So tell your BFF Fabian to adopt:

11. UGC Services should use reasonable efforts to track infringing uploads of copyrighted content by the same user and should use such information in the reasonable implementation of a repeat infringer termination policy. UGC Services should use reasonable efforts to prevent a terminated user from uploading audio and/or video content following termination, such as blocking re-use of verified email addresses.

Do it right here, right in this thread. If he won't...ask him why he won't adopt this policy.

Fabian COULD do all that right there in house. Several tubes and torrents have made blacklists that they post right up the sites and is part of the TOS when a person makes an account to upload that they are NOT allowed to upload any vids from those studios.

Thing is he refuses to even discuss doing something like that. He only wants to be DMCA'ed so he can keep making money off of other people's work for as long as he can. Hell, if I were him and could get away with it...I'd probably do the same thing. It's just human nature at it's very lowest common denominator. Especially when you have a lot of pre-paid ad spots that bring in the money for those tubes...you need the traffic that all those ripped videos bring in.

Here's a Hush Hush Blackzilla video on Pornhub:

http://www.pornhub.com/view_video.php?viewkey=743254466

Here's the profile of the user that uploaded it:

http://www.pornhub.com/users/JJ09

He's uploaded 1209 videos. Let me state that again. 1209. Twelve hundred and nine videos. None of which appear to be shorter than 20 minutes. Oh and did I mention he has uploaded an ADDITIONAL 900+ videos that are set to Private. 2100+ copyrighted videos. But I digress...

Here's another of his vids, this one from Porn Pros:

http://www.pornhub.com/view_video.ph...key=1914850290

And here's another from Chanta's Bitches:

http://www.pornhub.com/view_video.php?viewkey=179243951

That's three on the first page. Under my suggestion, Fabian would kill this account since it's clear this guy has no intention other than uploading copyrighted content. That would result in the removal of over 2100 infringing vids with one click of the mouse. How much does that cost copyright holders? Zilch.

How is that not an incredibly workable solution?

Because then he doesn't make any money...and the new solution from FSC doesn't make any money. It's best for him and the FSC that all that content stay there until all the owners join the FSC and pay for APAP

Not saying the FSC is actively endorsing that...I'm just saying that IF there is a choice between making money and not making money, it's obvious which option is preferred.

Or how about this,

here's a Backseat Bangers vid on Spankwire:

http://www.spankwire.com/Lisa-Backse...s/video205243/

Here's the uploader:
http://www.spankwire.com/Profile.asp...&UserId=349041

He's uploaded 2,353 vids. All of which look to be full length copyrighted videos.

Here's a Third World Media vid he uploaded:

http://www.spankwire.com/Meow-Bangko...e/video216919/

And a Hush Hush:

http://www.spankwire.com/Young-Fresh...x/video216715/

3 strikes he's out. That'd result in the removal of 2300 copyrighted vids.

Didn't need any fancy software or digital forensics technology.

Why won't Fabian do this? Hmmmmm.

Then they need to be upfront with copyright owners and tell them they are in this to make money. Don't try and package it with some bullshit claim about wanting to stop piracy. They don't want to stop piracy because it's their new cash cow now.

Why would anyone take it personally when their property is stolen from them repeatedly?

Well in all fairness...of course they want to make money. Who doesn't?

The thing that they are ALL missing here is the emotion factor. Will this help the piracy situation? Yeah a little bit. Will it make some money as a motivation to the FSC and the tubes? Yeah.
BUT...does it piss off the guy who did the REAL work of creating, filming, editing, uploading, taking the legal risks, etc.? You damn right it does.

That's why the posts from Fabian come across so smarmy. He doesn't have a fucking clue. He's probably never even been on a real porn set in his life. But for those of us who actually have all the skill sets to do everything from casting to lighting to editing to uploading to site design to updating to marketing etc., etc. WE get fucking pissed when someone else comes along and makes money off of our work.

So Fabian comes in here and gets blasted. And then he gets pissed off and starts posting in a shitty manner. Human nature...he's defending himself. And then the guy who did all the REAL work gets even more pissed.

Same with DDuke. When I read that he went to some seminars and had a meeting with AEBN in Jan. of 2008 so he now knows about piracy...I almost spit water out of my nose! lol

WE, the guys who actually do this for a living are the ones who do REAL work. Not go to meetings. Or seminars. Or own a tube site that runs itself on a script and tell people on GFY that it's impossible to police it.

No. Guys like me are the ones who really work this business. If Fabian gets fired tomorrow...oops, I mean if he loses his company tomorrow...what skill sets does he possess to do anything in the real porn business? I don't know. Can he shoot? Direct? Can he open notepad and build a site? Can he manage his own server? Film editing? Does he know how to take care of his own 2257 docs? My guess is a big fat NO. Other people do all that for the company, not him.

Well, a lot of us out here HAVE taken the time to learn to do all these things. And we do it everyday. And make a damn good living from it.

But to see people scheming on how to make money with MY work doesn't sit well. It doesn't sit well with anybody who actually has skin in the game.

Again, I completely understand and agree with the concept of monetizing it. I'm just trying to explain why I don't think it will ever be fully accepted and the FSC congratulated with open arms about it even if they deserve to be.

Content producers are going to look at it like a shakedown. That's just the way it will be.

Now, companies like Top Bucks, Nasty Dollars, etc. will be a lot more open to that. Because they too are run by people who never step foot on a porn set. They just hire shooters to do the work. So they aren't gonna be as emotional because they don't have the time and effort invested.

They simply budget out each month for x number of scenes. No involvement other than talking on the phone. So those big companies are going to probably step in line rather quickly I would guess. Why not?

Fuck, that's my video. Thanks.

You'd almost think this was some bad joke. :disgust

What happens if the tubes who signed up for this decide to not follow the agreement?

Robbie, I must disagree with your assessment of why I might be posting in a non-emotional manner and you might perceive that TopBucks or Pink Visual is not as attached to the work. Here are all my reasons to give a shit and care and be all emotional:

-The 60 employees here in the office that I see day to day
-The other 60 employees that used to work here 4 years ago
-The producers we've worked with and that I've met that I've seen struggling
-The fact that I have loved being here at this company for the past 10 years from the work I do to the people, to the creativity and use of technology.

I've already let all of those factors get me frustrated, annoyed, sad, bitter, etc and it didn't accomplish anything.

So, I let all of those factors inspire me and our company and instead act (not react) with intent, knowledge and good business decisions. And ever since I made that change in how I was on June 9th, 2009 & the people here also changed, Pink Visual and TopBucks have been impacted and for the better.

Do you put up a different URL watermark on the vids so you can track any type ins or just claudia-marie.com?

Just curious if its possible those spots generated type ins in addition to the 6 sales? I know if I'm surfing on a tube and I see something that catches my eye I would most likely type in the URL versus click a text link.

As Robbie and Half man, Half Amazing have pointed out this is there business plan. To remove these uploaders and their content would seriously effect the Tubes bottom line. They use pirated videos to sell ad space.

And the FSC has jumped into bed with them. Think about it. The organisation that hails itself as protectors of Freedom are now in league with those who profit from piracy. And want others to jump into bed with them and pay for the privilege.

Are the FSC jumping on the same bandwagon by joining them?

Although I have no horse in this race, I have been in this business an awfully long time and frankly, what I see happening is this (realistically or otherwise, it is the perception by many at this point):

• A system that is basically asking content producers to pay for the privilege of not having their content stolen -- by the same people stealing it.
• A system of pay us (FSC) if you want us to protect you from theft -- but only if you join us.
• A system us pay us a monthly fee to monitor an extremely small number of your video content on an extremely limited amount of sources

The bigger producers probably will just jump on board, but this will likely have a negative impact on smaller producers and in general, provide a seriously negative attitude towards TopBucks, Pink Visual, Manwin, and the FSC in particular.

Prior to this, PinkVisual was damn near put on a pedestal for championing a cause closely regarded by many as one of the most serious to face content producers in a long time. Many were hopeful of PinkVisual following through such that a precedent could be set. Thus, for many, the settlement has already tarnished that reputation somewhat, and certainly disappointed many. Granted, it is not PV's job to set a precedent, but it was indeed hoped by many that PV would be the one to finally do it. Thus, that's probably a big reason why so much negativity right now around this as it as it pertains to PV. The FSC has long been a topic of credibility, or lack thereof, in this business, so no surprise there.

One thing I do find interesting though is the idea of swapping an advertised video of 20+ minutes for a 2 minute trailer. Personally I think this is going to backfire. In fact, it's likely going to be the fuel to create numerous "illegal" tubes who refuse to get on board with this "protection scheme". Once that happens, and I think it very much will, surfers will simply go to where they're not jerked around. They'll just migrate to other tubes that give them whatever they click on and continue to hide behind the DMCA. Anyone willing to bet money that some of those tubes operating under this scheme will also create illegal ones under aliases in order to capture that crowd too. If so, then its just business as usual, but now with added revenue stream from those who pay the monthly protection fees.

And then if that happens, and surfers migrate, the "FSC associated tubes" will see lower page views and ultimately lower ad revenues. How long before changes are made then?

It'll certainly be interesting to see how this all plays out. My gut feeling is that this is not a solution at all. The real solution, in my opinion, would have been for the FSC to instead focus on some actual legal work, such as addressing the loopholes being exploited in the DMCA.

I would like to add paying off 3rd world police and sometimes running from them, to that list.

I know y'all have been impacted. I'm an affiliate since forever. :(

My point is that until you actually dig the ditch yourself with your own hands and you actually own that ditch...you can't feel the anger that the people in that position feel.

I can stand back and be a little bit detached because I already have my situation in hand and have for the last two years. It was a HUGE burden off of me. I literally couldn't sleep when my content was being devalued like that.

Matter of fact it was a couple of years ago when I first hired removeyourcontent and had not yet figured a way to successfully protect my streams in the members area, that Eric at RYC told me that Claudia-Marie was the most pirated girl out there.

It was sick. And it made me physically sick.

And yes, I have had to let employees go too. I hated it. But I could no longer justify keeping them on. This is a business. And pretty much anything that has to do with my tgps and affiliate work is now just me. There just isn't enough money as an affiliate anymore to justify having a group of employees working for me.

But I'm just explaining to you...try and tell a guy like Tony and his wife Mandy Blake. Or Buzz and his wife Rachel Aziani. Or Dave and his wife Chica. Or our own Scott and his wife Celeste Fox...and the list goes on and on and on...just try telling those people that you understand where they are coming from.

Cause you really don't. You're not the one having to explain what you do to your family. Or try to protect your kids from finding out. Or try to keep stalkers and crazed fans from finding where you live. Or worry about the police kicking your door in at your home. Or worry about a million other little things like that.

People like that are putting EVERYTHING on the line. And they damn sure don't appreciate...and never will appreciate anybody stealing from them OR shaking them down (which is how they are going to view it)

I just had a bunch of videos removed from them about 2 weeks ago, I think this was one of them as it's not showing now, however.... note the message: This article is temporarily unavailable. :helpme

Not everyone Robbie - I for one am doing my small bit on the side not to make money from it. I'm doing it to help others. That said, of course there will be some costs involved if people want to implement it, since it will take me time to put it on their servers and customise it for their needs. But the costs will be minimal.

I am doing it because I like doing things like this that keep my grey matter churning over. That actually IS my job. I get compensated for things like that, not paid.

This setup is different though, because the technology IS expensive (you can thank the MPAA for pushing up the price on that one). However, there are companies involved that need to make money to make profit. I think (I may be wrong) that the only partner in this that is not-for-profit is the FSC.

I think it's great that mainstream technology has been brought over to the adult world, since it is proven technology that works. The problem is the price which will only be affordable to the major labels.

Shows how little you know about this business or any business if you think $450 = 10 sales a month. So let me explain to you what it costs to take $450 a month. Less processing feed of 10% ($45) less affiliates payouts of 33% ($150) So an extra $450 is $255. Where did you learn your business management and accounting skills?

DMCA has become an enormous cost of doing business because of you and people like you who profit from others hard work and paying them nothing.

You can change the present. And you have absolutely no intention of doing so. Unapproved uploaders can have limits on the length of scene they can upload. Serial offenders can have ALL their videos deleted. You won't do either because it will hurt your ability to sell ad space. Selling ad space because you have pirated full length videos on your Tube sites TODAY is your business plan. Yes you want to work with everyone, every serial pirate you can find.

It might bite you in the ass if you really cared about piracy. Hang on you do care about piracy, you love it to death. :Oh crap

:2 cents: :2 cents:

This is my thoughts on this situation.

Anyone who thinks the problem with Tubes can be solved by a program is a dreamer. It won't work and this is why. If anyone knows otherwise I will stand corrected.

Large traffic tubes sites exist because they can publish full length scenes and reap hundred of thousands to millions of viewers a day. Without the full length videos the traffic will migrate, to the other Tube sites with full length videos. It took Pornhub and a few other Tubes 2-3 years to go from practically nowhere to be the top porn traffic sites.

In that time they have educated the customer he doesn't have to pay for porn, in fact Tubes offer a better deal than most porn sites. So if the top 20 Tubes take up this scheme with a vast majority of the porn producers/owners AND delete all the full length UGC videos and their profiles. The surfers will soon realise and go to the 21 to 40 top Tube sites of today. Which will become the top 20 in a very short space of time. Because the surfer is now educated and will go looking.

So Top Bucks, FSC and all the others who jumped on this band wagon can you see how it will not work? If you hamstring 20 Tubes with a program another 20 will take their place. Same goes if you do it to 2,000 tubes. And those that replace them will see the folly of signing up to this and will be in countries you can't chase them so easily.

I bet Manwin have realised this as well so have no intention of making it work.

And if Top Bucks have such marvelous content that the viewer has to have, as no other content will take it's place. I'm going to be surprised.

Edit And another thought. If Manwin or any other top tube comply with this scheme and see another tube coming up to their level, they can't keep buying them out. Because once they get the new tube to comply, the next one in line gets their traffic and becomes a threat. They can't keep buying tubes because their traffic is migrating. Then change the new one to the reason the traffic is migrating. Running around chasing their tails.

It's not the solution and you know it. It won't clear Pornhub of EVERY full length video on it. And if it did you would lose traffic to the next tube down the line with full length videos on.

You're trying to fool us or/and not got a clue how it works.

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth...5#post17588485

I just listed 7.

This EXACT thing happened when torrent sites like Mininova went legit. The downloaders just went elsewhere and other torrent sites moved up the traffic list.

You're wrong.

Manwin has every intention of making this work and it's a brilliant move on their part. Part of the DMCA law states that to comply a tube has to take advantage of available tech. If not they can be sued for infringement. Since Manwin operates the biggest tubes out there they are in the lead position. They already have the traffic and by pushing this new technology forward into the adult space they are giving copyright holders legal rights to go after tubes that do not take advantage of available technology. If every tube has to comply then they will remain the biggest traffic holders in the industry. With this move, and TB and the FSC's help, they are crushing the competition.

That's his M.O.

:)

You're delusional. You're seriously telling us Manwich wants to remove piracy from their tubes...yet they allow profiles with 2300 and 2100 copyrighted videos to remain. I understand the whole "use available tech" argument but how about the "use common sense" argument? How about the "stop repeat offenders" argument?

They won't even punish their own users that are clearly violating the TOS of their sites, yet you think Manwich is going to lead the way of anti-piracy? What are you smoking and can I have some?

I'm guessing Fabian is being silent because he's got his Manwich people working on either switching all their "Uploaded By"'s to 'Anonymous' or their busy creating a bunch of fake profiles. Which is it Fabian?

Maybe you won't respond to my challenge but I think I'll do it anyway. If nothing else it'll make for a very compelling body of evidence for one of my clients when we can show how you do nothing to punish repeat offenders.

Atticus, I see your point, and certainly hope it works like you expect it to work. However, I think there also exists a real possibility that overseas Tubes will also flourish as a result since surfers will not appreciate having a bait and switch tactic used. While I hope I am wrong, to me the success of tubes to this point revolves around the following:

• Volumes of Surfers attracted to enormous quantities of free porn
• Provide that enormous amount of videos, legal or otherwise, to create an almost viral traffic explosion
• Sell ad spots for revenue sources

To me, if you disrupt the surfer enjoyment, you risk disrupting the rest. And by using a bait and switch technique, I just can't see surfers staying around.

One big thing we keep reading around here is that "legal" tubes using sponsor trailers cannot compete with the big tubes because of the full length videos offered. Whether that is a valid observation or not, I do not know. But I seriously doubt that if a tube company sees their traffic drop as a result of this, and subsequently the value of their advertising marketplace, that they'll sit idly by and not notice the other competitive tubes cutting into their viewership. Thus, the "legal" tubes under this plan STILL need full length videos, legal or otherwise.

For this reason, I don't think you can claim to be both "legal" and still allow user uploaded material and hide behind a DMCA. I just don't see a grey area here. You're either legal, or your not, regardless of having a DMCA policy in place, as that's simply flawed.

This is all just personal opinion of course. But it all strikes me as a conflict of interest to take money to protect content users from yourself, then continue to post unauthorized material of those who refuse to pay.

But Manwich doesn't. Who exactly is it your partnering up with in this thread again...oh right....Manwich. So you're telling people, in a thread about UGC sites, to support a company that doesn't even support the principles you promote, in relation to UGC sites. Why would anyone want to jump on board again?

Common sense isnt a legal argument. Use available tech is.

I dont think they want to remove piracy at all. I think they want to maintain their standing at the top of the adult traffic world. By setting the example that the technology is available they are forcing the smaller tubes to comply as well. It's a great business move to create a level playing field once they already have the upper hand.

They are never going to just remove a thousand videos because common sense tells them they're copyrighted. That would hurt their position and they're not legally required to do so.

We'll see...
http://removeyourcontent.asia/temp2/subpoena100801.pdf

For the more technically inclined.

It's nice that they can keep it in O(log n). That leads me to believe that they don't have to compare each fingerprint to every other fingerprint to find a match. They probably store it in a manner in which they specify the video generally and then narrow down more.

That would suggest that they have the ability to find similar videos as well.

Seems like this technology requires being able to feed the videos from a site into the engine to fingerprint and then compare. There seems to be a technical and also legal flaw to this.

Technical: You have to write a spider for each site individually because they protect each video. They can detect how many videos you "watch" and if it is over a certain threshold they simply ban you. If they think you are spidering their videos they just have to change the authentication method. IP's suspected of spidering can be banned outright and shared across the network of piraters.

Legal: IANAL but reverse engineering something in order to break its protection is usually considered illegal. The DMCA might have some provisions to allow it or might add some in the future but that still leaves the technical problems mentioned above.

On an unrelated note, this technology has yet further applications. It would be cool for someone to be able to upload a clip or screenshot from a movie and then have the site report back, what movie is this from? Which can ultimately be used for things like, who is this girl?

Too bad the FSC isn't doing things like this if they want to go after piracy.

Your technical & legal flaws are incorrect. It's already been done on both tubes that voluntarily integrate and ones that don't. This is not a science experiment, the FSC didn't invent this, its been done and proven by technology companies already. Get a demo of the technology by contacting the FSC and see for yourself or read more about it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital...fingerprinting

:thumbsup * 999999999999999999999999999

Before I start, one important statement.

I have been very honest on this board, very open, very willing to discuss. The emotional crap I get thrown my way is tiresome and thus obviously gets me aggravated sometimes. I do my best for this not to happen as far as I can, but obviously I am not perfect.

I will continue to be very honest in these threads, I will repeat statements over and over again while people think they have to put out false and unproven claims over and over again...

I will start with the basics, just to get them out of the way, which the haters here all will simply claim are lies:
- All content is _user_ uploaded, this includes our own users for brazzers and mofos and users for the partner program people of course.
- We do not make money with APAP. Only in the case of replacing content and putting ads up to the content owner we would. Currently, we are implementing it, but we will see how much use it will have. We are right now simply not letting content fingerprinted up on the site.

Regarding the repeat infringer policy, as far as I know we ban the user, and prohibit him from signing up again via blocking email address and such. Right now, as far as I know, we do not remove all the content, but I am verifying that, I simply did not have the time the past few days.

Regarding Robbie's post long post, saying I am a stupid idiot who knows nothing...

Please, if you do not know me, stop claiming stuff you obviously do not know.
1) I invented NATS, telling me I can not admin a server, build a site with notepad, take care of 2257 docs, is just rediculous.
2) Can I shoot? Myself? No, we contract 3 exclusive studios in the USA, and are testing 3 in europe for exclusivity too. We also outsource amateur content to 150000 individuals around the globe. (Yes, thats 4 zero's).
3) Direct? Again, no.. not myself, the studio's have director's on their payroll.
4) Film editing? Directly, no, we employ a crew of 60 people in-house (yes, 60), who do pre and post production, including script writers, model scouts and managers, special effects artists and video editors.

So, I guess, if I lost my company, my skill sets sadly only seem to be inventing software like NATS, writing high speed server systems, and managing a company...

So, sorry.. I think, that I do really work this business. Btw, I have been on sets, just mentioning since you thought I likely never was.

Just because I post on this board, does not mean I have nothing to do obviously. I enjoy posting here before and after true work, or during to relax. It get's the edge off... so to speak. I'm weird, I know...

I am also unsure why you seem to think I am somehow less valued in the adult industry simply because I do not shoot content myself.. very confusing.

The thing most people here complaining how they are so much more in hurt by piracy because they are content producers just seize to realize is that Manwin currently is one of if not the biggest producer in adult entertainment online.

As I have said from the beginning, months ago, we are slowly doing our plan of changing certain aspects of how the tubes work. This can not happen overnight. Anyone with a sound business mind will understand this. For those that do not accept or understand this fact, so be it, I'll survive and ignore you...

Eric, looking forward to lots of fun fights with you, which you obviously want to have...

You do realize that the FSC doesn't participate in private party litigation right?

No, you're wrong. You assume all the Tubes are subject to the DMCA law. Try enforcing it in Russia, Ukraine or any other country that does not give a fuck about the US DMCA law. Does the "available tech" stipulation apply in the EU?