which is illegal).

The court would look down on the lawyer that went directly to filing suit without having first sent a Cease & Desist / Pre-Litigation Settlement letter.

And, if no letter was sent in advance, the pirates would also make that an issue and start saying how unfair it is that they got sued without warning, without getting a chance to keep their name out of court, without a chance to handle it in private, etc.

ONLY THE PIRATES WHINE ABOUT THIS STUFF.

Met-Art, X-Art and all the way down to tiny operartion like mine - we would all much rather not have to defend our business from pirates 24/7, we would all much rather not be force to spend countless hours chasing down pirates, and for damn sure we would much rather not have to pay IP companies and lawyers.

ONLY THE PIRATES CAN STOP THESE LAWSUITS.

[DamianJ]

Originally Posted by JimmyStephans

Every single time there is a car crash with injury the lawyer for the injured party contacts the lawyer for the "at fault" party (or their insurance company) with a pre-litigation offer.

Yes, indeed. But with a car crash, you know the other person was actually involved in a crime. In this case, there is no evidence. Which is why these cases NEVER go to trial.

Originally Posted by JimmyStephans

(when stats show 95% or more did do it)

Seeing as none of these blackmail cases have gone to trial, please link me to your source for your totally made up 95% nonsense. I could do with a laugh.

Originally Posted by JimmyStephans

And, of course there was ONE batch of bad lawyers that treated copyright litigation as a profit making adventure

There were many lawyers doing that. In the UK and USA.

Originally Posted by JimmyStephans

The court would look down on the lawyer that went directly to filing suit without having first sent a Cease & Desist / Pre-Litigation Settlement letter.

The court would look down on them for not having a shred of evidence, not a lack of pre-litigation letter. Which is why none of these cases have gone to court.

Originally Posted by JimmyStephans

ONLY THE PIRATES WHINE ABOUT THIS STUFF.

Really? So you think the EFF are pirates? You think newspapers are pirates? You think judges that rule these blackmail letters are a scam are pirates?

The people that 'moan' about the blackmail scam are people that think blackmail scams are bad.

Originally Posted by JimmyStephans

ONLY THE PIRATES CAN STOP THESE LAWSUITS.

Really? Couldn't people just stop paying blackmail lawyer scam artists to stop sending out blackmail scam letters?

PS Using caps lock doesn't make you right.

[NewNick]

Originally Posted by AdultKing

I understand the mechanics of this and the cost/benefit proposition.

What I am saying is that let's call it for what it is, it's another money making scheme for X-Art, not a crusade against piracy.

You of all people should understand that you have to play by the rules and work the system to get where you want to be.

If going after the individuals rather that the companies is the best way to get a return of the cost of the litigation then that is what you have to do.

It is the fault of the lawmakers that we are where we are today.

[NewNick]

Originally Posted by Roald

But then again with good content comes good traffic ;)

Paul ? Is that you ?

[Roald]

Originally Posted by NewNick

Paul ? Is that you ?

Lol nice one

[InfoGuy]

Originally Posted by DamianJ

Yes, indeed. But with a car crash, you know the other person was actually involved in a crime. In this case, there is no evidence. Which is why these cases NEVER go to trial.

Seeing as none of these blackmail cases have gone to trial, please link me to your source for your totally made up 95% nonsense. I could do with a laugh.

The court would look down on them for not having a shred of evidence, not a lack of pre-litigation letter. Which is why none of these cases have gone to court.

You are wrong. Malibu Media pursued one of these pirates, took him to court and won a verdict with a judgment of $112,500 plus costs and legal fees (~$1/2 million) on June 10, 2013.

Adult film company suing people who download porn

Also, car crashes are not usually classified as crimes unless they're DUIs or from reckless driving.

[DamianJ]

Originally Posted by InfoGuy

You are wrong. Malibu Media pursued one of these pirates, took him to court and won a verdict with a judgment of $112,500 plus costs and legal fees (~$1/2 million) on June 10, 2013.

Sorry, my bad. ONE case has been brought to court, a year ago. And the 112,500 John Doe got done, and that was because he lied in court, so after trebling the fine, he multiplied it 10 fold because of the lie. They still will only get cents on the dollar.

Originally Posted by InfoGuy

Also, car crashes are not usually classified as crimes unless they're DUIs or from reckless driving.

True enough, but the point was, a letter is sent to someone you know for a fact was involved in an accident. Not just someone who pays for an IP.

We all know this is just a cash getting exercise and is nothing to do with fighting piracy.

It's despicable and a cunt's game.