myfreecams is going to be shut down!
 

I heard that because girls are showing copywritten movies in the background and dancing to copywritten music without paying for it that myfreecams is getting sued by the studios? anyone else hear this?

copywritten movies in the background??? maybe i can understand this about music, but movies?!?

Seems unlikely. Although there is always the possibility they could be sued. I think Bangbros was for the same thing. Paid their settlement and it was business as usual.

dont know, but i know when i upload a video on youtube, and i have music playing in the background, it mutes the video, and has a link to the itunes url for the song under the video.

There is a new company now trying to do what ACADIA tried to do years ago .. going after the richest adult properties trying to extort money from them with patent/copyright claims ...

If MFC or anybody else is stupid enough to bow to them, then they deserve to be shut down ...

Unlicensed copyrighted music should not be playing in the background. Likewise, ixnay on logowear or logos in the background, no underage drinking or drugs, etc.

The cam studios should provide some training to their models/performers about rules such as this, and provide a written set of guidelines for their performers, along with scheduled periodic refresher training.

I'm assuming that they train their performers on how to maximize their performances so that they can maximize their profits, well, they need to also train them on how to avoid getting sued. :2 cents:

ADG

Youtube does this ???

If this is true the music and movies industry are taking their copyright-bullshit way too far.

greedy fucks

Right. Okay for porn companies to piss and moan about their copyright and issue DMCAs left right and center, but when porn companies are infringing on the rights of other artists and creators, that's fine and dandy and any complaints should be disregarded?

Someone posted about this - music in cam sites - a few months ago, in thread pretty much met by the sound tumbleweed. Certainly no cam site wanted to touch it, IIRC, but as ADG said it's just another rule they need to create, and they should probably address it sooner rather than later.

strange this never happened to me, but again never uploaded copyright music video, but never seen a music link to itunes either.,
there are few vids muted.

upload a video with any of Prince the artist music in the background and you will see just what fris is saying.

if somebody takes my content and uses it as part of something else I would lose no sleep over it - he's not selling or giving away my content to the market I'm trying to sell to.

A camgirl dancing to a copyrighted song on the radio is hardly damaging anybody - in fact it's promoting the music.

it would look real good on the music industry to sue some 20 year old girl from Kentucky or Bucharest for copyright infringement. cam girls work as independent contractors on MFC, the music companies can't sue MFC, successfully anyway.

the law is an ass sometimes.

Might get sued but won't be shut down.

I am having a Hard time with the Music part of it.
If they are playing illegal MP3's like some clubs do then, Yes.
If they are listening to the radio, then NO.

Leo should know better ...

they sure do.

Ok, so some alternative radio band makes a video and uses your Destiny images throughout the video... you're totally ok with that, with no payment? different market? LOL sure.

Will have to remember this for future projects. :1orglaugh kidding

Some musicians would rather not associate their music with girls fisting their assholes. Nasty Dollars go sued for their In The VIP site because of the music in the background.

Maybe you are right about the independent contractor, but when a girl repeatedly uses copy righted music while performing what should MFC do? My guess is they would be legally obligated, like a tube site, to take down the content and suspend the user/model?

ya they do.

I have their back.. but only if i get free credits.... :pimp

Most cam sites out there have girls playing copywritten music in the background.

And there's a big difference between being sued and being shut down. Stop making BS thread titles, you sensationalistic bastard.

It's still illegal. "Federal Law provides sever civil and criminal penalties for the unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or exhibition of copyrighted music or motion pictures".

A chat host playing a video or music in the background, if seen or heard by the end users, could very easily be violating this law. And regardless of any argument to the contrary, the website, service provider, hosting company or billing company would be right to want to shut the stream down simply to avoid the legal costs of fighting this.

if some band did a music video and used some clips i owned - it wouldn't bother me. i sure wouldn't sue them. now if some huge successful multi million dollar making band did it, i'd sue them but that's just because it's a money making opportunity and a multi million dollar band could have contacted me and offered to pay for it.

if some adult paysite or tube does it - different story, they're financially hurting me.

Nasty Dollars got sued for ONE reason, they have millions of dollars. There are hundreds of thousands of videos out on the Net with popular music playing in them, amateurs doing cover versions of famous songs - they aren't getting sued.

the troll who started this thread heard nothing - there are no rumors about MFC.

No it's not. They can be sued. They can't be shut down.

.

I am shocked. Greedy movie companies .

Sorry, I guess it was specifically Nasty Dollars, not bangbros. Sorta the same company I guess?

Of course, just like Bittorrent is "promoting the music". :winkwink:

The music they play adds 'value' to the camsite. Guests are more likely to stay in a room or a site that has music, even if it's something they don't know, than silence. Though many cam girls have no audio anyway because it can slow the video.

I don't frequent cam sites, but for the models I think it would be a shame if it was stopped. I'm not a fan of how copyright law is (mis)used generally though.

Sure they can, and they would, if the cam site has no explicit policy against it and/or allows it to happen or doesn't remove (repeat) infringers.

It's not the cam girl from Kentucky broadcasting the music to you and me (p2p), she just transmits her stream to the site, they then broadcast it to many.

I agree, I'm no fan of the way copyright law infringes on ordinary people's rights. But some people like to swing the copyright axe around and don't like it so much when it comes back their way.

So if a car driving by has the windows down, and I hear the music, look out?

You can SUE andyone for ANYTHING, and Just because the person settles, does NOT mean it was illegal.

You have to understand the difference between using the music to make money and being resold. I would guess if the Cam Videos are being resold then yes,
Otherwise it is NO different then me being in a strip club!

Strip Clubs get sued, but the ones using a computer and non paid for music. The ones that use a juke box, do not, why? The song was paid for to be played!

I see TMZ using client content (video and audio), quite frequently, including copyrighted footage. They make money off sponsors and commercials. Troll on.

I think he just blew his cover as well. :winkwink:

Aren't they the same thing?

They get sued if they don't have a license and/or permission to play the music in public, whatever format they're using.

Because they have a 'jukebox license' and/or permission to play the music in public.

Edit: Pretty sure it really is this simple: by law you need a license and/or permission for a public performance of music you do not own.

What the studios do is fine the girls and profit from the mistakes of the model, but they usually give them a few warnings first.

op is a liar and a retard. he's just making shit up as usual.

Lawyers have said you cannot monitor your network unless you want to lose your safe harbor protection. They would need to receive notice from the rights holder. Example: Stolen content tube sites, like tnaflix, monitors their network all the time - thus violating DMCA. They actually look the studio's owner email up, in whois, and notify them about the infringement with a referral to the FSC resell program (Because they get referral money on ads) :disgust So they are AWARE of the infringement on their network. :1orglaugh

That's why you don't see youtube emailing uploaders with notices saying "Hi - we saw your video and think it's infringement, do you know you can use our content ID system.......etc." :winkwink:

About time the copyright pendulum sways to the other extreme. That's all it is one extreme to the next. Good news really, the only way a middle ground might be found.

.

youtube does that now. sometimes when you upload vids it says ``we think this is content owned by blah blah do you have the rights to upload it"

Don't listen to the threadstarter he's making this up. He's the same moron who thought tubes would certainly fail because of bandwidth costs.

The problem is that your opinion has no weight when it concerns someone else's
property. If what they are doing is stupid then that's their option because they own the
rights.

Your failure to protect your content rights does not make the content rights of others fail.

Isn't it amazing how resistant people are to understanding this simple law.

It's so basic : "If you didn't create it then pay for licensing or don't use it".

So simple.

Everybody understand the models rights and gets the release signed but there's
a massive brain fart when it comes to musicians, writers and film makers.

These people don't seem "stupid" at all; it's a resistance thing.
They don't agree so therefore there is no law in their eyes.

arguing about something that some clown just made up is retarded.

Ive found that fines backfire :2 cents:

actually youtube only bans the videos from mobile devices, ones that have sound in the background.

Simple math. Copywritten music in the background of your Youtube videos = no money

This isnt new, restaurants, barbershops,etc must pay licensing if they want to play music in their place of business..Ascap must be paid or civil action is taken. I remember 20 yrs ago my friend had a restaurant played music in the background. One day the ascap man showed up. He had to buy a license. Leo could buy a shitload of royalty free music cheap and offer it to girls to use if it becomes a problem.

That's probably after the match of the video internally I am guessing. We get notices that talk about youtube content ID, etc.. after the notice (auto-reply). That's all managed by the rights holder and there are mainstream folks who make nice money on that system. It's under THEIR control though and no third parties are involved. Youtube is also not taking a cut either as I am aware.

well.. they did 100 million dollars by now, so they really must not care if it goes down... they did an amazing business.

Its open to their discretion and it depends on what sort of video it is.

I just uploaded a video today that has copyright music in it. I did last week and I will continue to do so. Youtube emails each time before its even live to the public telling me they know and that I need not take any actions.

So, not sure what type of vid you are talking about, I have heard of this. But its never happened to me.