Fifty vengeful ex-girlfriends...

Yea, I must say I agree, something isn't right with this post. :disgust

Easy there.

You can't expect a processor to know whether a client site is scraped or not.

this will clearly shake a industry a little bit

Stupid thread.

I really dont think Mutt understood or even read the article before posting. :2 cents:

how is it netbilling's fault?

netbilling is just a gateway not even a processor

if anything it would be the bank that approved the site for visa/mc in the first place at fault here

i didn't say it was Netbilling's fault - not surprising since the average webmaster is working with a GED level education at best. your reading comprehension skills are on a par with your ethics and morals.

I asked Netbilling 'how does it feel to have your company connected/associated with the term CP in the adult press and mainstream press?'. And it's a fair and valid question. The lawsuit does exactly that.

Listen those of us in the teen and solo girl niche know far more about this dirty little secret called EX-GF than any of you know nothings. In fact I think I know who this girl actually is, I was shown her 2 years ago and googled and traced her myspace page - Orlando, Florida.

Ask any EX-GF site owner if they've ever been contacted by an underage girl or their parents about their photos or videos being online - they all have, those that say they haven't are lying or have hidden their contact information.

I have well over 10,000 ex-member emails from my teen solo site which is perfectly targeted towards EX-GF sites - I have upsells in my members area - for the last two years I could have make a little bundle cash sending that traffic to EX-GF sites with a click of a button. BUT I know what those sites are, I know how old many of the girls are - I don't do it. Because it's wrong and in the long run when the national media picks up on the EX-GF porn phenomena and what it's a code phrase for it's absolutely the stupidest move the porn industry has ever made.

1. I think your reading comprehension skills arent the best either.
2. You googled and traced an underage girl? Why?
3. You are a saint. I wish there where more people just like you.

this coming from a guy who has made threads about reading 16 year old girls blog entries while scouting myspace for models

lols at you

http://gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=966925

Your intentions were pretty clear to point a finger at us.

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/index.php
 

Your initial title and thread was quite inflammatory and accusatory.

This combined with the above statement: You're an asshole flinging shit at the wall for pageviews.

common sense :2 cents: if it walks like a duck and sounds like a duck, shouldn't you at least check to make sure it's not a duck ?

These sites get approval from the processor first right ?, considering the content i would assume they ask for some sort of documents at random, so yes the processor should know if the content was scraped.

I would feel a tad uncomfortable ( to say the least ) processing for a site that can't verify its models aren't children regardless of what the law might say.

Tell that to VISA or the bank issuing the merchant account when they pull the account and freeze the money. They do expect a processor to know. How many have been closed down for not knowing?

keep stacking that paper.

Seminole county is not a porn friendly county. Not at all

I sharted from laughter looool

I guess it's easy to look the other way when the money is good... :winkwink:

Exactly right, nobody misunderstood his intentions in this thread but he himself it seems.

do you have something against netbilling? why would you just call out netbilling

Because he is a butthurt moron that has a reading comprehension.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

By asking a biller you get a general idea rather than 1 site who will say blah blah, close and open up the same site on a different domain with another Cyprus Corp.

If Netbilling said 'This is terrible we do not want out company associated with these sort of allegations and will not process any exgf sites without a full check.'

You know where the niche stands billingwise.. nope?

You alive mother fucker? Give me a shout I miss you!

And it'll be a great day when billing companies start asking to see 2257 docs before approving a site. Then they'll be earning the 15% they charge!

Netbilling is a GATEWAY. They don't actually process anything. A bank does. And when we got our merchant accounts the bank went through our sites with a fine tooth comb. Made us change any words they didn't like and even took photos of our office space. It was pretty intense.

Netbilling has nothing to do with any of that. It is the various merchant banks that we all depend on in this business. And for whatever reasons, they decided to process credit cards for those sites.

I'm no expert on foreign merchant banks because we are still at good old Humboldt right here in the US. But I don't think a US merchant bank would allow that stuff.

But anyway, Netbilling has nothing to do with what is on a website. It's the bank that approves or disapproves a merchant account.

Thx for the explanation.. So why are they named in the suit should be the banks nope?

My only guess would be general ignorance about how billing actually works. I wouldn't have known if we didn't have NATS and use cascading billing including our own merchant account with netbilling as the gateway. It's not really something that most people would have knowledge of or care to I suppose.

I'm guessing they just kept clicking on the "join" page and looked at each "biller" One of them shows up as "Netbilling" so they included them.

Pretty typical when attorneys that don't know how a business works try to figure it out. After all it would look like Netbilling is some kind of company like CC Bill at first glance to the "civilian" eye.

does netbilling not look at the site at all? they dont have any sort of approval process for the site?

That's like asking if NATS checks all sites... it isn't going to happen. Netbilling has no legal power to do that or request it, if they did people would just move - something nb can't stop either.

well billers do it, im surprised netbilling doesnt (even tho they're not a biller), and i wouldnt compare netbilling to nats..

ccbill doesn't process either, they use banks and a few of them. Outsider POV they are a credible gateway as well it seems, right?

florida is good for 3 things. Latinas, white trash, and humidity.
bottom line,
duke

CC Bill has their own merchant accounts and are indeed a 3rd party biller. Not a gateway in the sense that netbilling is only a gateway. YOU have to apply for and get a merchant account. Which was pretty hard to do for many years because of the money you needed to have and run through the account. So mostly companies that had those kind of sales could do it.

I have been told that over the last year it has become a lot easier to get a merchant account and you don't need to have the capital that we had to have when we did it.
But again, I'm no expert.

CC Bill does just what the merchant banks do. They give you an anal probe. Netbilling doesn't and can't. It's none of their business really. Hell, I don't like it when the bank asks me all these damn questions. It kinda pisses me off because I feel like it's none of their business. But it's the way it's done.

with all that said I still don't get how it's obviously possible to set up sites with stolen, underage content and no one seems to care (of the parties involved). And no one seems to be responsible either.

and then we (as the industry) wonder that some people do their best to bring us down

Actually, here I think 'anal probe' is a little much, unless you have a real sensitive anus, Robbie. :D

What CCBill does is go over the site the first time you submit it. If they see any of the usual violations - beastiality, crushing a bug, whatever - they ask you to remove an image or a phrase (like 'virgin' or 'teen', I believe, plus others). Sometimes they blame it on Visa, sometimes not (Visa won't approve the site unless you remove blank).

But once you submit a site or two you get to know the deal and now they just approve in a day or two and rarely ask for changes. Once they approve the site they never look at it again and I asked why not once, when I was first submiting sites. The answer is obvious: millions of sites, who's going to police them?

Which is why, even IF Netbilling (or anyone) had THE most vigorous approval process there's no way a company could manually/visually/with a bot make sure a Webmaster didn't just insert the offending shit he took out until CCBill stopped looking. LOL (not my sites, for goodness sake!)

Epoch does the same, tho their criteria for what offends them is slightly differant.

no one cares because of the $

its only bad if you get caught with your hand in the cookie jar

No, I mean they actually gave me an anal probe.

But now that I think about it...I wonder why the two guys had baseball caps with "CC BILL" written in sharpie on them? And why did they insist on one guy taking pictures while the other guy was "probing" me? And then why did they switch places and start all over? And why did we all share a cigarette and snuggle afterwards?

Hmmmm.....

LOL No wonder you went merch.

No, CC Bill is still in my cascade. And I use them exclusively for my VOD. We put the merchant account with netbilling as the gateway first in the cascade for the paysites because CC Bill charges an outrageous percentage for processing because they handle everything on their end. We make a lot more money by having netbilling up front with CC Bill and Epoch as backups.

This is exactly what I want to explore for my company. Not only for the benefits you mentioned but because it's the only way I can see that I can control my own billing more. CCBill and Epoch are great companies but I know they must be...ahem, how can I put this? Taking their foot on-and-off the gas pedal, so to speak. Or perhaps it's their merch banks doing so (a more likely culprit). But I also assume that Epoch etc have what YOU must have: some control over the scrub rate, the put-through ratio, the fraud detection, etc etc etc. So, if they do, then it's reasonable to assume there are times when they ARE touching these aspects of billing. So why let them have that control and not me? :)

Of course, convenience goes a long way, and many affiliates will ONLY promote CCBill sites, so it's a trade-off, i guess. Or I suppose it might be possible to setup "double processing choices" for affiliates: let them send their traffic to CCBill Join pages, if they prefer, or to NATS pages, if they prefer.

damn, its like teen pussy rules the world or something according to how some guys act.

did someone say teen pussy?????????????????? where?????????? pics or it didnt happen.

We do inspect every site after it passes the Visa approval to make sure it is up to our standards as well.

and what is your position on accepting these gf type sites ? i am assuming by your statement netbilling looked at the site and approved it despite the fact the "theme" of the site involves unverified age content ?

Do you request the proper documents for all the content featured on the site?

They are a gateway, ccbill doesn't even do this, why would netbilling be responsible for doing that geeze lol

I just wanted to know what they meant by that statement:

"We do inspect every site after it passes the Visa approval to make sure it is up to our standards as well."

Policing the Internet:
Difficult thing
to do

- fatfoo

Epoch terminated my long standing account (and all rebills) because I refused to give them the IDs of two MILFs without covering up some private info so someone could not stalk them. I lost HUGE and had to close a program over the loss. Yet I see these GF sites flourishing with illegal content and some of them have girls who look like they are 13 years old, with the biggest names in the business hosting, billing and acting as a gateway for them. IMHO, you're all equally guilty.

So please, don't any of you tell me you can't ask for IDs for ANY model who looks to be too young. Epoch does. It should be your duty, as a company that works within this industry, to help keep things on the up and up.

EVERY host, billing company, gateway and webmaster knows most of these sites are using stolen content and there is a chance minors are on the sites. Yet everyone turns a blind eye. Why?

To say you don't support it is bullshit. Not only do you support it, but you profit from it. All of you. You're lying to yourself and the industry. Take some personal responsibly and ask for IDs of anyone you think looks young. Not only will you cut down on CP but you will also cut back on stolen content, another problem that no one else gives a shit about but has no problem profiting from.

If Epoch can do it, and they suck HUGE sweaty donkey balls, then the rest of you can do it. Take some personal responsibility for once and do the right thing. None of us need a court ruling to tell us what is right and wrong.