$450 covers 10 videos across 16 tube sites. Whoop-tee-doo. Either of the guys in my sig are a better deal for ALL of your content across ALL the sites. I will also add they only have 9 tubes on board and Nathan owns almost all of them. Hardly something to get wood over, though I will agree the technology is AMAZING.

It's just a shame that the same people who have been ass fucking the industry has their hands in this and you actually have to pay money to keep your shit off of their sites now. Typical mob / criminal behavior... create a problem then make people pay you to protect them from the problem you created.



How do you know they are not employing people right now to steal and upload? Because he said so? Good luck with that. You don't know anything about the guy and you are just going to take his word, after he supposedly bought one the biggest pirate operations in the industry, that he is going to change everything, yet he won't delete the videos of a user who violated his TOS after uploading videos he didn't own the rights to? Wake up man. Nothing has changed other than a new arrogant face, assets moved, and more people duped.

Remember when they said they didn't own any tubes and it was counter productive to their business model? :1orglaugh Epass also said they were not going anywhere and everything was fine, and you saw how that turned out.

If you are willing to buy a company built on stealing from others, what does that say about you? It says you are unethical and you at that point assume all the bad shit that comes along with the new criminal enterprise you just purchased. That's the way it goes. He supposedly bought (and I really doubt it) this company after the US Government seized millions of dollars from them from money laundering AND they were hit with piracy law suits. He knew the business was crooked going in, as the Feds don't freeze your money for nothing. Yet he did (supposedly). I still believe it was simply asset shifting.

People wouldn't be posting what they are if this was all on the up and up. CRIMINALS get outed, pointed at and attacked, not good people. There is a reason for this reaction.

Anyway, this is all a huge waste of time for everyone. Winning a GFY argument or even making a single point, is like being the tallest man in China.

Ain't that the truth! lol

Robbie, I don't mean to seem like I'm picking on you, but it appears you lack knowledge about the process of a settlement agreement. In this case, the settlement agreement ocurred last Monday, and it's been already a busy week. A settlement agreement is not a magic trick that magically makes all agreements done at the point a signature is put on paper.

Seems you have made up your mind though which is personally fine to me, that is your business decision. What inspires me more at this point is the fact that I already see this movement working. There are people taking action. Like the two additional major tubes who within 1 week of hearing these announcements are already signed up to demo the technology & the various studios who have also started the process to get finger prints going and learn about the technology. And the other studios and tube sites who are in litigation that realize this is a real remedy the courts award.

So, in 6 months, when it's likely that the APAP finger print database has over 100,000 adult videos finger printed & 25 tubes (and growing) are filtering their content & torrents/cyberlockers are beginning to also consider filtering if not already be participating, then maybe you'll reconsider and want to join a realistic growing anti-piracy movement.

So for the many silent readers in this thread, here's a quick reminder of where to go to get more information & the email form to set up a demo:

http://www.fscapap.com

Allison I don't feel that way at all. And I have nothing against you by the way.

But I don't need knowledge of "process" of a settlement to know that job NUMBER ONE for an ethical honest person would have been to go into the tube admin and immediately remove all of your videos.

You don't agree?

I would have done that MYSELF if I were Fabian. But since he's such a big shot and has all of his employees at his beck and call the very LEAST he could have done was have one of his grunts open the admin and delete all the TopBucks stuff.

The fact that he did not speaks volumes. The fact that you aren't doing anything about that but making posts together and acting all chummy with him doesn't look good for you guys as far as having smarts goes.

I've been in this business a good while now. I've dealt with a lot of folks. And even now...if I find my shit on a site and I know the owner personally I just write him and send him the URL and my stuff comes down.

You would THINK that would have been the first thing this piece of work that you are snuggling up to would have done.

An honest person would. And you know it. So you're trusting this guy over people like me? WTF?

Just checking my stats remote...I haven't made a lot of sales with Top Bucks over the last few years...
And Stats Remote only goes back to 2003...and I made decent money with you guys before 2003.

But just looking at Stats Remote "All Time" (2003 until now) I've still managed to send 3102 joins and 4086 rebills.

How much money has Fabian made for you? Or should I say COST you. And yet you really don't give a shit about MY opinion? But Fabian is your boy? Again...WTF?

Join a realistic growing anti-piracy movement to fight against the same people who are part of the same realistic growing anti-piracy movement and caused much of the piracy problems in the first place. Great plan.

Once a thief, always a thief. You should know that by now, especially in the adult industry. They may take your finger printed videos with one hand, but rest assured they will find a way to fuck you with the other one. Putting a new face on a company that has built an empire of piracy, is not going to change much of anything. It was clear the moment Nathan said they would not delete the banned users videos, after he violated their TOS and loaded videos he did not own. Even Youtube does that when they ban a user, and I they are probably a little sharper than your new partners. It's just more of the same, with new faces and a shot at getting legitimized by your company and the FSC.

Honestly, I hate to think what pushed you into settling with them and getting into this cluster fuck of a deal. They must have really had your ass in the cross hairs. Or did they buy your company? The latter would make more sense to me, as I don't know why you tossed your company's excellent reputation into the sewer over this. What's that old saying, if you lay with dogs, you get fleas.

Robbie, I never said your opinion didn't matter. I was honest and told you that what specifically is inspiring more is the fact that I've seen 2 tubes already show committment to participating in APAP and several studios in addition to all the active participants. In addition, I said maybe in 6 months you'll reconsider, but for now it seems you've made up your mind so I'm not sure what the point is in debating for now as I'd rather respond to those with questions about the technology.

Your opinion on job #1 is based off of extremely little knowledge of a confidential agreement.

And I'll re-iterate the content on the tubes will be handled appropriately in the timeframe we deem appropriate. Our handling of the matter was on our to-do list next week in fact.

And to be clear, I am being reasonable with Fabian and Manwin (not BFF like some of you like to believe). Do you see Pink Visual banners all over their sites or Brazzers banners all over Pink Visual sites? We have made committments and there's no reason to make things ugly in my mind.

Yeah something seems off. We will probably never find out.

DWB. Check out most major RIAA/MPAA copyright infringement suits against a user generated site that ended with a judgment or what they declared as a succesful settlement and you will see in most imstances they now work together in a more positive way under certain guidelines. Only the rare instance shows otherwise. I'm not sure why you would think copyright law would apply to the adult industry differently.

Again, Allison...I don't NEED to know what is in your "confidential agreement"

An honest and ethical person would have your stuff DOWN. That doesn't break any agreement...unless you got your ass handed to you in the legal settlement.

As I said before...to get my stuff down from many sites doesn't take much more than me saying "Hey, this is Robbie, please take this down"

So after all this Fabian still doesn't even do that much for you? Sorry Allison, I have nothing against you...but damn I've been making a lot of money a long time and that ain't how I would do things from your side.

Good luck to you. And good luck on your piracy summit which I'm now guessing is mainly a recruiting session for the FSC.

As I said, I don't need to know anything at all about your legal agreement to know that a sincere and honest man would have taken all Pink Visual vids DOWN immediately.

UNLESS...you lost and he won.

And again...I don't care. He STILL should take them down. Are you really going to argue that with me? Or argue that it's "okay" for your shit to be viewed by hundreds of thousands of EX-potential customers as we speak? And for him to continue to make money and traffic off of it while it KILLS your affiliates?

Jesus fucking Christ.

4FITTFY answers :thumbsup

I am not entirely sure if this whole collaboration is represented thoroughly, or perhaps I am just not fully understanding it. I would like for anyone involved to just correct me, and others, on any of the following statements, please:

1. Content producers are being asked to pay a fee to protect 10 of their videos from being displayed by the same tubes currently displaying them in an unauthorized fashion, and in full length.
2. With only 10 videos protected, participating tubes still have the ability to display the rest of a producer's entire library without authorization, unless DMCA'ed, at which point they have to remove that specific link to that specific video.
3. You must be a member of the FSC for the privilege of paying $450 to have 10 of your videos protected against the people displaying them. Anything else in your library is still fair game unless DMCA'ed.
4. Anyone can start a tube, create fake users (or hire remote users), visit the torrent and forums that are very rampant with piracy to grab content, then upload the content to your own tube, put a DMCA provision in place to protect yourself, and then join in the protection scheme to be paid to protect content owners, and without any upfront costs to implement the protection software.
5. The foundation of this system is one of bait and switch, whereby a full length video is detected and switched for a shorter one that is authorized.
6. The FSC has effectively given up on doing anything to close DMCA loopholes through legal channels and are instead using a technology to address an issue for which they themselves have little to no experience with, and using this technology as a way to bolster membership.

I'm not trying to be difficult here, but this thread has certainly caused me to have questions. If I am mistaken on any of the above, by all means I'd appreciate the clarification.

Robbie,

So, Allison tells me, she wants certain content to remain up until they can test the fingerprinting with it, and we comply with her request and that somehow makes me a bad person again? You guys are hilarious...

DWB, I wonder, although I think it is impossible, what would it need for you to believe that I actually bought the assets? I do not particularly care if you believe it or not, but it might convince others too...

The fact that Fabian has stated that even if a user uploads 2000+ copyrighted videos he won't do JACK SHIT about it unless he gets 2000+ DMCA notices (which he hopes to come under the guise of the APAP/FSC finger print revshare dicksuck program)...well that pretty much shows you how honest this guy is. This is why we don't believe he has ANY intentions whatsoever to clean up piracy. And PV and the FSC are putting out press releases like we're all supposed to jizz in our pants because this cocksucker company claims they're gonna join up. In the words of Winston Wolf - Let's not start sucking each other's dicks just yet. All this means is that they'll have some bullshit defense to trot out in court should anyone else ever sue them. So all that PV and the FSC have done is given Manwich cover so that they are untouchable in lawsuits.

Great job guys! Why don't we just stop calling it a settlement and call it what it really was for PV....a big fat LOSS! And for Manwich a big christmas present with a very VISUAL PINK bow on top.

Half man, if or if not we delete the rest of the videos I can not say for sure right now... And if we will change that policy, whatever it is, I can not say either right now. I do not make decisions on GFY. I make them with legal and business advisors...

1) No. There are 2 programs. There's a program called "Media Wise" which does not have a monthly fee. This program works with the participating tubes & prevents users from uploading your content by replacing it with advertising content that you select. There's a completely seperate program called "Video Tracker" which is a tool that is used to track your digital finger prints on the participating tubes AND 16+ other tubes (and more as they add them). It's a tool for sending DMCA notices, tracking, data collection and legal evidence collection. This tool costs $450 per month. There is bulk pricing for tracking more than 10 titles per month. You can participate in just "Media Wise", in just "Video Tracker", or both. I've pointed out that the "Media Wise" program is the no brainer, as participating studios now do not have to even worry about finding and DMCA'ing their content on 8 tube sites, instead by simply getting a digital finger print (which is very simple and help is provided) they can replace attempted uploads with advertisements for their sites on the fly.

2) No. See 1. You were overlooking the "Media Wise" program and instead referencing the "Video Tracker".

3) Yes, the program is limited to FSC members. See DDuke's response as to why as she explains it best. The FSC membership rates are based on a corporation's size, so you can contact the FSC for the exact rates.

4) Correct. In that case they make a distinction between past liability and current liability.

5) All of that is decided by the content owner. I have a feeling content owners will get very creative in figuring out ways to best appeal to a tube surfer.

6) There's no point in the FSC making attempts to clarify or change the laws behind DMCA because it's a waste of money for many reasons. First, is the fact that there has already been plenty of case law established when it comes to DMCA and copyright law. Second, is the fact that because larger industries are impacted by this like music and Hollywood, they are fronting the money to make headway in creating new case law (although some times that backfires too). And lastly, is the fact that it's more likely Congress would make a decision that would impact copyright law and DMCA more severely then any case law would.

I will definitely admit that I'm not an attorney, but I've been through a handful of litigations and have been advised by both in-house counsel and top of the line, experienced copyright law attorneys and I can say with confidence that digital finger printing and filtering is a solid and thorough remedy awarded by the courts.

In fact, while this technology was in its infancy (2001), it was a court ordered remedy in the Napster case:

http://news.cnet.com/Napster-to-add-..._3-267997.html

Since then, it's use has only grown and improved in the mainstream

One remark regarding 4)
If anyone did a tube that way, ie downloaded content from torrents and such and put it up, OR even if they just scraped other tubes in an automated way, they are NOT protected by DMCA!

Implementing the fingerprinting tech at that point does not help them either.

Lets say Pornhub has one of our 40 minute long vids - your service can replace that 40 minute video with a 30 sec. promo vid? I don't see how you could replace one video for another on a tube site you have no control over.

Vittle, because we are actively working with FSC's APAP and are committed to it. The least that will happen is for us to remove content which is fingerprinted and the vobile biz settings for it say not to allow it.

Allison: thanks a lot for the clarification on the above-noted points. The media wise program seems to have been overshadowed/forgotten while the tracking aspect (the one with the fees attached) has been the primary focus -- at least on my part.

Well, the person doing this would certainly never admit to uploading the videos. But to not recognize this is happening with a lot of tubes I think would be naive at best. Between remote uploaders, proxies, foreign IP's attached to inhouse user accounts, and other assorted methods, to insulate themselves against claims that would remove them from DMCA protection. Thus, "claiming" it was user uploads would put the burden of proof back on the person claiming the infringement.

As a result, it seems as though one could certainly start a tube in this manner, gain some marketshare, join the protection scheme, claim they are going legit, and then get paid to protect content producers as a supplementary revenue stream.

Granted, I have no intention of tossing my hat into the tube ring anytime soon. But it seems to me that this protection scheme provides a financial incentive, beyond advertising revenues and traffic sales, for people to start tubes en masse using unauthorized content with the ultimate goal of getting paid to protect content owners from themselves.

It's an interesting scenario.

robwod,

considering scripts like mechbunny have actual SCRAPER PLUGINs to allow for easy scraping... just gotta find out if the app is active in the code.

Fabian says that yes they can apparently easily replace a 40 minute video with a 30 second one. However, deleting all the videos a user has uploaded....well that is SUPER DIFFICULT MAN.

Hmmmmm.

Half man, it is sad to watch how hard it seems to be for you to read.

Allison has explained the problem, as have I, if you do not understand it, go talk to a lawyer about it if you actually have the money to pay for one.

This whole scheme depends on thieves acting honorably -- an oxymoron in my book.

I don't understand why Manwin is going to all this trouble. If I wanted to right now today I could buy 50k full length videos licensed for tube sites for $5 a pop. Content guys are desperate, hell i was paying $5 a pop 4 years ago, could prolly get them cheaper now. Seems they are attempting to share the wealth, yet most are upset about this?

Hmmmmm is right! :thumbsup

Many paid webhosts will terminate and "delete" (remove from public view) all content of accounts that get too many DMCA complaints ... so a paid service can do it, but a free service can't? This is not making sense ... :upsidedow :321GFY

Bottom line is that the "we can't delete everything" is nonsense - the tubes certainly can, but choose not to. End of story. :disgust

Ron

It's sad to watch how hard it seems for you to do one honest thing.

Go talk to an honest human being...you'll have to go outside the Manwin circle of thieves to find one though.

Robbie, I did not attend a seminar. I never said that I attended a seminar. What I said is that, over the course of 18 months, FSC brought together experts. We brought together experts from mainstream entertainment, experts from the legal community, experts from the world of software, and most importantly, experts from within our membership - John Stagliano, Christian Mann, Michael Klein, Steve Hirsh, Bruce Lehay and Keith Webb, Bob Johnson and Bruce Whitney, Rob Novinger and Tony Rios, Ali Joone, Steve Orenstein and many more.

To oversee the program FSC contracted with Gill Sperlein arguably one of the most successful copyright infringement attorneys in the industry. Gill was the staff attorney who successfully guided Titan Studios though many groundbreaking copyright infringement cases-Gill is a well established ?expert?.
The aforementioned group recognized that tubesites were a reality of business in the digital age. It was clear that our goal was not to legitimize tubesites, but rather to force tubesites into a legitimate business model. The resulting APAP program takes a stick and a carrot approach to copyright infringement.

Most of what I have read on this thread is based on a complete misunderstanding of what APAP is. For those of you who are interested in understanding the program?
First, the stick?TRACKING AND ENFORCEMENT In this approach APAP participants are given a copyright analysis of their content by Attorney Gill Sperlein who also assists the content providers in developing a plan for making sure their content is properly copyrighted. Businesses participating in the tracker component of APAP have their content tracked every two hours on 16 selected tubesites with state-of-the-art technology. Tubesites are selected by their Alexa rating (highest -trafficked sites) and through participant input.

APAP technology gathers information and develops an evidence packet of materials for each infringement. This information saves a great deal of attorney time and expense for those companies who choose to litigate. Once an infringement is found, DMCA takedown notices are sent out and tracked every two hours to determine time and level of compliance. There is a great deal more to the software--if you are interested contact me at FSC and we can set up a demo.

FSC APAP maintains statistics for infringing locations by compiling information and tracking notices sent to any given site, thus locating the biggest violators and then documenting how sites respond to takedown notices. Then finally, APAP works with subscribers to determine an individualized approach for each infringing site; identify subscribers, when appropriate, who wish to engage in litigation and match them with others to form litigation groups.

Through a coordinated effort in APAP?s Tracking and Enforcement phase, participants pressure tubesites to adopt Mediawise--the carrot. Mediawise software uses audio-video-metadata fingerprints to STOP content from being uploaded. Instead of a title going up, the software applies the business rule the content provider wants for that title and either truncates the content or provides an overlay that takes the viewer to the content provider?s site. Content providers fingerprint their entire library and their content DOES NOT GO UP unless the content provider wants it to. With this approach, the content provider not only blocks stolen content from being uploaded, but also realizes a potential new revenue stream

So what does all this cost?
Tracking and Enforcement ($400/month)
To participate in this phase of APAP, there is a minimum tracking of 10 titles or 1500 minutes. The cost is $400/month (NOT $450). There are bulk rates and less frequent tracking options at much lower costs available for those who wish to track large portions of their libraries. There is a one-time $450 registration fee. The program is month-to-month; you will NEVER be forced to continue with the program if you are not satisfied.

Mediawise/Monetization (FREE repeat, FREE!)
This costs the content provider absolutely nothing. The content provider fingerprints his/her entire library with assistance from our software professionals. The content is identified with Vobile?s Mediawise software and instead of the content going up, it is truncated or replaced with a trailer that takes the viewer to the content provider?s site. If a purchase is made, then a portion of the purchase goes back to FSC who pays the host site and Vobile (the software company). Here is the breakdown:

If the content provider is participating in the Tracking** and Enforcement phase the breakdown is*:
Content Provider 60%
Host Site 15%
Vobile 15%
FSC & Gill 10%
*Percentage of net ? after billing fees and chargebacks
**These providers have a higher percentage of the rev share than non-participants as we rely on these companies to continue pressure on the tubsites to join the program.

If the content provider is NOT participating in the Tracking and Enforcement phase the breakdown is*:
Content Provider 55%
Host Site 15%
Vobile 17.5%
FSC & Gill Sperlein 12.5%
*Percentage of net ? after billing fees and chargebacks

If you have any questions or would like to set up a demo, shoot me an email.

Diane, thank you for the clarification.

You are 100% right. I totally took that out of context. And applied the word "seminar" to it because you had speakers giving talks like a seminar. But the way it looked when I typed it made it appear that you went to some show and sat in the audience...when the reality is that you hosted these speakers yourself to learn something.

My one question on that would be this: Acknowledging my ignorance of what Mainstream is or isn't doing...did you get any real experts from adult in there? As much as I very much respect the list from your membership...I don't see any names there that are really known for their prowess or success on the internet...much less in combating piracy.

I know that when you launched this idea...you really didn't know WHO were the "experts" that were already doing it. But I'm assuming you do now.
Have you reached out to any of them? John Stagliano is a legend and a giant in our business and knowing his reputation...I'm betting he has educated himself pretty damn well on this...BUT having said that, does he have a database of pirate sites? Do any of those people on your list of experts know who, how, and what to do for over 10,000 pirate sites?

Well, there are some folks who were already doing it back when you had that group get together. It would have probably been pretty damn beneficial to bring in those people to show y'all how it's done and get you on the right track and eliminate the learning curve.

That was sort of my point. You guys just appear to be fish out of water on this thing. Not saying you can't pull it up to speed real quickly. I'm sure you're smart enough to do that.

Anyway, that was my point. I've never played quarterback on an NFL team. But if I suddenly decided to invest my money and buy my way into the game...I'd definitely bring in the best strength trainers, coaches, etc. to try and get me ready. I wouldn't bring in the best Team owners or the best guys on the board of the NFL. They might be the best at what they do...but it wouldn't do me any good at what I was trying to achieve.

See what I'm saying?

As Vobile developed the technology and has experience in using the software to initiate copyright enforcement actions, I imagine you could say they are experts. It seems to me that other anti-piracy efforts in our industry are not using the same technology.

Alexa will point to the major offenders for monitoring.

Just saying......Vobile is probably considered expert in their game and the sites are in plain view.

Robbie, who would you recommend and what would they "bring to the table?"

That's true to a great extent. Vobile is the expert at their software. How much expertise they have in follow through with said software is totally unknown.

And just looking at Alexa isn't going to tell you jack. If you think that will do the trick then go round up a few thousand pirate site url's off of there...see what I mean?

And that doesn't count the mother lode: Surfer forums.

And does Vobile have that data base ready with the proper email address for each DMCA to be sent AND a working uneasy relationship with the guy responsible for pulling shit down so that when you make a dmca request to him it doesn't sit on the shelf for a few weeks?

I'm doubting that very, very much. And that's just a small part of what I'm talking about here. There is a LOT more to this than just a fancy software that is a bit overpriced for the results it brings.

I think I said it best in one of my replies here...this software is like having a bazooka and not having a target or even knowing how to properly fire it yet.

The only one I could recommend are the ones I use. RemoveYourContent.Com

Anything else that I or anyone else says would not be based on experience. I have used them for a few years now. I know what they can do.

Anybody that has not used any kind of service like that is only theorizing and guessing.

It would be nice to have seen what the FSC is trying to do coordinated with the guys who pioneered anti-piracy in adult. But they didn't. Probably because at the time...they simply didn't know any better. Thus that list of "experts" in anti-piracy that DDuke listed above.

Some of the best in our business in that list...at other things. I'll say it again, if I need pests exterminated I hire a professional exterminator...not the owner of a company that does something else.

People who know me know that I have been preaching anti-piracy for years and years.

I am good friends with Nate and kind of motivated Ai3rk get the "Content Producers Summit" going back in 2007 which I flew from Texas and attended.

Back around 2004, I personally flew to LA and visited every major company in the Valley and spoke to the owners/webmasters/sales reps about how piracy was going to ruin our businesses.

I appreciate your passion and respect anybody who is trying to affect "change".

I do not consider myself an anti-piracy expert....just an activist. I have seen piracy's effects on my business.

I would say that I am the same. The only extra thing I did was to make sure the we had a backend script in place that keeps our new updates from being stolen out of our members area to begin with.

That was the greatest single thing I ever did to increase my sales and stop the blood flow.

All the rest of this "anti-piracy" is just chasing your content. Locking it down is job 1.

But of course to this very day I'll have people on GFY try to tell me it "won't work" and it will be "hacked" etc., etc. after a little over 2 years of it working
lol

I don't think that what I have done sucessfully as far as protecting my content and keeping it down to a dull roar and then having removeyourcontent work on taking care of the rest ( a VERY effective and cheap one-two punch ) is something that the powers that be want to have discussed at the upcoming "Anti-Piracy Summit"

There's no profit in it for anybody. It just keeps the rightful owner of the content in a lot more control of what's happening. So it only profits the one person who SHOULD be profiting : The Content Owner. Not the FSC, and definitely NOT the pirate site.

Robbie,
I'm going to be coming to Vegas next month for a scuba diving trade show around the 18th or 20th. Would you like to get a bite to eat and exchange some ideas? Treats on me.

lol.

translation: robbie lets eat and break bread and bro out so we become buddies and you stop making great points in our thread when we're trying to make money.

squeeky wheel gets the free lunch. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Definitely get in touch when you're here. I'll bring you over to Robbie Manor and show you some things that really work well on piracy and help you in any way that I can.

Dialog is a good thing....it is how I learn.

Keep making the points. They are food for thought.

Waaaaay off base Alprazolam. If this were Fabian saying it, I'd agree with you. However I've known "Redrob" for many years and he's about as stand up a guy as you'll ever meet. He doesn't screw anyone over and the work that he's done for free speech (especially fighting the fight in the incredibly difficult state of Texas) is tremendous.