Stolen Content solution ?? - GoFuckYourself.com

will76 · 11-02-2009, 03:01 PM

I don't produce my own content or own exlusive content so this doesn't affect me directly, just indirectly. However if I was producing content or owned exclusive content that was getting stolen I would do the following:

Why hasn't anyone done this or tell me why this is not a good idea?

First of all find a site that is medium size, that constantly has your content listed on it. You send them out DMCA they take it down, next day more content is back up etc... It's a cycle you can't beat.

I'm betting that half or more of these medium to small sites steal the content themselves and make it look like their "members" are posting it. Or at the very least they stolen all of the content initially to get the site filled up ready to have it launched. With DMCA you can't sue the site for having stolen content on it if they comply to your requests to have it taken down. However there is no protection under DMCA for the members who uploaded the content.

If you take site XYZ and sue the members who uploaded your content to their site, you would be sending the site subpoena for all of their information for the members who uploaded your content. Do you really want to sue the members? That's a different approach. But my hunch is that most of these sites will be fucked when hit with a subpoena because they where the ones who added the stolen content in the first place. Then there is no DMCA protection, and if they are a decent size site that actually makes money you should be able to sue and receive damages.

Would this just be for sites/companies based in the US or in your country ? not sure about that part.

If it was a real member that uploaded your stolen content to site XYZ you could threaten to sue them or settle for a small amount they could afford. Or sue them and make a point that if any users steal your content that you will sue them. Sure it wont stop content theft but I bet your stuff gets stolen a lot less than the other guys. And/Or if you sue the users of site XYZ it might cause them to stop using that site and move to another site which would be hurting site XYZ's business and maybe then they would actually be proactive about content theft so you would leave their members alone.

So why would this not work? And please read it all and comprehend what I am saying before you reply back "wouldn't work". and thanks in advance to the smart asses who reply back with that anyway.

Barefootsies · 11-02-2009, 03:04 PM

90% of the people bitching daily fall into the following catagories....

1. They do not produce content at all. Or are surfers.

2. They just want to bitch. They are not going to pay to enforce copyright either via a third party service, nor hire an employee to do it, or do it themselves. They already threw their hands in the air and just complain daily.

3. Fall in between the content producer, and the program. So the program does not enforce it since the producer could have licensed to more than one company. The producer is understaffed, or too lazy since they already made their money and do not want to spend the time checking if an authorized affiliate, or whatever.

So laziness, and apathy.

will76 · 11-02-2009, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

90% of the people bitching daily fall into the following catagories....

1. They do not produce content at all. Or are surfers.

2. They just want to bitch. They are not going to pay to enforce copyright either via a third party service, nor hire an employee to do it, or do it themselves. They already threw their hands in the air and just complain daily.

3. Fall in between the content producer, and the program. So the program does not enforce it since the producer could have licensed to more than one company. The producer is understaffed, or too lazy since they already made their money and do not want to spend the time checking if an authorized affiliate, or whatever.

So laziness, and apathy.

I've heard of a few companies that spend a good bit of money on attorneys, or uses a DMCA service and are pretty active with it... so let's just pose that question to them, the people in position to sue and that give a shit and want to do something about it.

d-null · 11-02-2009, 03:33 PM

I don't think that legally there is any requirement to archive information on the identity of an uploader, such as IP, so if they were smart they would just purge their server logs of those IP records so that if any subpoena came there would be no information possible to turnover

Barefootsies · 11-02-2009, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by will76

I've heard of a few companies that spend a good bit of money on attorneys, or uses a DMCA service and are pretty active with it... so let's just pose that question to them, the people in position to sue and that give a shit and want to do something about it.

Yes. There are some. Very few, but yes, some who actively police their content.

They openly have talked about it at the shows. They file suit, the people remove the shit and promise not to do it anymore, then they drop the case.

Much the same way a lot of these other industry cases are dropped that we read about in XBIZ monthly. A lot of sabre rattling and press coverage on it. In the end, always dropped or come to terms.

Almost nothing ever goes the distance.

After Shock Media · 11-02-2009, 03:41 PM

People are greedy, just set out a decent cash reward for an insider or previous insider who would be willing to become a whistle blower and provide documentation such as memo's and emails from the managers, owners, etc. Telling them to upload, remove and re-add assorted content etc.

I am positive there has to be at least 1 if not many not so happy, greedy, or out right envious people currently working for or has worked for one of these larger sites with deep pockets who just happened to collect assorted documents.

MRock · 11-02-2009, 05:17 PM

Here you go champ: http://www.wp-board.com/

A few more modern heroes like this could change things ...

Dirty Dane · 11-02-2009, 05:36 PM

Maybe the industry should create massive boards, filehosts, tubes, torrents... with the same "terms" not to infringe. Then record and sue every infringer.

There must be money in that - sad, but true.

will76 · 11-03-2009, 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MRock

Here you go champ: http://www.wp-board.com/

A few more modern heroes like this could change things ...

Thanks for sharing, well worth the read. I applaud his efforts and is similar line of thought to what I was thinking here.

I like this part in particular " The first suit, likely filed in November, will be in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida (Federal Court) in Tampa. That suit will name all those listed above that have not settled, and all those within the United States that provided financial support to the old WP-Board site(s). Yes, this is new from my previous thoughts, but the lawyers feel that we need to attack all those that supported the website as a haven for copyright infringement and other illegal activities."

Would love to see AFF and some other companies that fund these sites full of stolen content get hit with lawsuits too.

Barefootsies · 11-03-2009, 01:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by will76

Would love to see AFF and some other companies that fund these sites full of stolen content get hit with lawsuits too.

They tried in the past to get the advertisers, processors, and others in the 'guilt by association' type thing. It was covered in detail in the trades a few months back.

The judge through out, or dismissed, the others named who do not directly run the site. Only those owning the site could be sued. So like it or not, precedents are being set. Do not count on advertisers, sponsors, others being lumped into any lawsuits any time soon.

Dirty Dane · 11-03-2009, 06:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

They tried in the past to get the advertisers, processors, and others in the 'guilt by association' type thing. It was covered in detail in the trades a few months back.

The judge through out, or dismissed, the others named who do not directly run the site. Only those owning the site could be sued. So like it or not, precedents are being set. Do not count on advertisers, sponsors, others being lumped into any lawsuits any time soon.

So what happened to those who 'could be sued'?

will76 · 11-03-2009, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

They tried in the past to get the advertisers, processors, and others in the 'guilt by association' type thing. It was covered in detail in the trades a few months back.

The judge through out, or dismissed, the others named who do not directly run the site. Only those owning the site could be sued. So like it or not, precedents are being set. Do not count on advertisers, sponsors, others being lumped into any lawsuits any time soon.

Which case was that ?

Barefootsies · 11-03-2009, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane

So what happened to those who 'could be sued'?

Case still had not went to court last I knew. It was still in the sabre rattling stage.

However, judge dismissed all those secondary people that had been listed on the initial lawsuit. As for the case, I am not sure which one's off the top of my head. It was in XBIZ a month or two back talking about it.

Look it up.

Dirty Dane · 11-03-2009, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

Case still had not went to court last I knew. It was still in the sabre rattling stage.

However, judge dismissed all those secondary people that had been listed on the initial lawsuit. As for the case, I am not sure which one's off the top of my head. It was in XBIZ a month or two back talking about it.

Look it up.

Well, essential is how those sponsors continue their business. If they "defend" themselves, then they also admit - or can't deny - knowledge of how they make money... quite opposite of their own "terms", if you ask me...

theking · 11-03-2009, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by will76

Which case was that ?

I think it was in a case against one of the major tube sites and if I remember correctly the entire case was ultimately lost...but I may be wrong. The information was posted on this board.

Dirty Dane · 11-03-2009, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

I think it was in a case against one of the major tube sites and if I remember correctly the entire case was ultimately lost...but I may be wrong. The information was posted on this board.

I think it was the redtube case?

theking · 11-03-2009, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty Dane

I think it was the redtube case?

It was...I just did a search.

11-02-2009, 03:01 PM	#1
will76 Making $$$$ w/ ClickCash Industry Role: Join Date: May 2003 Location: USA Posts: 18,037	Stolen Content solution ?? I don't produce my own content or own exlusive content so this doesn't affect me directly, just indirectly. However if I was producing content or owned exclusive content that was getting stolen I would do the following: Why hasn't anyone done this or tell me why this is not a good idea? First of all find a site that is medium size, that constantly has your content listed on it. You send them out DMCA they take it down, next day more content is back up etc... It's a cycle you can't beat. I'm betting that half or more of these medium to small sites steal the content themselves and make it look like their "members" are posting it. Or at the very least they stolen all of the content initially to get the site filled up ready to have it launched. With DMCA you can't sue the site for having stolen content on it if they comply to your requests to have it taken down. However there is no protection under DMCA for the members who uploaded the content. If you take site XYZ and sue the members who uploaded your content to their site, you would be sending the site subpoena for all of their information for the members who uploaded your content. Do you really want to sue the members? That's a different approach. But my hunch is that most of these sites will be fucked when hit with a subpoena because they where the ones who added the stolen content in the first place. Then there is no DMCA protection, and if they are a decent size site that actually makes money you should be able to sue and receive damages. Would this just be for sites/companies based in the US or in your country ? not sure about that part. If it was a real member that uploaded your stolen content to site XYZ you could threaten to sue them or settle for a small amount they could afford. Or sue them and make a point that if any users steal your content that you will sue them. Sure it wont stop content theft but I bet your stuff gets stolen a lot less than the other guys. And/Or if you sue the users of site XYZ it might cause them to stop using that site and move to another site which would be hurting site XYZ's business and maybe then they would actually be proactive about content theft so you would leave their members alone. So why would this not work? And please read it all and comprehend what I am saying before you reply back "wouldn't work". and thanks in advance to the smart asses who reply back with that anyway. __________________ ICQ: 86364801 Email: will [at] innovativeassets [dot] com PROGRAM SHIT LIST - DO NOT PROMOTE (click link for gfy thread) FNCash \| Media Revenue Last edited by will76; 11-02-2009 at 03:03 PM..

11-02-2009, 03:04 PM	#2
Barefootsies Choice is an Illusion Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Land of Obama Posts: 42,635	90% of the people bitching daily fall into the following catagories.... 1. They do not produce content at all. Or are surfers. 2. They just want to bitch. They are not going to pay to enforce copyright either via a third party service, nor hire an employee to do it, or do it themselves. They already threw their hands in the air and just complain daily. 3. Fall in between the content producer, and the program. So the program does not enforce it since the producer could have licensed to more than one company. The producer is understaffed, or too lazy since they already made their money and do not want to spend the time checking if an authorized affiliate, or whatever. So laziness, and apathy. __________________ Should You Email Your Members? Link1 \| Link2 \| Link3 Enough Said. "Would you rather live like a king for a year or like a prince forever?"

11-02-2009, 03:41 PM	#6
After Shock Media It's coming look busy Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn". Posts: 35,299	People are greedy, just set out a decent cash reward for an insider or previous insider who would be willing to become a whistle blower and provide documentation such as memo's and emails from the managers, owners, etc. Telling them to upload, remove and re-add assorted content etc. I am positive there has to be at least 1 if not many not so happy, greedy, or out right envious people currently working for or has worked for one of these larger sites with deep pockets who just happened to collect assorted documents. __________________ [email protected] ICQ:135982156 AIM: Aftershockmed1a MSN: [email protected]

11-02-2009, 05:17 PM	#7
MRock Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Tampa Posts: 251	Here you go champ: http://www.wp-board.com/ A few more modern heroes like this could change things ... __________________ Sell more Jill: Strapon Gurl Clips - Pixaloons Video Clips - Busty Smoker Clips

11-02-2009, 03:33 PM	#4
d-null . . . Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: NY Posts: 13,724	I don't think that legally there is any requirement to archive information on the identity of an uploader, such as IP, so if they were smart they would just purge their server logs of those IP records so that if any subpoena came there would be no information possible to turnover

11-02-2009, 05:36 PM	#8
Dirty Dane Sick Fuck Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: www Posts: 9,491	Maybe the industry should create massive boards, filehosts, tubes, torrents... with the same "terms" not to infringe. Then record and sue every infringer. There must be money in that - sad, but true.