or maybe the database query /html output mismatched the join date and the last login date.

Well then that clears that up. Your policy is too delete and ban a users account for uploading infringing content. But you don't remove the remaining infringing content or the info in his account identifying him.

So you aren't really interested in getting stolen content down. You just want to play the same DMCA game that all pirates play.

Don't you see how that absolutely makes a content producer livid with anger? And rightfully so? You did NOTHING to produce that. You did NOTHING to deserve the money you make from the prepaid ads.

It makes you a parasite Fabian. That's what Pornhub does. And no, I'm not talking about Brazzers. That side of your business is a great thing.

But when you sit there and say to the world that you would expect a company to be forced to send you 500 separate DMCA's when you could plainly see that this one guy put them up there and you could simply take them all down as being AGAINST your TOS...then you're just fucking with people while you suck off their work.

Jesus Christ man. I hope to fuck that Top Bucks and The FSC are reading what you are saying here. They have no excuses now. You are laying it out there.

You've had several opportunities to save face here. You could simply say: "Hey, of course if we ban a guy for stolen content and he has hundreds or thousands of more vids he uploaded we will delete it all with one click"

But nope. You just want to keep poking a stick at us. I'm speechless.

I'm done talking to you. You've answered all my questions. And I appreciate your honesty.

To everyone in this business reading this thread: I hope that the title of this thread has become self-fulfilling and that now all of your questions have been answered about this whole deal that Pink Visual and the FSC have signed off on with Fabian. Anything this ex-programmer/sudden multi-millionaire is involved with in any way carries his and his companies policies that he is stating in his own words. Nothing left to say. He's said it all in this thread.

Hope you all choose wisely. I highly recommend removeyourcontent.com over this whole scheme. At least they actually go after pirates instead of dreaming up ways to help them make even MORE money off or your content.

If the tube host is not in control of user database, then who is?

Robbie,

I appreciate your honestly in your posts.

What I will have to agree to disagree with is your comments which basically make anyone that is, by your words, not in the trenches, some second grade would be porn company.

That, is just a rediculous remark.

I work a LOT with people right in the trenches. I can accept that you hate the tubes, I can accept that you think I am a bad person... what I can not accept is you making me out to be somehow not a real pornographer just because I own a big company instead of doing this in the basement...

Also, just because I am a programmer does not mean I have the time to go in and learn a system and setup some kind of script which magically fixes everything. On top of all that the system might actually destroy our DMCA protection. It is not this easy.

Robbie, hate me all you want, call me names all you want... Also please accept how DMCA works. Your example was horrible. We work a lot with NA. It completely changes our approach... If we would remove all the content from a user we ban right away, by my understanding (but we are verifying this with our lawyers currently), it would remove our safe harbor under DMCA because it becomes selecting content at that point. It is not a red flag!

The tube host controls the bandwidth, load balancing and routing, not the user database.

What if the banned infringer also uploaded non-porn hollywood movies or underage content, but no one sent DMCA notice about that, wouldn't you remove that too? If not, what is "selecting content"? If you choose to let only porn movies stay, then you ARE selecting.

I don't think any host lose their safe harbor if it's in their TOS that all content will be removed if banned or they upload something else not allowed. Maybe your lawyers should consult with the laywers for YouTube, Rapidshare etc. they do it without losing safe harbor. YouTube remove porn (select).

Rapidshare takes it further by banning duplicates. Maybe that should be implemented too, beside the fingerprint technology. Then nick2 won't be a problem.

I licensed a tube script and have full control over database. Me only. Guess I licensed very advanced script then. :winkwink:

Fabian Thylmann, you're no saint or businessman. You don't have to fear me and I never once said you had to. However, you will fear what lies ahead for Manwin. I guarantee it. :)

You are correct. Youtube is an example of this.
https://youtube.com/t/copyright_program

This was in reply to this question.

So a US law applies in countries outside the US. Can you explain how that works and does it go in front of the countries law?

Also Atticus said this.

"Part of the DMCA law states that to comply a tube has to take advantage of available tech."

Does that mean you have use all the available technology or content owners have to use it to use it to police you?

So you have now had your attention drawn to this bug, will you fix it or hide behind the "bug" excuse?

Also now you've had your attention drawn to these 2 people will you be deleting all their movies or hiding behind the DMCA clause that the content owner has to send a DMCA notice? Because from what I can see these 2 people are uploading content from many different studios.

Both questions go to your intentions of cleaning up the companies act. Either empty rhetoric or a true statement of intentions.

I have little to do now I'm retired, so maybe it's a job I should be doing and let Fabian tell us all these nicknames are from before he took over, or he owns all the content or it's a work in progress.

Do I charge Manwin for this service. :1orglaugh

Nor as much as we're looking for the excuses that trip off your keyboard. :1orglaugh

Can you explain what the term Private means in the uploaders history of uploaded content?

So the DMCA law prohibits you from banning and blocking a law breaker?

You're not selecting, you're deleting the whole account including all the uploaded videos. No selection of content what so ever. Can you point to the place in the DMCA that says this.

It's strange how people somehow think posting my picture and real name on boards make me scared, simply because they never would reveal their own names on them...

I am actually looking _FORWARD_ to whatever you are trying to achieve... I love these little fights, I love the courts, you will be shocked of the outcome if you try anything funny....

Dirty Dane, as I have said in a previous post I am not yet 100% sure what happens, and we are checking with legal also if removing it would cause us problems...

And you simply do not understand what selecting content is. Youtube not allowing porn is not selecting content, Us not allowing non-porn or illegal content is not selecting content either.

My real name is all over the web tough guy. Lose the threats Fabian.

He said tube "hosts" not tube..

I am guessing he said this because the Subpoena is sent to Reflected Networks, which hosts Tube8.com. Instead of to us directly, which honestly I do not get but ok... I will let him play his games...

No Paul, I did not say US law applies in the EU. I replied it to "Does the "available tech" stipulation apply in the EU?" ... has nothing to do with US law. There are similar rulings in Europe which make "available tech" stipulation apply...

Paul, as I said multiple times, its a case by case basis, we can not simply remove all content, we own licenses to a ton of content so we will see what happens. The two users will likely get banned from uploading content again.

This has very little to do with intention of the company... For all you know, we own special tube licenses from everyone out there... Also, asking me these questions right now, is useless, its the weekend, I can not give you real answers and it takes time to get many of them... As I have said, we are changing various aspects of how the tubes work, none of that can and will happen overnight. Either you accept that or you do not, but that's how it is going to be...

I will simply continue on my route and maybe at some point more people here on GFY will accept that I actually am doing things... maybe not... and I honestly do not care much since I know for myself that I am...

Private area of content only they themselves can view and share with friends if they desire, but they are not publicly accessible.

OK here's a few questions for you and Alison to answer.

User; http://www.pornhub.com/users/bryanc

Public Videos (1045)

Joined: 1 year ago
Last Login: 3 weeks ago
Videos Watched: 94
People have watched bryanc videos: 17,797,701 times

He's got a whole load of Back Seat Bangers videos, owned by Top Buck, 23 full length scenes. Of the 1045 videos this guy uploaded.

So does he work for you and uploading your licensed content, work for Top Bucks and uploading their licensed content or neither?

If Top Bucks are allowing this video on your site, where is the link to their site. OR do they sell the license of their content to be used on Tube sites?

And if he works for Top Bucks are the other 1022 videos he's uploaded all their content?

And if he works for you do you own the license to the other 1022 videos?

And yet another one. http://www.pornhub.com/users/crispocolis

Joined: 1 month ago
Last Login: 2 hours ago
Videos Watched: 156
People have watched crispocolis videos: 7851 times

He has 42 videos from Public Invasion. A BangBros site. It has in total just under 190 videos on the site. So are BangBros giving away around 22% of their site for free?

Of course if the answer is yes it's licensed content from both sponsors it begs another and even bigger question.

Why should an affiliate promote sites who allow their content to be given away for free in such vast numbers?

Sorry double post.

So again. Does the "Available tech" clause mean you have to apply it or content owners have to? I think this is something you need to be very clear on as it might negate your safe harbor regarding DMCA.

Are you saying you can't remove the content of a LAW breaker as this will harm your safe harbor? Would love to have a lawyer give a ruling on this. Because I don't see any selection going on. You don't select his content, he broke the rules, his content goes.

Good point, you might own the license to the content Bryanc uploaded. Do you own the license for all the other scenes he uploaded? He has to be in house either on the premises or off to be uploading licensed content.

Would be very interesting to know if Top Bucks is licensing full scenes to Tube sites.

People will start to accept you if they see you're really trying to remedy the situation. Not hiding behind phrases like "For all you know". Or saying "it's the weekend", you must be able to get into the back end and see if this guy is part of your operation or not.

I'll check some more of his content and come back. Because it gives people an idea of your integrity and Top Bucks.

In this post http://www.gfy.com/17590216-post55.html, you stated "Anonymous is a special account." What's the function of the "anonymous" account having thousands of these private videos? Can you please explain along with more details about this "special account."

Which also means that if those videos are copyrighted, content owners can't see them. I'm sure Fabian's wheels are turning to find ways to prohibit content owners from seeking out their content on his criminal network of sites.

Oh wait...they already are. Go to spankwire.com and try to see any of the other videos a user has uploaded. They've disabled that access. So that we can't sit here and show users with 2000+ stolen videos uploaded and show how the scumbags at Manwich haven't changed their tune what so ever.

Congratulations FSC and TopBucks...you've been seduced to the dark side. Forever will it dominate your destiny.

so if in the 70 my dad popped in vcr copy of "soul train" showed his friends some guy dancing down the row and said that cat can really swing that ok, and protected fair use of commentary

but doing the exact same thing using a tube site, is somehow wrong.

WTF.

Nothing you say is valid.

You are a fucking idiot. :2 cents:

Example A (private home, he paid for that copy)
Example B (mass availability to the general public, didnt pay for that copy, certainly didnt have to prove his ownership).

Which do you really think is "fair use".

Well first of all, we at Topbucks are aware of every single video on all of the Manwin tubes. We are coordinating as to which ones we will send DMCA notices on and which ones we will use to test digital finger print filtering on. All aspects of that and other plans are our business decision.

You might want to brush up on what Fair Use means as I believe you are missing some key aspects.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

Damn Allison...I know that you wanted them to stay up when you filed suit against Manwin for the proof of it.

But the fact that you settled with them and your vids are still sitting there completely devalued every second that they are viewed is just amazing to me.

I would have thought that at least your settlement would have gotten your videos taken down. Jesus Christ.

And leaving them there to "test" with? WTF.
That pirate site owner could have at least taken all your stuff down with a few clicks. He claims to have once been a genius programmer, and I know that in my Mechanical Bunny admin I could have it all gone in a few minutes time.

Then you could always upload some vids to test when this "solution" is FINALLY ready to test.

If you're saying that all legal action is over...then why on Earth has your new "partner" not taken down your property? You do realize he is making money off of Top Bucks property and you are losing money don't you? Not to mention your poor affiliates like me who lose our traffic and sales to his site.

This is unreal.

You would not be able to say anything else but that at this point. :2 cents:

Meanwhile, while you're coordinating "who's on first," they are profiting from your content and devaluing it at at the same time. :thumbsup

Yeah! Allison! You must be REALLY STUPID!!! Robbie doesn't understand your business decisions so that MAKES THEM BAD!!!

YOU IDIOT!!!

Robbie thinks that YOU ARE A BIG SILLY!

You should just quit now.

ROBBIE HAS SPOKEN.

YOU HAVE BEEN JUDGED.
.
He will be calling you a pirate and putting you ignore next. Be careful.

Robbie,
This shows you who is really running the show now.

Kudos to Nathan and company for this unbelievable takeover of the internet. It was a BRAZZILLIANT move and perfect executed. Duping the the FSC to get on their side and to get them to believe their shit, was a stroke of genius unlike anything we as an industry have ever seen. Even though I find it all appalling, I will give credit where credit is due.

Thats exactly the same I am thinking about this whole Mansef/Manwin/Fabian discussion.
In my opionion there are some people around that have a massive problem with big picture thinking.

Why don`t you realize that this is a big chance for the whole business? The technology behind is awesome. That whole digital fingerprint technology can be a great tool for solving several problems, and it is already working perfectly for the entertainment industry.

The adult industry was sleeping far too long, but now it seems like people are joining forces to actually do something together. And I believe that this is a good thing.

One argument I read several times in this thread was, that paying 450$ for this technology would be too expensive. If there are producers around here with just a small amount of videos to fingerprint, why don`t you create some content group with several smaller producers? Or try to get your content fingerprinted by one of the larger Studios that will take part of this program? ... just two ideas ...

The way some people are acting and reacting in this forum is shameful. I can truly understand that copyright holders are angry, but did Fabian steal the content? No. Sniffing in Fabians private life, posting pictures of him and his family and accusing him of being the devil is in my opinion unacceptable.

best regards
Renzo

I agree that Fabian's attitude throughout is shameful. Especially when he hides behind DMCA and declares that even when a user is BANNED and DELETED for stolen content uploads...he is STILL going to leave the stolen content up, in some cases THOUSANDS of full length scenes so that he can profit off of it.

Shameful indeed. Very shameful.

What if he pushes the red button and closes all tubes tomorrow. What would happen?

The FSC has never had any experience in this. They are supposed to be fighting for our constitutional rights against the govt.
Their track record? Not good.

There are already companies in place who track your content on over 10,000 pirate sites (including file sharing and bit torrents) and get it dmca'ed down for MUCH less than what the inexperienced FSC is charging to attempt to get your stuff "switched" with a trailer on a handful of tube sites.

As I said before...I COULD overpay for a relatively ineffective solution. I COULD overpay for a lot of things. But I didn't get rich by making dumb business decisions. If others wish to...then they have every right to do so.

I've made my decision reading Fabian's statement. DDuke talking about meeting with a couple of companies at the beginning of 2008 and then attending some seminars to become experienced with piracy, and Top Bucks still having their videos on Pornhub after reaching a settlement against them.

Those things pretty much sum it up.

And I got news for you...Fabian IS much nicer than the pirate sites that are bigger than him. He's the biggest tube. But not the biggest crook.

If I'm acting "shameful" because of what I'm reading here and seeing happen...then so be it.

I'd stop deleting the affiliate emails from Jug Cash and start running their new galleries again.

He doesn't have to close them down. That would be silly. If he turned his tubes into fully legal (non-pirate) tubes AND made it a policy at Manwin not to accept traffic or pay commissions to those who profit from pirate content he could have a significant positive impact on the industry. I'm guessing he would also get a lot of support from those who still attempt to sell porn in 2010 and intend to do so in 2011 and beyond as well. But that's his call to make.