dogfart business model redux

Only webmasters who would upload content without our authorization and in violation of terms and conditions (IE our video length limitations) would be impacted. How do you see webmasters who utilize tubes to generate traffic impacted by this?

Surfers really "upload"? I thought it was employees doing all the "uploading"?

i dont fault you for your business model.. i think its brilliant.. you have put companies in a situation where it is more profitable to rev share with you than it is to fight you..

regardless of your intentions to clean up what mansef started, the fact is that mansef built a business by stealing the content of others..

forgive me for being naive, but micheal corleone going legit doesnt squash the sins of his past...

i find it difficult to forgive a company that fucked over a lot of peoples livelihoods just because they change ownership and name...

i dont know why i spend so much time explaining my opinion when i moved on to mainstream 2 years ago when i saw the implosion of adult..

maybe its just my values getting the better of me where i believe that putting doing the right thing is more important than making money...

in any case, good lick with your business model and at least you are moving forward with providing a way for content owners to have their content removed from your sites...










.

because the last time i checked, any watermarked content that was attempted to be uploaded to mansef/manwin tubes was rejected...

has this policy changed?

i was told very clearly that you had to have a paid partner account to upload watermarked videos...




.

Side note FYI. Here's a list of a handful of mainstream sites you may not know already use digital finger print filtering and many of these also use a monetization component:

Break.com
Facebook
Youtube
DailyMotion
Justin.tv
MySpace.com
Veoh.com
56.com
AnyStream
Photobucket

Of course media owners from Disney to the record industry have also maintained finger prints for years. We in adult need to catch up.

also, what if you took the position of not allowing any of your content to be uploaded to tubes and all the other content producers took the same approach...

where would the tubes get fresh content then?

do you think that would make your content and program more valuable or less valuable?





.

mansef/manwin same shit different toilet.

what about the content you continue to profit off of, that you have no right to show.

guess thats not going to change.

im sure more lawsuits will follow since you havent shown any interest to stop the pirated content, until you are caught.

So Pink Visual helps the entire industry by helping put the breaks on a large piracy source, then sets a standard for all other piracy tubes and many other sources to use thumb print technology on our side of the business, which is working in mainstream and works in general, has been what has worked in other court cases... and some of you think it's a bad thing?

It really sounds like some of you may have expected the impossible...

disney goes after any site that has their content without permission and as far as i know has never been unsuccessful in getting their content removed...




.

I'll let Fabian reply. We have no control over how tube site operators choose to deal with watermarked content and their paid partner program.

That rejection has nothing to do with digital finger prints and filtering. In fact, it has the potential for content owners via the monetization program to flag what content submitted is "okay" and should just be let through as is. It actually works the opposite way in which content owners could choose NOT to flag uploaded content say under 2 minutes or whatever they want.

"promo sites"

then tell me this, how come all of your tube properties have brazzers content no longer than 4-5 mins in length, but the 30-120 min videos, are videos that are their without the consent of the owners.

so its not ok for people to use your full length videos, but its ok to use others.

I have noticed this too. Just an FYI - we have 10k infringing sites in our database and most none of them care about fingerprints.

ok, but then what you are saying is that "hey, we (topbucks) can upload our watermarked videos but the rest of you are on your own"?

dont get me wrong, i think this whole fingerprinting thing is a positive step, but if program owners are just going to worry about themselves then why continue on with an affiliate program when the deck is stacked against them from the start..

it seems to me that programs are going to be looking out for themselves in the future, which is fine, just tell your affiliates thats your intention...

let the affiliates make an informed decision as to whether or not it makes business sense to keep promoting programs that feel this way...


.

pretty disgusting.

there is only one problem here, one solution - and this ain't it.

anybody who tries to sell anybody who actually knows anything in this business that any of the major tube sites are user submitted generated is a fucking piece of shit.

there is one solution to this and it doesn't involve paying the FSC a dime nor paying Manwin a cut of anything - STOP STEALING OTHER PEOPLE'S CONTENT AND HIDING BEHIND THE FUCKING RUSE OF DMCA PROTECTED USER SUBMITTED BULLSHIT!!!

PornHub is NOT the porn equivalent of YouTube - stop treating them that way. I can upload whatever the fuck I want on YouTube, try that on any of the major porn 'tube sites'.

In regards to this. Use of finger print technology is not mutually exclusive to other techniques for content removal or anti piracy strategies in my opinion. Companies need to make the business decision on what mix is right for their needs.

We would encourage any company to learn about the various services and options.

Exactly. This is why everyone should be educated about the true scope of online piracy. When studios are told that 80% of online piracy is tube-related, (which came from an FSC/Apap client and not factual), who are not aware - there's a bit of an issue there. Especially those overseas.

No. I'm not sure where I'm going wrong on explaining this. So let's take a hypothetical example where Tube X is using the FSC APAP monetization program.

TopBucks webmaster Y decides they want to upload some promo video as a way to generate traffic to a TopBucks site. They create a user upload account at Tube X (however Tube X's policies work).

TB Webmaster Y goes to upload the a 3 minute clip of Orgy Sex Parties to Tube X, watermarked in a way that promotes a site that redirects to OrgySexParties with their affiliate ID.

The upload is cross referenced against a database of digital finger prints maintained & is flagged as a match. In the database, we (TopBucks/PinkVisual) has a set of rules on what our recommendations are for dealing with content of ours uploaded. We have a rule that says that if it's under 3 minutes it's okay & let it be.

So TB Webmaster Y gets his video uploaded to Tube X and it goes through as it did before (no replacement, no overlay, just exactly as it would have gone through).

--------------------------------------------
Now a side benefit of this technology to Pink Visual in this example is the fact that I can look at all the finger print matches that are say under 3 minutes and verify that they are actual webmasters promoting our sites. Through the FSC APAP system I have already found numerous instances of uploaders who take our content & watermark it to promote a paysite of theirs. We obviously would handle that situation differently.

I would be impressed if you removed ALL of the videos uploaded by the user/uploader as well as banning said user/uploader. Instead we see the same user uploading stolen content over and over and over again...and we send DMCA's over and over and over again.

How can you honestly justify NOT deleting ALL uploads and NOT banning a member of YOUR tube sites that has had DMCA notices filed against content they have uploaded illegally? Honestly...you can't.

Thank You...

FSC program does ZERO for the real problems out there. Absolutely nothing. If you don't know what is really hurting on the piracy front, you don't have anything at stake. It's a good smoke and mirrors play to make some money though, so congrats to them on that.

Yes we can, it's called repeat infringer policy. And currently, it falls shut as soon as the user uploads (I think, would have to verify to be sure) 3 videos that get DMCAd. The account is then shutdown.

If you think this is not correct, do let me know of a user where you feel this is not the case, so I can investigate myself.

All of this obviously only applies to post March 1st 2010.

By far most of them also are not tube sites.

As you confirmed yourself, tube sites are NOT the major problem with piracy in this industry. It's the sharing boards and torrents which are the big problem in my opinion.

There are a ton of other companies that have 3-5 minute clips on our tubes also, it's by far not only brazzers.

Did you ask all the owners of those 30-120 minute videos? Also, ever think of the possibility that we might actually buy licenses to content?

BTW, we have full brazzers and mofos videos uploaded to our tubes all the time. We find them on other tubes too. We send out DMCA's all the time... In terms of amount of piracy OF OUR content, we are likely one of the biggest ones. We have sent over 100000 DMCA's in the last 2 weeks alone.

Translated: The Piracy Retreat held by Pink Visual, and now with guest speaker Fabian from Manwin, is just one big sales push for the FSC, aimed mostly at the dying dvd companies.

Well done.

I am not going to the Retreat.

You should.

It is going to be all dvd companies who will fork over however much money the FSC asks them to fork over. You could help and do your part to help both the FSC and to fight piracy at the same time.

It would be a Man-Win. :upsidedow

We help the FSC in every fight they are fighting for the industry, from .xxx to piracy and everything inbetween.

And the FSC makes almost nothing from this system, most money goes to Vobile and in the case of option 1 that allison explained, only a small share goes to FSC too. Most of it is a revshare between the tubes and the sponsors, some goes to vobile, some goes to the FSC.

BTW, the FSC is a non-profit org, so not sure why you keep making it sound like the FSC is making a ton of money here...

FSC...fabian buy that too?

I don't make any money on paper either.

Just to be clear. 3 DMCA's then the account is shut down (good news). Does that mean ALL of the videos uploaded by that user are also deleted from your database?

User: frogman304

It took me all of ten seconds to find this guy. Just type in compilation as a search and you'll see dozens more of the same. These compilation videos are examples of obvious copyright theft. I challenge you to do the right thing. Shut down the accounts and delete ALL of the videos uploaded by these obvious abusers.

Sorry for going off topic. On topic, I feel the whole finger printing/filtering thing is a great technology but it's a bit expensive. One can only hope the price comes down or sales go up so smaller programs can afford the added expense.

Everyone here knows Mansef = Manwin only stupid people don't know this.

You guys change name when Mansef got flagged by the US gov't with your millions of funds frozen in Georgia.

Quote From The Truth

You're close... last 12 hours:

Why would someone want to waste their time and upload your promo videos to get you traffic if they aren't being paid to do it? Just doesn't make sense.

The real upload abuser are the tube employee, which I'm sure Nathan is going to deny.

I've got my developers on this and will hold you to it :winkwink:

Lucious.

Do you own the copyright to the material you mentioned? If not, then you as much as I do not know if the content is infringing or not. If it is yours, send a dmca for it.

This is just like a comedy central clip on YouTube or a music video or whatnot...

good advice:thumbsup

PXN, no we did not. I spent quite a bit of money on the Mansef assets. And the pink visual lawsuit almost made the deal fall apart.

The funds in Georgia are non of my concern.

But this if from all your clients I am guessing? The 100k is just us ;)

Correct but it didn't take two weeks ;-)

Well some of them actually are user submitted/generated, at least partially. Xhamster for example - they do have real user profiles, those users interact with each other, post and discuss videos, have videos in their profiles that are obviously stolen from very different sources (which is not typical for the in-house "uploaders") and usually on top of it they have videos of themselves masturbating or wearing satin panties or eating their own cum or doing some other sick shit. It is impossible to fake that.

They do have several profiles that are obviously fake - like 1000 videos stolen from just 2 or 3 companies (average real poster will randomly steal from many companies), zero comments on other posters' videos, no avatar, no profile info such as interests, no video of an uploader sucking his own dick etc. But those are old profiles, they used them to fill their tube when they started - new stuff is posted by those who seem to be "legit" youtube style uploaders. I do not check all profiles of all users uploading new videos there as I have better things to do, but I do sometimes check them and those profiles I check do seem real to me.

Not saying that I believe in all that hiding behind DMCA "safe harbor" bullshit, or that none of the major tubes upload videos themselves. I'm just adding my observation that tube owners are not always stealing from us alone, in many instances their users do actively help them.

Where does the money go? FSC or Vobile?

Who are the owners of Vobile? Are they pure mainstream or do they have secret adult ties?

Sure, us alone send around 6000 new found ones a day.

I also do not get the part of the deal where it says "monetization" of your content found at participating tubes. If those tubes are willing to post our clips and provide advertizing on revshare basic, why wait until some sick fuck will submit our full length clip to them? Why give your share of sales to FSC/Vobile, after this clip was replaced with an edited promo?

If you want to post our stuff, simply contact us and we'll provide you with enough clips to last you forever even if you're going to post them daily. And so will many other producers. You, not FSC/Vobile, will get credited for those sales. And you can plan your updates in advance, using the vast pool of clips legally available to you, not having to worry about DMCAs taking down all the good stuff etc.

Why not to simply come here, post a link and say SUBMIT EVERYBODY, submit your program and contact details, submit your clips, banners and promo texts for your site(s). If we like them we'll signup for your program and shedule your clips for appearances in our updates.

I seriously don't get it.

Hi,

obviously you can use our Paid Content Partner Program anyway. The monetization comes from the fact that it just gives you the possibility to make some extra money with the system....

So if I submit videos myself legally, I need to pay for a spot. But if the same clip is posted as a replacement for an illegally submitted video, it's free of charge?

That's sick man.

I recently found a video on your site with a girl being fucked by a dog. The girl IMO looked under age.

Who should I send the link to, the police, FBI or AG?

This is the long term plan. Pink Visual/Topbucks are going to find themselves fucked in the long run. A few big Tube sites will dominate the business and when they do buy out as many programs as they can for cents on the dollar.

Unless people stand up and fight.

Start telling members the truth about the dating sites and the odds on getting to meet a real woman off them.

Just one way.

A Tube charging to submit content. :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Had to come.