My experience with registrar transfers is true and correct.
Your's may be different and the process may be easier now.
But I believe it was 6 to 9 months ago I tried to transfer SexEducation.ORG into the Verio.com backroom.

But is was within 60 days of renewal or some other BS reason and was therefore declined. I had to pay on both sides to affect the transfer ... a money grab ...imo

The process has been the same way for as many years as I have been a hosting administrator.

Hint Hint ... done your homework yet?

Did you bother to check his sig and put two and two together? Or are you REALLY that stupid? This is an honest question.

If all I did was collect graphics and present them as a graphics collection - then you would be right.

However, I do not do that - I discuss the graphics/video in the context of the magazine and provide the source of message (graphic or other) being discussed.

In other words ... a newspaper photographer can jump in his car and take a picture of a billboard and publish that "picture of public advertising" in their newspaper.

Are you saying that newspapers can no longer discuss what other newspapers are printing or presenting or advertsing?

So if you weren't doing anything wrong, how come your host shut you down?

You're very ignorant of the law and specifically of copyright law and fair use policies. Here's some homework for you.

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-42/
Before you spout another word, go read that in it's ENTIRETY. Then come back and tell us how informed you are. I've read it and studied it front to back for years... How about you, tough guy?

I have to go to work.
Have a good day.
POOF

John E. Beacock
[email protected]
1-403-619-2739

It's a witchunt dontcha know sweetie? :)

Newspapers do not post pictures of porn ... the laws forbid it ... GET A CLUE.

Will do when I get back. LADYFUCK ...
But off to my job now...
POOF

Yes we know McDonalds needs clean bathrooms as clueless as you are I can't see they hired you to work the counter.

Wasting your breath mate... he's a prick and ain't going to listen.... If he can't grasp stealing content is wrong and all the other shit after 10 PAGES, it'll take you another 150 posts to get him to go and look at domain name issues.

Can someone post all the proof of these allegations here on this page? I don't feel like reading everything, but get the jist of what's going on here. I've seen some pretty harsh accusations, and no real hard proof. Thanks :)

We refuse to post the screen caps of the child porn that was on his site. However many screencaps were taken and sent to the calgary police department.

As for him flying under the radar on where he was hosted if you fdo a whois on sexeducation.com it comes back on verio nameservers IE: ns1.secure.net and ns2.secure.net

Further investigation showed that he was only hosting the dns there when in fact his real server he was hosting on belongs to rackshack.net as the domain resolved to an ip of 64.246.44.170 as do all his other domains.

To date through our complaints and showing of proof verio has pulled his dns. He has since registered with 3 hosting providers that I know of trying to find new hosting for his dns however they have all been aware of this thread and the proof and he has been unsuccessful in finding new hosting for the dns.

well now THAT'S appreciation for ya. heh!

Let's guess his job shall we? I plump for one of the following...

Scout leader, school caretaker, priest, childrens entertainer.

I think this guy is onto a great business strategy. Create a sex "newspaper" and use others photo sets but just make sure you write an article about it. Damn, Playboy is doing it all wrong paying bucks for photos. They can just use others and change there format to a "newspaper".

We never have to buy content or pay models again if we follow this. Just think of the possibilities.

You did not answer the question though ... as usual.

Can a newspaper take a picture of a billboard on the side of a road and discuss that billboard with a picture of it ... in it's newspaper?

You did not answer the question.

THAT has absolutely nothing to do with fair use.. if you had taken the time to review that link i posted (which is the Canadian copyright act in it's entirety, INCLUDING fair use policies) you would realize that your applications are in violation.

Read up, bub.

500


This thread is to long.. what's the cliff notes on it?

The guy admitted that he doesn't credit his "sources" in line with fair use, he admitted he doesn't have 2257 info for explicit content, and he admitted he has photos of naked minors on his site. Now he's trying to rationalize that what he does is legal.

Oh and all his hosting got pulled.. hahaha.

When I began the SexEducation.com website I contacted iServer.com to ask them what they felt. They said not to host SexEducation.com on their servers. I pointed the domain to where it could be hosted. Duh!

Yes - maybe - and maybe not - with regards to Verio.com pulling my DNS. I might be able to call them tomorrow morning - unsure of my schedule right now.

QUOTE: "HE HAS SINCE REGISTERED WITH 3 HOSTING PROVIDERS" This is a complete fabrication and lie. ANOTHER WITCHHUNT FACT based on some type of circumstantial evidence...forcing pieces of a puzzle together where they do not belong. I have NOT contacted any hosting providers. I am sorting out with current supplier what went on - when I have time.


QUOTE: "been aware of this thread and the proof and he has been unsuccessful in finding new hosting for the dns" .... Incorrect. I have not been presented any proof - and the final and absolute victory will come by the taped backups that Verio.com makes of the sites as they will reveal no distribution of child pornography.

There has NOT been any proof presented to me or this thread of these CONVICTED CHILD MOLESTOR or CHILD PORN DISTRIBUTION charges ... even when asked to describe any graphics textually (color,position , anything ...) a HEAVILY CENSORED graphic ... nothing ever ... NO PROOF EVER PRESENTED.

QUOTE "the domain resolved to an ip of 64.246.44.170 as do all his other domains." Yes - one master domain ... that branches out into other smaller portals of communities is my intention. To do that you use the "domain" variable of the web browser ... and when you click to enter ... lets say BibleSexEducation.com it discusses biblical issues and has biblical links. If you came to FamilySexEducation.com it would go into more family orientated content and links. I think thats a kewl strategy - and still do.

Apparently, you don't seem to realize JUST who JFPdude is and HOW it is that he knows what he does about your activities as far as hosting. You are acting like we're a bunch of newbies. Listen pal, most of us have been doing this since before you knew what a computer was, stop trying to "dummy" your explainations.. Instead, why not try actually READING AND PAYING ATTENTION to what it is WE are saying to YOU? STOP MAKING EXCUSES. Have you read the link I gave you yet? Come on, read it.

You also are apparently too hung-up to realize that any REALLY DEFINITIVE proof has already been submitted to the proper authorities, and nobody would post it on a PUBLIC MESSAGE BOARD, and perhaps comprimise it's integrity. If you don't already feel the noose tightening, get a little more comfy.. you won't know it until it hits you.

Suffice it to say that your hosting would NOT have been pulled on a witchhunt.. HOsts do NOT WANT TO PULL WEBSITES... They want your money. If they hadn't checked FOR THEMSELVES and found you in violation of the law, your site would still be there.

I have not contacted Verio.com yet.
I have contact RackShack.net.

Nor have I made any changes to any content.
Nor have I deleted any files and still have access to them all.
Nor has all my domains shut off.
Nor has anything but a complete CLUSTER-FUCK occurred which I have no time to deal with - but have been forced to do so.

I am still having a problem accessing my [email protected] email - which hopefully Verio.com will solve OR present this mysterious "proof" ...


[PLUG]
Female Genital Mutilation exists because we don't talk about it.
"Any cowardly father that permits circumcision of their daughter should be castrated." Dad@

It's not so mysterious if you go back and read some of JFPdude's posts. You don't do your research.. not so smart. And the idiotic plugs about female genital mutilation certainly aren't making an impression.

The billboard is in public, so I am assuming yes. You put something up in public, then it could happen. But I could be wrong..been wrong in the past..and been right on things.

But adult content is not a billboard in public view. And a website is not a newspaper.

I have never seen your members section...does your members section just list pictures, or does it have more articles?

No I do not know who this JFPdude is.

Yes - the link you provided is to the Government of Canada law website. The copyright act specifically. I read it - and it is a mumble jumble of legal jargon referencing subparagraphs and exclusions.

On the same website ...

It says I have a right to "free speech".
I intend to quote publicly made statements, in reference to graphics that means content posted in the "free tour" areas.
And discuss those graphics ....

The average of internet pornography is affecting society.
We have much proof of this when you examine the introduction of television into emergining nations. Quite simply - what you see is what you want.

However, the average of internet pornography is NOT how normal people have sex.

There is no such thing as a vaginal orgasm - it is a lie propagated by pornography.

Now don't get me wrong - I am not saying we should not have pornography - I am just saying that we need to do a MUCH better job of teaching HOW TO HAVE SEX.

The proof of this poor record is that 50% of women never have an orgasm and 70% of men complain of premature ejaculation.

It has pictures but they have NOTHING to do with the articles.. they are just there.. most of them still with the tags... I'd show you but well..his site isn't there.


And he REALLY needs to read that link I sent him... DO YOUR RESEARCH, DAD.

Are you referring to the "file server" ?
The primary purpose of the "file server" is to allow a person to block the graphics contained in the articles.
Once again - never anything specific.

And I will keep doing my research and SexEducation.com will continue to grow and evolve as my knowledge does.

I am not saying I have never made mistakes.
I do say that I have tried my best.

The tour of the website is the most important research I have done - and everything else on the website - is really just discussion - sexual intercourse. Interesting, punchy, sometimes angry - blogs - of this worlds sexual hypocrisy as witnessed here in this thread.


[PLUG]
No aroused genitals or reproductive bodily fluids on any directly accessed domain name.

I can't believe you COMPLETELY glossed over that? What kind of idiot are you, really? It's not just legal jargon, it's all laid out VERY PLAINLY what is legal and what isn't.

Fair dealing for the purpose of research or private study does not infringe copyright.

9.1 Fair dealing for the purpose of criticism or review does not infringe copyright if the following are mentioned:

(a) the source; and

(b) if given in the source, the name of the

(i) author, in the case of a work,

(ii) performer, in the case of a performer's performance,

(iii) maker, in the case of a sound recording, or

(iv) broadcaster, in the case of a communication signal.

and...

29.3 (1) No action referred to in section 29.4, 29.5, 30.2 or 30.21 may be carried out with motive of gain.
(like monetary gain..you had this behind and avs, that's for profit and that's motive of gain)

Does this apply? I don't think so:
Copies of articles for research, etc.


(2) It is not an infringement of copyright for a library, archive or museum or a person acting under the authority of a library, archive or museum to make, by reprographic reproduction, for any person requesting to use the copy for research or private study, a copy of a work that is, or that is contained in, an article published in

(a) a scholarly, scientific or technical periodical; or

(b) a newspaper or periodical, other than a scholarly, scientific or technical periodical, if the newspaper or periodical was published more than one year before the copy is made.

How about this.... I doubt everyone who's "work" you were using was aware of your use... How's this for a definition...


Consolidated Statutes and Regulations
Main page on: Copyright Act
Disclaimer: These documents are not the official versions (more).
Source: http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-42/38008.html
Updated to December 31, 2002

[Previous]




PART III
INFRINGEMENT OF COPYRIGHT AND MORAL RIGHTS AND EXCEPTIONS TO INFRINGEMENT


Infringement of Copyright


General

Infringement generally


27. (1) It is an infringement of copyright for any person to do, without the consent of the owner of the copyright, anything that by this Act only the owner of the copyright has the right to do.

Secondary infringement


(2) It is an infringement of copyright for any person to

(a) sell or rent out,

(b) distribute to such an extent as to affect prejudicially the owner of the copyright,

(c) by way of trade distribute, expose or offer for sale or rental, or exhibit in public,

(d) possess for the purpose of doing anything referred to in paragraphs (a) to (c), or

(e) import into Canada for the purpose of doing anything referred to in paragraphs (a) to (c),

a copy of a work, sound recording or fixation of a performer's performance or of a communication signal that the person knows or should have known infringes copyright or would infringe copyright if it had been made in Canada by the person who made it.

Knowledge of importer


(3) In determining whether there is an infringement under subsection (2) in the case of an activity referred to in any of paragraphs (2)(a) to (d) in relation to a copy that was imported in the circumstances referred to in paragraph (2)(e), it is irrelevant whether the importer knew or should have known that the importation of the copy infringed copyright.

Plates


(4) It is an infringement of copyright for any person to make or possess a plate that has been specifically designed or adapted for the purpose of making infringing copies of a work or other subject-matter.

Public performance for profit


(5) It is an infringement of copyright for any person, for profit, to permit a theatre or other place of entertainment to be used for the performance in public of a work or other subject-matter without the consent of the owner of the copyright unless that person was not aware, and had no reasonable ground for suspecting, that the performance


DO YOUR RESEARCH. Shall I continue?
I've only hit three sections... there's lots left.

well, it's kinda hard to present proof to YOU when YOU claim any links presented to you have broken images so you cant see them.
what fucking ever dude. you are such a lowlife loser.
:321GFY

Are you really this dumb? I have been married to a system administrator for many years, I probably know better than you what a file server could do, in fact I could also probably rip it apart and put it back together blindfolded with one hand tied behind my back. Would you stop acting like you know something special? YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT.

Your "knowledge" is shit. I read most of your articles, and most of them are WRONG... anatomically, theoretically, and even gramatically. You have NO clue about sex education, you are NOT a qualified instructor.. Stop trying to teach people.

You look the picture ...
you say ... has a female approx age.
sitting on the side of a bed ... sheets X color ...
a male is touching her on the ...whatever ...
and that the graphic is included in the article discussing ...whatever ...

Is that so hard to do?

no, that isnt hard....is it so hard to know what pictures are on your OWN site????

also
is it so hard to run your site within the scope of the law?

get a fucking clue.

It's illegal if not accompanied by proper custodial information AND a proper license to use it. Even non-erotic photography requires the use of a license or some form of permission, and unless you are a REGISTERED news agency or periodical, you don't count bub. How do I know? BECAUSE IT'S MY JOB TO KNOW. I've sued more than enough idiots just like yourself into oblivion for IMPROPERLY AND ILLEGALLY utilizing my images. You don't read much, do you? Too busy studying "sex education" to actually study the laws that MIGHT just keep your ass out of jail?

how would we know what age someone is in your pics.....even you dont know.....it's all stolen.

:321GFY

I call it a "file server" on my website. It really is custom filtering code. I'm glad you have better programming skills then I do. I do my best though.

I do know something special.
There is a new GENDER NEUTRAL MANNER in which to explain how to have sex. The SexEducation.com magazine discusses those issues that created this SPECIAL AND UNIQUE manner in which to explain to someone how to have sex ... where both partners experience orgasm.

I did that - and it is special - and it is true.