I have been a long time subscriber at hotmovies.com and is less porn being produced? there's literally just nothing new being uploaded on there.. constantly 90s compilations which i HATE and then like old mid 2000s movies...
Yes. There are many reasons for this, but it boils down to the fact that everyone is getting their porn for free, putting all the companies out of business (or teetering on the brink).
Although I am in complete agreement with what killbill said. The fact that Hot Movies is using older titles to update their sites is not necessarily a bad thing. Especially if you are a person like me who prefers older movies.
[Link]
Todd Gack Deactivated User
"Oh, of course. Todd Gack." 849 Posts 6/12
Posted - Jan 24 2013 : 9:29PM
^ There's no disputing this fact. It still seems to me that there's an endless influx of hot young new girls getting into the business. Makes me think the overriding motivation is the thrill of it and money, less so.
Kill Bill, I have to agree with you on this one. Other than Kink.com I can't think of any porn producers expanding in the current environment. I think Kink does well because people turned on by BDSM tend to be more highly educated, making us more likely to be able to put two and two together and understand that if we steal our porn it will not continue to be produced. I think Intersec does reasonably well for the same reason but even they have only started one new site in the last five years.
Commisioner of Porn Quality Control 522 Posts 2/08
Posted - Jan 25 2013 : 1:51AM
There was a drop off after the Mr. Marcus incident. Now there seems to be a slew of good stuff coming out this next month. I prefer quality over quantity anway.
^ I regularly visit X-Rent to see what's new, and average number of titles per month is down by at least a half. Of course, some producers have given up on physical media and moved to shooting individual scenes for the internet, but if you're looking for movies there are a lot fewer to choose from.
There is less porn being made and the porn that is being made is lower budget due to the fact that the funds just aren't there. People think stealing porn (watching it on tube sites, illegally downloading it) is harmless but it is not, when there is less money going throughout a business there will be less products being made. Moral of the story is if you want porn to get back to the "golden age" or at least a "silver age" make sure you're actually paying for memberships to sites or dvds. The more people buy, the more funds are in the industry to create more porno magic :)
Which is why I do not understand the people that think buying stuff off of a girl's wishlist makes up for the fact that they're watching scenes for free. Sure, you might have spent $40 on something for her, but you you're also (albeit indirectly) costing her bookings which can make her hundreds of dollars each.
^exactly!!! Mind you I love receiving gifts, if given the choice I would rather have fans buy my dvds and subscribe to sites that I am on to continue requesting me
I think what may be throwing some people off is that in the past couple of years there have been lots of new companies popping up using old scenes for their DVDs under new titles that appear to be new. As a consumer I don't mind this because I've never see most of this stuff. But I can see how those kind of titles may have an effect on the studios making new content. For someone like me who's into the girls and looking for the best price point if the title with what I consider a stronger cast is available at a lower price I'm going with the older stuff I never saw over new content. The sad thing for the studios is that there's so much existing porn these days that even if there's no new stuff being made for most casual porn viewers they wouldn't notice.
On that note, can you recommend the single best site to pay for where the funds actually go where they should? (i.e. back into the company/stars that make it)
I probably should be, but I'm not totally convinced that it is less than 2008 or 2009. I'd want to see the hard data. I went back to look at the ADT release calendar for the last several Januarys and then also picked another month (September), while there are some anomalies, you can count on around 400 releases a month. Even back to Jan. '05. This month? 330. Last month? 345. But last September was 390. And last January popped just over 500. Of course, compilations are included in this count.
[Link]
Todd Gack Deactivated User
"Oh, of course. Todd Gack." 849 Posts 6/12
Posted - Jan 25 2013 : 10:32AM
I belong to an adult dating website that enables members to post videos. It seems like they cannot be downloaded due to their way their embedded. Are porn production companies looking into ways to technologically prevent their scenes from being downloaded for free? I don't even know if it's really possible, it just seems like a logical thing for producers to try.
I prefer paying with cash, instead of giving my card number to some faceless internet site over possibly an insecure connection. Video stores are disappearing, so I eventually joined the trend of renting and buying dvds by mail. I don't expect to ever see the appeal of stream rental. I might eventually subscribe to sites for specific types of porn, but most of them are networks, with one price covering lots of extra porn I don't want to buy.
As in the company that is owned by the company that owns most of the major tube sites? I don't think I agree with that. Brazzers may spend the most money on their talent, but a lot of that money comes from the very sites that people are complaining are destroying the industry in the first place.
^^though I do not agree with tube sites there is no denying that Manwin owned companies put out quality work and pay the talent more than any other company in the industry does these days.
^Unfortunately, yes there isn't much arguing with that. What I don't like is how they've nearly destroyed the rest of the industry to be able to get to that point. Edit: And I personally don't like it enough that I'd rather support any other companies that I know consistently pays their talent over any Manwin owned property, because I don't want to justify their business practices. Edited by - whatsatelephonebill on 1/25/2013 3:45:01 PM
Ofcourse Manwin owned companies can pay the talent more since their tube sites make them money while is part of the reason the majority of the porn industry is in a financial shithole. Is there less porn being made? Yes. But is it a lot less tho? I would think (or possible hope) that the vast number of pornsites on the web have replaced at least a small part of the DVD market. Edited by - MorganKane on 1/25/2013 6:36:04 PM
I don't like the idea of porno tube sites either. However, since Leya is relatively new to the industry she may not have known the connection between Brazzers and tube sites that shall remain nameless on here. Not everyone in the industry reads Mike South's blog (although they should). To answer the question that prompted Leya's response, I think Kink.com is the most ethical, I wouldn't have any qualms about subscribing to Evil Angel either. Reliable small operators sites such as Lew Reubens' and Jeff Gord's would also be good honest choices.
When an entire industry is hurt by just one person or company, I expect the leaders of that industry would unite to take down that one, with criminal charges and civil suits. A prosecutor could make a big deal of conspiracy, RICO, etc. That could be a tough sell to a government that is sometimes run by anti-porn crusaders, but I thought something more would have been done by now.
The problem is that as long as the tube sites are complying with DMCA takedown requests, then they aren't doing anything illegal. Tube sites aren't liable for the content that users upload to it (Safe Harbor). It doesn't matter that as soon as it gets taken down, someone else uploads it all over again. There was a point a few years ago where it looked like we were headed for a legal battle between Pink Visual and Mansef, but they settled out of court and no one has brought anything back up since. I don't think any company that isn't already connected to Manwin has pockets deep enough to afford a long legal battle with them.
Of course it's possible to prevent people from downloading a sites videos but why would anyone want to join that site? I pay for my porn but I will not join a site that doesn't allow me to save the content to my computer. Some sites tried to go the DRM route but they quickly realised that they were losing members at an alamring rate and they ween't getting new ones. The ability to download content is not the problem. The problem is the people that use the stuff they downloaded to make money by uploading it on Tube and Torrent sites.
Who says that Tube and Torrent sites are complying with DMCA takedown requests? It's been my undestanding that it is very hard to get these sites to takedown their illegal content and when it does happen then it quickly gets uploaded again so the injured party has to start the process all over again. That is not what I would call complying so much as fucking with people. I'd also like to add that if the Tube or Torrent site are not doing something illegal when they allow a video to be uploaded into their server once then they certainly are when they allow the same video to be uploaded again afrter they got the DMCA request. I know they claim ignorance of the offense but that is not usually accepted in a court of law so if they ever gewt tried for a crime then they can't use that in their defrense. second time 2-I don't know if Tube Sites are liable or not but I think they should be. I'm pretty sure a pawn shop is liable if they are found to have stolen material so they try to make sure that the articles they have in their store is not stolen material. The problem is that the goverment has to get involved and they are not necessarily willing to do that because we are talkingh about porn.
[Link]
Porn Scout Deactivated User
3735 Posts 10/02
Posted - Jan 26 2013 : 5:06PM
Personally, I subscribe to sites for the convenience factor. Currently, I have memberships at videobox, 21Sextury, and Elegant Angel. All three are extremely affordable and the content is presented in a way that is easy to download and view. Yes, I could find more stuff and not pay for it on torrent sites, but that's also kind of a hassle and then there's the additional risk that you don't really ever know exactly what you're downloading, i.e. viruses and malware. I think the same value proposition exists with mainstream media as well as long as the price point is reasonable.
The reason they're not liable is because if they were, then you or I or anyone (like, say, their competitors) would be able to post illegal content, get it noticed/flagged, and have the company themselves get in trouble for something they had no hand in. Without the Safe Harbor clause of the DMCA, yes the "tube sites" wouldn't exist, but neither would YouTube or Flickr or Instagram or anything else that allows a user to upload pictures, audio, or video (basically, anything that could hold a copyright). And before you say "This would never happen", Viacom got caught doing this to YouTube while they were suing them.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Jan 28 2013 : 6:02AM
^ I don't believe the 'safe harbour' claim washes in court, Pirate Bay and many other torrent sites that made the same claim have been shut down in court.
Natural 6 - review by Captain Jack
Posted - Jan 24 2013 : 6:52PM