I herd Paul Markham was a crip

How many boards you banned from now? like 4?

Maybe Gideon has a lick of sense, if they don't pay for the affiliates license and the new license I should start serving DMCAs. I've done nothing wrong so far, other than losing my rag, so maybe I should think of serving notice on these guys.

They have content unlicensed, copyright infringement.

Gideon are you one of their affiliates? And yes you are a tool and stupid. It's not my job to go around looking after Smokincash affiliates, that's Smokincash's job or are you too stupid to realise that?

Of course a DMCA would not be a nice thing to do, but in the end if they don't contact me and pay what else am I meant to do?

But this is how much some think of piracy. So long as it's making them money it's fine. When I say them I mean normal affiliates. They are using unlicensed content, maybe without knowing maybe some are seeing this thread. So Smokincash know which videos are which, if not they need to go to the content stores and THEY need to sort it out.

They are doing nothing their affiliates are still using content they don't own. This is not my job to sort out their fuck ups.

bashbug I'm not banned from one single board I want to be a member of. Damages one is the last place I want to be. He thinks I should say sorry to people stealing my content. :321GFY

Your banned from netpond cause they were sick of your bullshit

No I was banned from Netpond because I rubbished their photographers board. My BS has been constant for years. :1orglaugh

The photographers board over there is lucky to get a post a day. Now was my BS right or wrong? :321GFY

You have to come up with far sharper bards than that.

Banned from ADX because I won't say sorry to people ripping me off.

And just in case you're wondering why I'm a prick when it comes to people ignoring licenses. It's because of all the people who don't ignore them. Maybe you like the first ones.

Have you thought about DCMA'ing all his affiliates hosts and upstream providers who are using the content, even if its on banners and stuff?

I wonder if you are alone as the only content provider who they dont have correct licences and docs for?

It's a bit heavy but a last resort. According to Pornonada, and I have the ICQ logs, he did not have a clue what was mine and what was not. So putting on my Sherlocke Holmes hat, I deduce he has more than one supplier that he does not have documents on. Because if he had documents on everyone BUT me knowing what was mine would be easy.

So Gideon is your braincell working? Do you think I should sort it out for all the others as well? :1orglaugh

Frankly this is a shit storm.

Let's give them till after the weekend and see what can be done.

Dont worry you're gonna be dead soon paul, what are you like 98?

Happy Easter :)

i have told you repeatedly that and the new license crap what is causing you all the problem.
re -read the sample letter i posted before you will notice i specifically avoid asking for the reup on the existing licience is the problem with your statement paul.

you have increased the cost of winning this case by 10 fold because your being an ass and demanding a liciencing fee which is at best suspect. The problem is you are absolutely right about the fees for using beyond the scope of the liciences.

but as long as your keep mudding the water with demands for fees that at best are the result in your conspiracy to embezzle funds from a corporation then you are going to just be wasting your time.

and you paul are an idiot, your not looking out for the affilates you are protecting your content and preventing it use. Think about if you showed me content that was offending
knowing that if smokincash chooses to remove it from the affilate section i would have to take down a gallery i may be getting traffic for i would ever use your offending content.

good luck with that, mud the water in a legal issue combining fees you have an iffy right to with fees you have an absolute right to and try and win that case in court.

If you like spending 10 times the cost in legal fees to get your money go for it.

when i mentioned reporting offenders to CAAST it was the stick of the carrot and stick offer i usually use becuase if they are screwing with my liciencing they are probably screwing with everyones liciences. informing the trade organization (which i am a member of) of a potential infringer is a pretty big stick.


if CAAST has to do an investigation on the company because of my complaint the fact that they refused to licience up even though i made consessions about potentially disputable charges (like your ignoring the "agent of" status and asking for the licience re-up) makes it easier for CAAST to make the arguement their actions are deliberate.

Without those concessions, that company can simply argue that it was a mistake and the only reason they didn't pay yet is because demanding fees you really were not entitled too.


Make the concession regarding the original fee, and go after them regarding out of scope use ONLY. That is the smartest move, but if you don't want to do waste your money, undermine your rep, and cost yourself tons of sales because people don't want to deal with a hard ass.

Are you saying that once content is used and put in the affiliates area it should stay in affiliate use, so as not to upset the affiliates?

If so I fully agree with you at last.

And all it needs is the sponsor to pay for the rights to have it in the affiliates area and keep it on the affiliates sites. 100% spot on at last mate. :thumbsup

I'm assuming you don't want it to remain illegal and with affiliates using pirated content.

Uhmm, i don't want to go into any details and further arguing as everything concerning me, the license issue with Paul Markham has been agreed on already some weeks ago.

The Terms are clear, the solution as well. Things just are a bit more complicated as i'am out of control as the program has been sold even before the license issue occured in public.

The new owners are aware of the terms and agreement as well, are in contact with Paul, and there is a timeline for Monday until everything must be fixed, paid for and/or being removed. That's it.

i have no problem with you going after them for using the content beyond the scope of the licience (giving it away to affilates)

what i have a problem is the claims you are making that are clearly arguementative (no "agent of" status so it was liciences to an individual and no to the request to resolve the issue by liciencing it to the corporation)

as i have said repeatly, you can act an ass, demand both what you are clearly entitled too (the affilate content being removed or paid for) AND what is at best suspect rights (re-up on the original licience- multiple times) or you can act like a professional and only deal only ask what you are really entitled.

Personally i would do the second, hell as i have already point out i would do one better than the second by offering to deduct the cost of the original licience from the cost of the required licience becuase it would create an insentive to choose to upgrade rather than remove the content

Who gives a fuck what you think???

Despite that fact that legally you may have been right, giving someone the opportunity to make things right is generally good.. even if you issued a DMCA you would have to list what content is yours to have them remove it. Give them a list and let it end...

It's all about how you deal with the situation... You can turn it into ridiculous drama on the boards that makes you look like a shit disturber, or you can be the bigger man, do your best to be co-operative, and maybe make a new customer. You chose the fuss. You always choose the fuss. Then you wonder why people avoid the fuss :P

Glad that it's all being handled tho... I just hate when stuff like this becomes board drama when all that was neccessary is a few emails.

In reality, by the orginal owner selling the site with the content, it didn't suddenly cost you any more money. It didn't cut into your profit margins for producing content. It's not like the original owner wanted to keep all the content and use it on another site aswell.

No actual expense or loss of money was incurred by you, during the transfer of this content to the new program owner. However people like you know you can abuse the intent of a licence and make more money, simply because you are greedy.

In short, you want to get paid twice, even though nothing about the program or the sites involved has changed. The only change was the owner of the site. That's like Microsoft requiring users to re-buy windows if you sell a computer with it as the OS.

You could simply offer a "reasonable" fee to the new owners to cover any costs for records updates ect..ect.. However instead guys like you are greedy and want to be paid twice for nothing.

Remind me to never do business with you..on second thought I damn sure wont need anyone to remind me..

little update, got a message from the new owners that they finally made an agreement with Paul that they can continue using it in the affilate area as well for some additionally costs which have been paid already by them yesterday.

After about 6 Drama Threads, endless posts, endless attempts to fix things, endless discussions, endless arguing and daily varying prices this issue has been fixed finally and the story for me and the new owners should be finally closed (hope so at least, lol)...

Thx to everybody who supported me and the new owners and saw that we are not intentionally pirates or thiefs, but got into the whole situation more by accident and unexperience as program owners as we bought everything like it was on the whole program.

We learned our lesson for sure and it's just obvious that we will check in future whatever we buy or sell much better.

Ok, as said already, case closed for us!

Paul you are a broke has been. You make a fool of yourself over and over again with every post you make. You sold out to the tube sites jusat to make a buck it's time for you to give up the internet .:2 cents::1orglaugh

I'm all for it being sorted by a few emails. Unfortunately it took a lot of drama to get the people using our content against the terms and conditions of the license to agree to abide by the terms and conditions of the license.

If the original buyer had never sold the content and left it to us to transfer it would of been done and dusted a long time ago. If Pornonada had not told me to resupply, without charges, what he and the original buy had lost and just removed what he did not own it would never have got this far.

We got shaved and everyone supports the shaver. Yes using content beyond the terms of the license is shaving. The content was given to affiliates against the terms of the license, everyone but us was earning from this. The response I got was, they will remove it from the affiliates area. So all the affiliates who are using it can carry on using it and sending them traffic and money with the unlicensed content????????

The only thing that brought them to agree to pay for it was the threat of DMCAs landing on their affiliates inbox.

Yes a few emails is the preferred method, sadly none of the people who were using unlicensed content would respond to emails or ICQ chats. Drama is all that was left.

Nice to see how some flame people who are getting robbed.

crockett would you not get dramatic if someone was shaving you like we were being shaved, or maybe this is the way you do business. No we did not want to be paid twice we want to be paid once for what is owed to us.

Maybe you run your business that way, we do not run ours that way.

pornonada you were the guy who brought this to the boards, I never knew about it until the thread on Ask D popped up on Board Tracker, you're the guy who thought I should resupply, for free content, lost in the transfer. Don't complain when the shit hits the fan.

As you say it's done and over. The new owners have agreed to pay $250 for the normal license and $850 for the continued license of the affiliates area content. The same charges we make to others.

i just bought tow nice domains and i dont know what to do with them first!

lol :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

"shaving a content producer" :1orglaugh

post links to other forums pelase.

Great job Paul. Starting a thread about this is the best way to show that you don't care. I think you were quite a gentleman about it, and how DamageX can possibly live with himself after doing this to you, I have no idea. Furthermore, the concept of a content provider being shaved is the biggest new idea I've heard in years and you should definitely sue some idiot who is shaving you. Kick them in the nuts, figuratively speaking, history will prove you right. It's nice to see someone of superior intellect posting on GFY for a change.