Paul Markham

Making money out of someone viewing/downloading pirated porn. What a terrible concept.

Like selling space for an advert on a site that makes money off pirated porn.

You know what would happen if you got subpoenaed to give out the info on downloaders on your Tubes. So please no crocodile tears about the poor downloaders. Illegal Tubes make their money off them.

__________________



Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

Nathan

Actually, no, suing downloaders from my tubes is just ridiculously stupid since you would never ever win in court.

Torrents are completely different...

__________________
"Think about it a little more and you'll agree with me, because you're smart and I'm right."
- Charlie Munger

Nathan

What illegal tubes do, is none of my business, since I own no illegal tubes... and as I said before, you can not subpoena info from surfers/viewers of our tubes, there is no legal basis for you to do so, none whatsoever...

You clearly do not understand copyright law...

__________________
"Think about it a little more and you'll agree with me, because you're smart and I'm right."
- Charlie Munger

neilmc

These companies are interesting, they might prove useful one day.

theking

There is a reason he is called clueless.

__________________
When you're running down my country hoss...you're walking on the fighting side of me!

FOR THE LYING LOWLIFE POSTING AS PATHFINDER...https://gfy.com/fucking-around-and-pr...athfinder.html

Robbie

BWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Nathan you just got exposed yet again bro!

__________________
-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.Com

Nathan

Sorry to let you know, but there is nothing exposed nor is there anything TO expose...

It is scary to see how few people understand tubes and dmca though..

__________________
"Think about it a little more and you'll agree with me, because you're smart and I'm right."
- Charlie Munger

theking

How many people have your attorney's sent a letter to that chose not to fight in court and chose not to pay...but simply chose to not appear in court and lose by default...and just say fuck it...try to collect the judgement? They then will have minimal exposure.

I have sued more than one person in small claims court that did not appear and lost by default...and have yet to collect a dime from the judgement against them...except for one person...who voluntarily paid the judgement.

__________________
When you're running down my country hoss...you're walking on the fighting side of me!

FOR THE LYING LOWLIFE POSTING AS PATHFINDER...https://gfy.com/fucking-around-and-pr...athfinder.html

Dirty Dane

I think you should distinguish between piracy and pirate. Taking action against an individual is not the same as taking action against a worldwide crime. No one can fight piracy alone but they can do whatever they can to police their own work and get the money they are rightfully entitled to. This is about peoples work, ie. money, not secret documents at Wikileaks, so question the motive is pointless. If everyone else were doing the same, then fighting piracy will have bigger effect. Maybe organize it and ultimately go for the host who encourage it, like Pirate Bay.

Pirate Bay has been sued, the founders face possible jailtime, their host has been fined, the website and its tracker have been ordered by courts to be blocked by ISPs on DNS level. They are part of the problem, bigger problem than uploaders, and don't tell me all of that happened without reason.

If A is more damaging than B or C, we could still leave out A from the discussion, but that doesn't change the fact that A is still the one creating most damage. Each case is individual and unique, "what if" "then..", but the logic doesn't change. Even ISPs or software developers can be targeted if there are good reasons to believe they are bigger part of a problem.

Paul Markham

Can you be subpoenaed of lists of people downloading content on your site you allowed others to upload and you don't own? If so you might want to inform people they are in danger of getting sued.

I fully understand why you're against this as it could screw up your business model.

__________________



Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500.
PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

Robbie

Whatever man. You're right...guys like me don't understand dmca. While you, you've now owned Brazzers for like how long? A cup of coffee? And you are an expert?

How about this...since you are saying you sincerely don't agree with what happened in the past and want to do the right thing...Why don't you simply have your programmer redirect that URL that shows up for Jordan Capri in the search engines as number one, back to it's rightful owner. That would seem fair to me. Redirect it to Jordan's site. It's obviously a screen capture of the vid right off of Lightspeed.

That is simple to do and wouldn't hurt you one bit. My programmer could do that in 10 seconds time (and then claim it took him an hour so he could fuck off playing video games). So now that that particular URL to a vid on Pornhub has been shown directly to YOU (the owner), there is absolutely no excuse for it to be there or for it to EVER be allowed there again...right? I know I could have my guy script that up so easily it's a joke. You must have at least one smart guy working with you don't ya?

__________________
-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.Com

Nathan

Robbie, again, you do not understand the point of dmca... If the copyright owner sends a notice about this clip, it will be removed in a matter of a few hours.

But it does require a dmca notice, for various reasons I am not going to post here... It also can not be redirected, completely regardless of if this is technically possible or not...

Paul, you have simply repeated the same thing you said before without even reacting one bit about my reply, so you clearly have no arguments...

Dirty Dane, you are right that we need to distinguish pirate and piracy. I also think a downloader of a torrent is not always a pirate, an uploader though clearly is! I disagree regarding your ISP and software developer comments though. Unless again they actively advertise to pull in pirates.

__________________
"Think about it a little more and you'll agree with me, because you're smart and I'm right."
- Charlie Munger

DBS.US

Starbucks does not ask for ID when you use there wireless internet and Cable companies don't ask for ID when the set up internet in your home. Who do you sue?

__________________
Make a Free Chaturbate White Label site in 34 minutes and be making money tonight

DWB

Why is Pink Visual suing Brazzers?

You didn't answer that from before. Do they also not understand the law and simply sued your company for shits and giggles?

Dirty Dane

Examples:

Forum:
I noticed on a porn piracy forum that a filehost was personally advertising their service. "Upload to us, and we pay you X per Y downloads". The thread was even sticky. At their website, however, their TOS said something like "do not upload without authorization, blah blah...". It's quite clear that such statement is only for cosmetic and legal protection. But the thread is evidence of encouraging piracy, also the context since it was only pirated files linked on the forum.

Tube:
"Upload to us, become a porn pimp/king". While that slogan and other "prizes" is not directly commercial, it still encourage and motives the uploaders to get a "name", just like the torrent sites or newsgroups. If additionally the tube uploads are to be approved before published and there are tons of full movies from different sources with same uploader, the chances of piracy (and the hosts knowledge of it) is close to 100% in most cases.

Torrent sites (and some tubes):
"You are not allowed to upload for commercial purpose. We delete "spam" ". That statement alone leave out anything else than piracy. Well, maybe 0.01% of the porn uploaded is someone made themselves...


It's not these activities alone that bring it to the next level, ISPs or software developers. If that happens, it's mainly a consequense of criminal investigations, ie. size and amount. The number of private lawsuits and reports and the number of users is a good indicator. An ISP can be ordered to block or close a website. Law enforcements can monitor traffic live if they believe there is a good reason, no tube, p2p, Rapidshare or even Google is excempt or protected from this. A software developer can be targeted if he construct or instruct users to obstruct police investigations etc. Together with changes in laws, that's not a situation most people want, especially the pirates but ironically they are the ones partially creating the situation. Pirate Bay was originally a "host" for pirates and laughing at US laws, today they hide in caves to withstand nuclear bombs and they are resellers of the illusion called VPN. Don't you see the patterns?

Robbie

Nathan...You OWN the site. You don't have to have a DMCA for ANY reason. You can simply remove it. How long have you been in this business again? lol

As far as you can not redirect it...BULLSHIT. You could do it right now. Nothing stopping you legally in any way. It's your site. I can take shit down and put it up on any site I own. So can anybody...but now you're going to claim that because of DMCA you can't do anything? What a joke!

Please explain to me what you would do if CP were involved? You would take it the fuck down is what you would do DMCA or no DMCA.

Why do you want to act so ignorant?

Anyway, I see now where you're coming from. You are going to keep fucking people. Fair enough.

This isn't about DMCA or you at all anyway. This is about COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT plain and simple. And the people uploading that to YOUR site are the criminals under copyright infringement. And the DMCA law doesn't apply in any way.

Yeah, Steve can definitely subpoena you for info on the person that uploaded that Jordan Capri vid. And you will comply. DMCA isn't even involved. Better get ready.

__________________
-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.Com

DWB

Yes Robbie, but because you don't understand DMCA or the law, and are probably time-shifting as we speak, you lose. Noob.

Robbie

Yeah, there are laws...that can't be discussed here, that prevent a person from changing anything on their own website. So he is powerless to remove Steve's video or redirect it to Steve's site. But the reasons can't be discussed here.

WTF?!?!?!

Goddamn. Just say straight out that you aren't gonna do it because you don't want to. Cause that is straight up bullshit you're spinning.

I can go in my admin on my tube site and hit "Delete" on any video I want to. And NOBODY can do shit about it. But Pornhub must be "special" and just because you own the site doesn't mean you have any real power, but it's reasons that can't be discussed. I'm gonna have to re-read the dmca law to see that part, it must be in invisible ink when it got to the section that says you can't change shit on your own website. lol

I don't have a problem with you Nathan/Fabian, but please don't act like that around me. Save that crap for the people who didn't pave the block you've been around.

__________________
-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.Com

DWB

He either doesn't want to and it's business as usual as everyone expected, or he can't because he doesn't actually own it.

Otherwise it just doesn't make any God dammed sense.

FlexxAeon

sometimes i am ashamed to be in this biz, i swear

__________________
flexx [dot] aeon [at] gmail

RK

Actually, cable companies ask for two pieces of ID when setting up a new account. Even if they didn't, you just sue whoever the account is registered to.

__________________
Does anyone look down here?

RK

The law on the subject is very clear. It is a criminal and civil offense, in the USA, to make an unauthorized copy of a copyright work. Downloading fits the definition of making a copy. The law doesn't care what you think.

With that being said, the criminal penalties for distribution (uploading) are much harsher than for downloading. The criminal penalties for infringing copyright for profit are even harsher.

It amazes me how many discuss copyright without fully reading the DMCA as well as Title 17 and Title 18. Here is how things look for a tube owner that uploads copyright content without permission:

__________________
Does anyone look down here?

Nathan

Pink Visual is suing Mansef and Interhub and not Brazzers. Why they decided to do that is their problem. The only thing that matters here is what a court decides.. I could sue you tomorrow, does that make you guilty?

Regarding the other people that claim they understand DMCA and are little lawyers... sorry, you do not see the big picture, its not that easy. I am not going to explain this here, and why should I, get educated by a real lawyer if you want to 100% understand it... Every single post here laughing at me about DMCA and copyright law has simple false understandings of the DMCA law _OR_ is not seeing the big picture. You have to see the law as a whole and not rip it out of context.

Robbie, regarding your comment about steve being able to subpoena me... I _TOLD_ him to do so. I also told him to send DMCA notices.
And Robbie, you are one of the few people that at least talk about the right thing.. yes, this is about copyright _infringement_ and not about copyright itself.. you all should educate yourself what the difference is.
Regarding me being ignorant, I am not, you are simply missing a part of DMCA. Also your CP comment does not fit at all. A basic misunderstanding of DMCA and/or 2257.

RK, as you said, "for a tube owner that uploads"... which is why I keep saying we do not run an illegal tube...

__________________
"Think about it a little more and you'll agree with me, because you're smart and I'm right."
- Charlie Munger

Robbie

Fabian you are still avoiding the fact that you CAN remove that video of Steve's. You know it is his. You are the owner of the site. Just go to the admin and hit "delete" then it's gone. Don't dance man.

If you're going to stand behind the dmca and say "I'm not doing anything illegal" and blatantly disregard the fact that that is Steve's video, and force him to take action then what kind of shit is that?

This isn't the same as claiming that you didn't know it was there...it's been pointed out to you specifically. You're not only stealing his content to make money off of prepaid ad spots...but you've also taken his spot on search engines. A double slap in the face.

Nothing wrong with out-seo'ing somebody...but you got that spot simply because that is a one of a kind video and was NEVER meant to be seen outside of the members area.

You know that. And you should have the decency to pull that shit down without having to have a guy who busted his ass all these years beg you to take it down...only to have it re-uploaded minutes later.

You SHOULD take it down and make sure it never shows up again. That is what a person with any sense of dignity and class would do. Instead you are spitting in his face. There is NO law that keeps a site owner from removing a video. Why not just do the right thing in this one freakin' instance and act like a gentleman?

__________________
-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.Com

tony286

If I understand the game as long as Nathan doesn't take down without a dmca he can claim safe habor. Now if he starts filtering uploads then safe Habor doesn't protect him. They have to change the law and they will not change it for us but for the motion picture biz. It also helps when you have VP of the us that calling it straight up theft it sets the tone.

Robbie

Yeah, I get that. But Jesus Christ...there are plenty of times that I see one of my vids on a tube site, and instead of bothering Eric...if I know the guy, I simply icq him and ask him to take it down. Boom, I get an apology and the vid comes down. It's just simple courtesy. Nobody getting their "safe harbor" threatened. He could just hit "delete" because it is a video that he knows for a fact that someone stole from a peer in the industry. Nothing is stopping him. He's not "filtering". He would just be doing the right thing.

__________________
-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.Com

theking

I will try for the third time.

How many people have your attorney's sent a letter to that chose not to fight in court and chose not to pay...but simply chose to not appear in court and lose by default...and just say fuck it...try to collect the judgement? They then will have minimal exposure.

I have sued more than one person in small claims court that did not appear and lost by default...and have yet to collect a dime from the judgement against them...except for one person...who voluntarily paid the judgement.

__________________
When you're running down my country hoss...you're walking on the fighting side of me!

FOR THE LYING LOWLIFE POSTING AS PATHFINDER...https://gfy.com/fucking-around-and-pr...athfinder.html

RK

Because keeping it the way it is makes him $$$ and because he doesn't care what you think. But you already knew that.

__________________
Does anyone look down here?

DBS.US

Everyone I know that has a wireless network has it in a anonymous name. You can order cable online then when the installer comes out he dose not care about ID.

Why would you put anything like that in your name?

__________________
Make a Free Chaturbate White Label site in 34 minutes and be making money tonight

Nathan

Robbie,

I am sorry, but Steve has _NOT_ icqd or contacted me OR posted here to remove this video!

_YOU_ have.. since when do YOU own lightspeed?

PLEASE understand DMCA, if you do not, stop posting your nonsense... You might actually want to consider that steve read this and decided NOT to contact us about it.. ever think of that? Why might that be? You do not understand DMCA or at least not the point of it, I am sorry.

__________________
"Think about it a little more and you'll agree with me, because you're smart and I'm right."
- Charlie Munger

topnotch, standup guy

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

- Joseph Goebbels





I understand that you're full of shit.


.

__________________
A hard dick has no conscience.

bjlover

I love the fact that these "uploaders" to tubes remove watermarks and site url's, because that is the first thing a surfer would do, remove the site url before uploading the video


Very convenient

Nathan

Bjlover, tubes that do that are asking for trouble if they expect to be able to still apply dmca..

__________________
"Think about it a little more and you'll agree with me, because you're smart and I'm right."
- Charlie Munger

RK

You are telling me that your Internet account at home or at the office is registered to a fake name? And your house/apartment also has a fake name on the title? And the credit card or bank account you use to pay the bill, that has a fake name too?

__________________
Does anyone look down here?

Zyber

You have a bunch of people in the US hiding behind anonymous internet, legally? I thought there was a War on Terror and institutions like Homeland Security just for this purpose etc.

ottopottomouse

It also applies that if you make something up by the time you've told 50 people you probably have started to believe yourself too.

__________________
↑ see post ↑
13101

SteveLightspeed

This lawsuit is starting to pick up some mainstream press! Here is my favorite quote so far:

"These pimps (which they are - because they are paying their actors for sex) produce immoral material and while I think what they produce is disgusting, I think it's OK for disgusting people to have their disgusting goods abused by the public. "

__________________
Abra-cadabra!

Kingfish

Gosh, I don?t know what part of the country some of you are from, but here in the rural Midwest in order to get high speed internet you have to fill out an application with all sorts of personal information and then the service provider runs your credit to see if you qualify. So if someone subpoena?s your information it is all there in a nice little folder at the phone company ready to go. It wouldn?t take the service providers in my area 5 minutes to comply with a subpoena requesting information about one of their accounts.

DBS.US

How do the illegal aliens with no ID or S/S numbers get internet?

__________________
Make a Free Chaturbate White Label site in 34 minutes and be making money tonight

DWB

Not hard to do.

selena

Gee, Steve, do you think they think we are disgusting?

__________________
~
Doer of Things at
MetArtMoney
Where Flawless Beauty Meets Art
~The MetArt Network ~
selena.delgado9

DBS.US

Bump

__________________
Make a Free Chaturbate White Label site in 34 minutes and be making money tonight

gideongallery

hell give current privacy laws you would be breaking the laws of many countries if you just gave that info out

http://torrentfreak.com/anti-piracy-...ountry-100909/

with fines as high as 10k per instance (ala pepida)
you would have to be a world class moron to just hand over the info to steve just because he asked you to violate those uploaders privacy.

__________________

“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak

gideongallery

so you have been using a 12 year old law to get your content off piracy sites for over 18 years

how the hell did you do that ?

__________________

“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak

gideongallery

backup timeshifting, commentary, parody....
oh wait you keep ignoring fair use completely, carry on with your bullshit arguement

__________________

“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak

Jake

For those of you attempting to justify content theft by hiding behind certain legal constructs may I just suggest a single word that you all should have learned about in elementary school citizenship class: ETHICS

eth·ics   [eth-iks] ?plural noun
1. (used with a singular or plural verb) a system of moral principles: the ethics of a culture.
2. the rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular class of human actions or a particular group, culture, etc.: medical ethics; Christian ethics.
3. moral principles, as of an individual: His ethics forbade betrayal of a confidence.
4. (usually used with a singular verb) that branch of philosophy dealing with values relating to human conduct, with respect to the rightness and wrongness of certain actions and to the goodness and badness of the motives and ends of such actions.

__________________

Alprazolam

there is no assimilation that you can make. people who are downloading porn illegally know they are doing it. they seek it out. they know its not free. you have intent. you have the act. you have them. they know they are receiving stolen goods.

gideongallery

since your trying to take the moral high ground here

how do you justify demanding that a person pay you a monthly membership to get old content that they just lost.

why doesn't your sites tag the videos they already paid for and give them access to only those videos forever so they don't have to pay for a backup service/ extra hard drives etc.

__________________

“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak

johnsteele

As the attorney that has filed the actual lawsuits, I can say that most of the negative comments on this post miss the point of what we are trying to do. I wish to make a couple quick points:

1. We are not looking to end piracy. That will never happen.

2. We are trying to get some "lost" money back to content producers on a contingency basis. If my firm is full of idiots that cannot accomplish this task then our clients are not a dime.

3. I am not trying to push this solution on anyone who would rather not pursue illegal downloaders. If a content producer is comfortable with writing off illegal downloads as a cost of doing business, I respect that.

4. With respect to the comment that most down loaders don't know its illegal, I can't help but wonder if that commenter is serious. Besides, ignorance of the law is no excuse.

5. For the 95% of the people on here that think what we are trying to do is a good idea, thanks!

John Steele

Steele | Hansmeier

chronig