Porn Piracy gets personal...

Author	Post
warrenwest67 Member Thanks for the mammaries. 966 Posts 1/07	Posted - Jul 20 2011 : 10:13AM I know there are lots of threads on this issue but this article looks unique. click here for the MSNBC article [Link]
Goldstein All-Star Member "You have sacrificed nothing and no one." 3689 Posts 8/10	Posted - Jul 20 2011 : 10:31AM Excellent article. [Link]
shark1 Senior Member 1219 Posts 5/04	Posted - Jul 20 2011 : 3:23PM Very interesting article! [Link]
Peoples Temple Member People tell lies my friend. Some people like publicity. I don't like publicity. 674 Posts 5/11	Posted - Jul 20 2011 : 4:13PM This is a situation where technology has grown so fast that content is extremely hard to protect. File sharing sites enable people to take content on their home computer and exchange it with anyone, computer to computer. I understand why adult industry people are angry when the public can view their content and not pay for it as in the past, but what they are really griping about is the modern day technology has made the content easily viewable. I embrace the free exchange of content. What would you prefer, shutting down the Internet? Take for instance, if I purchase a product and choose to share it with others, that is my choice to do so. I used to share my VHS adult movie collection with friends and after they viewed it they would return it to me. Is that a crime? If I purchase a CD, put the music on my computer and then choose to share the file with others, who is anyone to tell me I can't do it? Same thing goes with videos. If people do not like the free exchange of content your real problem is with technology. How nice it is not to have to go into a video store to get adult content as we used to have to do for years. [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Jul 20 2011 : 4:36PM It has already been used in Europe for mp3 music sharing but it has been ruled out as being a mere blackmail and violation of privacy and outlawed. A lawyer can track down a song but only if a judge allows it because there's a prosecution running. nobody exept the Authority can track personal data or put a tracker into a computer without permission of the owner they charged for example € 430 as a price for an mp3 song adding attorney's payment one of them even arrived to me but I would not for sure download a song like the one they accused me, not even for life Most people though knows that if the police put under exam a PC will surely find something illegal considering that even a youtube flash clip could be labeled as such for example if you have filmed your nephew first birthday and there was Alicia Keys in uour background , you might find that you need her permission to put a song in a movie even when private. So everybody paid to avoid any risk and thats why the judge did not allowed such way to prosecute the downloaders , if you find them or suspect one them call the internet police have a proceeding opened and le them to prosecute. You will ask your payment in a court hall they ceased [Link]

Black Market Danny Member BlackMarketxxx.com 92 Posts 5/11	Posted - Jul 20 2011 : 5:02PM interesting article indeed www.BlackMarketxxx.com [Link]
crazy8ight Member You Gotta Go There To Come Back 114 Posts 7/11	Posted - Jul 20 2011 : 11:54PM i agree with you Peoples Temple. The industry made this bed, and they too have to lie in it. i read somewhere that the boom of the internet actually came to life because of porn. they were the industry leaders, they pushed for the technology. Sadly.. a one or two or a few people payed to watch or stream content or record it.. and they shared it to the masses like movies and music. [Link]
warrenwest67 Member Thanks for the mammaries. 966 Posts 1/07	Posted - Jul 22 2011 : 9:27AM Well the biggest news to me in this story is the effort to track down the biggest downloaders. If there is money to be made in busting pirates you know there will people all over it. I know what piracy did to the music industry and though Napster was forced to change, the buisness never really recovered. Gone are the days of big investment into artists and long term commitments to growth. Just mabey the hunt for the quick buck + return and thats it. The "Edison" plan of controling recordings from inception, mastering, distrabution, even archiving seems to be breaking down. But I still beleive in supporting our Adult industry. I hope we can figure out a way to keep it going. [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Jul 23 2011 : 6:42PM As I said this thing has already been tryed in Europe it went well for a while but you know any blackmail goes well at first. But when you go on the false assumption that anyone who use a file sharing site is a pirate but it is not then you may crash onto legal troubles. This happened to ME personally I had to receive a file from a client which was of about 24 MB , I cannot receive that through email , because it was too big and I had a limit of 5 MB so I suggested to upload it in a file sharing site and to send me the link , he did so and I eventually download my file. a month later I received or better my office receive a letter from a lawyer stating that an IP in a day and at that hour downloaded a song of his client and thus we had to pay € 428 for the song or we will be sued and have to face way more money or even imprisonment. You can imagine the reaction of my chief sine the computer related was mine and I was the one who downloaded that song. My job was at risk I had my emails and showed to my chief that indeed I DL from that site a file but it was for duty and it absolutely wasn't a song , plus he knows my musical tastes and I put his attention on the fact that I could have never downloaded anything of that author not even for life , he believed me than I had to sue that attorney to save my job, My lawyer explained that fact and said that I indeed DL a file but I had proof that it was not what he claimed to be and that he on my behalf was going to file a criminal claim for a blackmail attempt and a possible violation of privacy collecting randomly some IP from the file sharing site and then trying to get money from them. We didn't arrived to a court hall because their lawyer apologized with excuses and a free CD of his client which I promptly trashed. Now in my case was a little thing but those guys surely bothered so many people that this way to act got the attention of some news and thus judges an parliaments and that procedure has been ruled out as illegal: a private citizen cannot get such informations he can indeed ask for them, but then had to file a clime and have the police to collect evidences to hit the culprit. I don't know your laws so well to exprees anything but to me this appears a dangerous way to proceed. Edited by - Laurie Cameron Fan on 7/23/2011 6:44:43 PM [Link]
sodomyonsunday Member I am Andy Levy's Tyler Durden 115 Posts 7/10	Posted - Jul 23 2011 : 11:44PM isn't it ironic that the free speech coalition is sponsoring this PSA and yet that is precisely what they are adamantly opposed to with the advent of tube sites. Filesharing should fall within the confines of the First Amendment and should not be subjected to litigation… I am against filesharing in principle, but to make it illegal would be a violation of the Constitution. [Link]
Digmen1 Member 629 Posts 7/07	Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 1:03AM I read the article. I liked the sentence where the lawyer said "The Industry is on its knees! (that kind of ironic !) We all know that piracy is bad and wrong. But I dislike it when they say I can lend a DVD that I have bought to someone else for a few days. But If my friend copies the DVD, then that is wrong as there are now 2 copies out there! Just as bad is computer software - you are only licensed to use it. You do not own it. If you sell the PC you are not allowed to leave the software on it! That to me is just plain wrong. Edited by - Digmen1 on 7/24/2011 1:09:29 AM Edited by - Digmen1 on 7/25/2011 1:11:52 AM [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 4:13AM sodomyonsunday wrote: isn't it ironic that the free speech coalition is sponsoring this PSA and yet that is precisely what they are adamantly opposed to with the advent of tube sites. Filesharing should fall within the confines of the First Amendment and should not be subjected to litigation… I am against filesharing in principle, but to make it illegal would be a violation of the Constitution. Click to expand How can you make illegal the sharing of personal files? that's precisely why it is so difficult to prosecute those pirating videos you can't forbid the filesharing for itself (I.e. a photo of you on facebook or any other social network) Also remember that many of those sites weren't born for piracy but to a real need of big room to store files in times when an HDD was at best 20 GB and when the most part of the internauts had a slow sometime expensive dial up connection so to have a server always available online with an entire archive was their only choice. Believe it or not but there still are many using some of these sites for legitimate purposes as it was in my case a couple years ago. If you have to send a big file a design of an apartment for example or a blueprint of something it may prove to extend the limit of your email so you have no choice but to use one of these servers. I'm adamant on this because I happened to fall victim of the assumption that anybody using these services is a pirate which is not However I admit that in these days piracy is the main use of these sites [Link]
johnshaft820 Member 271 Posts 1/05	Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 10:33AM So these lawyers are extracting $2900 from downloaders who could have purchased the same product legally for like $15? This indicates one of two things: 1) The porn studios' business model is fucked and their only profitable activity is intimidating downloaders into paying hundreds or thousands of dollars for something that normally sells for $10-$20. In this case, they're acting in bad faith as they really need the downloaders to keep downloading so they can keep threatening litigation and book the profits. Obviously it's more lucrative for a studio to extract $2900 from someone (even after the lawyers take their cut) than it is to sell that person a DVD. 2) This is being driven by the attorneys, who are surely keeping a good cut of that $2900 in legal fees. [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 10:52AM ^ The second case does not exclude the first , actually it could be the same the only change is the perpetrator , a Porn Studio or its lawyer. Also you can even get more if you threat gay people which even being innocent might pay to avoid exposition , there many places in the world , even in (decadent ?) Europe in which a gay might have hard times if exposed I personally know a gay , we all know he is gay but his father is a strict bigot and is more than hostile with gays he threatened more than once his son he would kill him if he discovers he is gay. What would he do if a Letter accusing him for having downloaded some "Come here and break my ass big boy" gay movie. I tell you he'll pay in terror even if he has never seen an adult movie in his life. What would happen if this become public in a court hall? He cannot even defend himself without exposing he's gay to his father. [Link]
johnshaft820 Member 271 Posts 1/05	Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 11:50AM What's pathetic in that MSNBC article is the gay performer who says that porn studios are more justified than Hollywood in pursuing copyright violators because porn is viewed as "morally questionable" and possibly not deserving of legal protection. Yet they're using precisely that "morally questionable" reputation to threaten downloaders with public humiliation. So, if they're going to leverage porn's sleaziness against donwloaders, they should expect that same sleaziness to make it hard for them to be seen as victims. [Link]

LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 12:20PM ^ I'm not American so my question could sound ridiculous but wasn't Homosexuality itself who was considered "Morally Questionable" not long ago? and that for many groups it still is morally wrong? I mean can't that man see that if he for first states that what is morally questionable should not be granted legal protection he himself will be the next target? There's a story Hey joe the police is pursuing Brenda because she's lesbian she's asking for help J: good I hate lesbians , it is wrong but I'm not lesbian so be it. Hey Joe the Police is pursuing John because he's gay he asks for help J.I hate them too , it's wrong but I'm not gay so be it Hey Joe the cops are pursuing Annie because she's fat she's asking for help J I cant stand those fat they should eat less, besides I'm not fat so be it. Some policemen are running toward Joe Hey joe we're here for you because you're ugly J. but it's wrong , help me people, help me, he shouted , he watched around but nobody was there not Brenda , nor John , nor Annie Joe was alone. The lesson of this is obvious everytime you allow the authority to shrink the field of your freedom be aware that'll be a first step. When you give up a piece of your freedom because you don't use it be aware that sooner or later that shrinking of your freedom will reach a point you care and at that point there'll be nothing you could do. Freedom in history has never been cheap , has always been paid in blood , and it's worth it be aware the cost you will have to pay to regain what you are giving up now. And remember that porn itself is morally questionable so according tho that man should not be granted legal protection nor Free Speech rights Edited by - Laurie Cameron Fan on 7/24/2011 12:44:06 PM [Link]
Peoples Temple Member People tell lies my friend. Some people like publicity. I don't like publicity. 674 Posts 5/11	Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 1:07PM Digmen1 wrote: Just as bad is computer software - you are only licensed to use it. You do not own it. If you sell the PC you are not allowed to leave the software on it! That to me is just plain wrong. Click to expand It is a constant Cat and Mouse game going on. I installed Windows XP on my computer and like you said it is only licensed on my computer. It will not work on another computer, even in my same household unless I purchase another license. The installation code on my software CD did not even work. I had to phone Microsoft and they provided me with literally over 100 digits to repeatedly input before it became operational. Also, to purchase another license is comparable to having to purchase a new software disc. I welcome the file sharing, the companies are trying to screw us and box us in, so screw them!!! [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 1:29PM ^You sure? I have two licenses for Win XP professional with original CDs both OEM I bought them with my computers but I've been told that each license could be used on three computers though Win Vista and Win 7 can only get a recover CD for 1 PC only. Anyway I decided to migrate to Linux which I was used to long ago (Mandrake 7 and a Red Hat) now I'm on Ubuntu Linux but most likely will pass to Linux Mint 10 soon both debian based EDIT I remember a friend of mine got a PC with XP the same way as yours pre-installed and with a recovery disc that can be used only on his PC , I did differently I bought Win XP separately and have him installed an thus get the OEM drop of price but with all the advantages of a regular license bought on its own Edited by - Laurie Cameron Fan on 7/24/2011 1:36:17 PM [Link]
Peoples Temple Member People tell lies my friend. Some people like publicity. I don't like publicity. 674 Posts 5/11	Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 1:40PM Laurie Cameron Fan wrote: ^You sure? I have two licenses for Win XP professional with original CDs both OEM I bought them with my computers preinstalled but I've been told that each license could be used on three computers though Win Vista and Win 7 can only get a recover CD for 1 PC only. Click to expand Yes, this is what I was told by Microsoft, my software is only usable on one computer. I only spent about $75 for the XP operating system, not professional edition, so likely that is why they only permitted me one license. I now only purchase software that will work even when my subscription expires. You have to choose carefully, some software is disabled after the expiration date while others work fine, only prevent you from downloading updates. My CD is called a Reinstallation CD, it is a fresh copy. I wiped off windows 98 and put a clean copy of XP. My computer never had XP on it before, that's why the product key did not work and I had to deal with Microsoft on the phone. Edited by - peoples temple on 7/24/2011 1:46:11 PM [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 1:50PM Linux is open source ,thus completely free and so is ANY program working on it , it can even work without installing it just from a CD or even from a Flash-drive , there are some anti-virus (of no use on linux) tou can use to examine a windows based computer from outside so that even beagle cannot touch it. Linux is also virus free only rootkits taken through windows in a shared computer might affect it [Link]
Hardware All-Star Member Your other left 14595 Posts 3/02	Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 1:56PM ^ But Linux requires one to actually exercise one's brain. Stealing other people's work is so much easier. [/sarcasm] [Link]
Peoples Temple Member People tell lies my friend. Some people like publicity. I don't like publicity. 674 Posts 5/11	Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 2:11PM Hardware wrote: ^ But Linux requires one to actually exercise one's brain. Stealing other people's work is so much easier. [/sarcasm] Click to expand I have no experience with Linux. I manage to figure out any computer problem with Microsoft. I've wiped clean my HDD a couple times and put it back fine. Nothing is known to be a bigger headache than Microsoft so don't know about exercising one's brain more with Linux. [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 2:14PM ^ This could be true , Linux has a logic after all [Link]
twistedvincent Deactivated User Juelz....Fucking Juelz 3960 Posts 5/09	Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 3:19PM Excellent article.....since being a part of this forum and interacting with some of the stars (here, freeones, and on twitter) I can't bring myself to download much if anything. I used to think twitter was retarded and useless, but it's helped alleviate the temptation for me to download because after getting tweets about their day to day activities, I feel like I'm personally stealing from my favorite starlets. However, I disagree with pink visuals in the respect that if I could only stream content from a site and NOT download, there's no way I'd buy a membership. [Link]
Harri Patel Senior Member #SDNY he's all yours. -- Michael Steele 5110 Posts 3/03	Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 6:58PM Laurie Cameron Fan wrote: Linux is open source ,thus completely free and so is ANY program working on it , Click to expand While that may be true for the core Linux distributions and some of the applications, to get a Linux machine to really function as a Windows or Mac replacement, particularly in the multimedia realm, you have to install a fair amount of stuff that is not open source -- either copyrighted stuff that the rights-holder allows to be distributed free for Linux users, or stuff that is basically just ripped off and distributed over back channels. [Link]

just_me Member 133 Posts 4/09	Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 11:27PM Peoples Temple wrote: I welcome the file sharing, the companies are trying to screw us and box us in, so screw them!!! Click to expand Grow up. [Link]
just_me Member 133 Posts 4/09	Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 11:29PM We live in a capitalistic society where one person provides goods or services in exchange for payment. This is how our world works. Just because one person is willing to spend his time and resources to give you something for free, DOES NOT ENTITLE YOU TO FREELY OBTAIN THE GOODS AND SERVICES OF OTHER PEOPLE. Edited by - just_me on 7/24/2011 11:30:29 PM [Link]
just_me Member 133 Posts 4/09	Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 11:35PM Laurie Cameron Fan wrote: Linux is open source ,thus completely free and so is ANY program working on it , it can even work without installing it just from a CD or even from a Flash-drive , there are some anti-virus (of no use on linux) tou can use to examine a windows based computer from outside so that even beagle cannot touch it. Linux is also virus free only rootkits taken through windows in a shared computer might affect it Click to expand You are showing a clear lack of knowledge of software licensing. You are confusing open source with GPL. And you are confusing the way these agreements are applied to developed software. If a software is bound by a GPL license, then you are free to use the source code of the software to create anything new, but whatever you create is also bound by the same GPL license. If an open source software is not bound by a GPL license, then you are free to create your own commercial product from the source code. If you are developing software to run on an open-source, GPL'd operating system, but do not use their source code to create your own software, then you are free to create a commercial product. and http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=linux+virus Edited by - just_me on 7/24/2011 11:52:54 PM [Link]
just_me Member 133 Posts 4/09	Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 11:41PM Laurie Cameron Fan wrote: ^You sure? I have two licenses for Win XP professional with original CDs both OEM I bought them with my computers but I've been told that each license could be used on three computers though Win Vista and Win 7 can only get a recover CD for 1 PC only. Click to expand Nope. Windows XP Professional licenses, both OEM, retail, and upgrade versions, are only licensed for one computer. Microsoft did offer a 3-pack for triple the price but the package included three cds, three manuals, and three COAs. Microsoft Office 2007 and 2010 Home & Student versions were sold for use on three computers with only one product key. [Link]
Digmen1 Member 629 Posts 7/07	Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 1:16AM just_me wrote: Laurie Cameron Fan wrote: ^You sure? I have two licenses for Win XP professional with original CDs both OEM I bought them with my computers but I've been told that each license could be used on three computers though Win Vista and Win 7 can only get a recover CD for 1 PC only. Click to expand Nope. Windows XP Professional licenses, both OEM, retail, and upgrade versions, are only licensed for one computer. Microsoft did offer a 3-pack for triple the price but the package included three cds, three manuals, and three COAs. Microsoft Office 2007 and 2010 Home & Student versions were sold for use on three computers with only one product key. Click to expand But the point is if he sells that first computer can he install his XP on a new computer ? probably not. And he is not allowed to give the XP away on the first computer ! [Link]
Harri Patel Senior Member #SDNY he's all yours. -- Michael Steele 5110 Posts 3/03	Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 3:29AM If you buy a "retail" copy of Windows, you can transfer it from one machine to another; you just can't have on more than one machine at a time. An OEM aka "system builder" copy is only good for the machine that it's initially installed on. [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 10:07AM Harri Patel wrote: Laurie Cameron Fan wrote: Linux is open source ,thus completely free and so is ANY program working on it , Click to expand While that may be true for the core Linux distributions and some of the applications, to get a Linux machine to really function as a Windows or Mac replacement, particularly in the multimedia realm, you have to install a fair amount of stuff that is not open source -- either copyrighted stuff that the rights-holder allows to be distributed free for Linux users, or stuff that is basically just ripped off and distributed over back channels. Click to expand True but this can't be avoided if lots of movies are in flash or Windows media or Real Media as for ripped off material, I don't know I only use what is in regular repositories [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 10:19AM Digmen1 wrote: just_me wrote: Laurie Cameron Fan wrote: ^You sure? I have two licenses for Win XP professional with original CDs both OEM I bought them with my computers but I've been told that each license could be used on three computers though Win Vista and Win 7 can only get a recover CD for 1 PC only. Click to expand Nope. Windows XP Professional licenses, both OEM, retail, and upgrade versions, are only licensed for one computer. Microsoft did offer a 3-pack for triple the price but the package included three cds, three manuals, and three COAs. Microsoft Office 2007 and 2010 Home & Student versions were sold for use on three computers with only one product key. Click to expand But the point is if he sells that first computer can he install his XP on a new computer ? probably not. And he is not allowed to give the XP away on the first computer ! Click to expand I don't know what you are talking about as said I have two licenses because I thought it worked the way you say but it's not one of the disks had been broken so I called MS assistance for a replacement and THEY told me that it was unnecessary as I can use my Product KEY on THREE machines and that if I Install an OS using an original disc and a valid product key I should have no problems, and so I did. I don't have a recovery disc I have a complete OS disc and both my machines have been activated online even though one of them have been partitioned and I useit with Linux as for the lack of knowledge I didn't want to lecture anyone it was a simple undetailed statement As for the virus I knew dozen of linux users none of them has ever had a virus nor have I in over 10 years os usage Harri Patel wrote: If you buy a "retail" copy of Windows, you can transfer it from one machine to another; you just can't have on more than one machine at a time. An OEM aka "system builder" copy is only good for the machine that it's initially installed on. Click to expand maybe we have different laws on consumer's rights but I assure you I can install an XP professional on ANY machine I want with a proper Product Key I bought it as an OEM but separately from my PC and had it installed at a lower price (€ 127 instead of 340) This can't be possible anymore with Vista or Win 7 Edited by - Laurie Cameron Fan on 7/25/2011 10:25:44 AM Edited by - Laurie Cameron Fan on 7/25/2011 10:28:03 AM [Link]
Michaelxavier Member Women, wine and song...there is nothing better. 152 Posts 7/11	Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 10:30AM Music, movie and porn industry have a common situation they need to rectify. Interestingly enough, the music industry is rebounding a bit and iTunes and other services like Napster are making it easier for people to pay for music. Porn industry needs to the do the same thing. GGG Models and Pornstar Archive [Link]
johnshaft820 Member 271 Posts 1/05	Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 10:41AM Could the discussion of WIndows XP licenses or whatever be continued in the Tech Talk forum? This seems very far off topic. [Link]

ninja1 Senior Member 2939 Posts 1/08	Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 12:30PM Laurie Cameron Fan wrote: maybe we have different laws on consumer's rights but I assure you I can install an XP professional on ANY machine I want with a proper Product Key I bought it as an OEM but separately from my PC and had it installed at a lower price (€ 127 instead of 340) Click to expand Based on your description, there is no reason for the € 340 product to exist. In the USA, The advantage of the full/retail version over the OEM version is the freedom to legally re-install it on subsequent computers (one at a time). But you have to pay a much higher price (double price or more) to buy that freedom. [Link]
ninja1 Senior Member 2939 Posts 1/08	Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 2:06PM johnshaft820 wrote: This is being driven by the attorneys, who are surely keeping a good cut of that $2900 in legal fees. Click to expand Correct. It is so easy to find illegal download porn links, by simply using Google. Most of the filesharing filehosts have a standing policy saying (essentially) "we will remove any copyright-violating links on request". I have been on filesharing boards where someone posted a link to an illegal download, and within 2-3 hours they post again to complain about "snitches" who reported their link and had it removed. It would be simple for the major studios to hire a person or team to troll the internet to find violating links and notify the filehost to get the links removed. But that does not generate real money in the way that the lawsuit threats/shakedowns do. [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 2:57PM Also there's people getting money each time one of their files has been downloaded and these usually keep claiming to get competitors deleted so that only their file could be downloaded , which is good as a general effect but leads to the deletion of file by request of someone who has nothing to do with them. I know of a site of a guy which charges a little amount to get the drawn he does on request he has not a big server so i put them on a filesharing service as a premium that way was cheaper than running a website on a server , someone put a claim of violation of copyright and he got all of his files deleted although he was the author and the owner [Link]
ninja1 Senior Member 2939 Posts 1/08	Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 3:59PM Laurie Cameron Fan wrote: which is good as a general effect but leads to the deletion of file by request of someone who has nothing to do with them. Click to expand This is the way the filehosts have to operate in order to help their reputation. The filehosts already have "bad guy" reputation. So they are quick to delete files by request without a lot of hassle. I believe any random person could probably get any file deleted by just requesting it. I mean, how does anyone prove they are the official copyright owner? And how would anyone verify it? Edited by - ninja1 on 7/26/2011 8:23:51 PM [Link]
Solar4 Deactivated User 183 Posts 10/10	Posted - Jul 26 2011 : 8:15AM johnshaft820 wrote: So these lawyers are extracting $2900 from downloaders who could have purchased the same product legally for like $15? This indicates one of two things: 1) The porn studios' business model is fucked and their only profitable activity is intimidating downloaders into paying hundreds or thousands of dollars for something that normally sells for $10-$20. In this case, they're acting in bad faith as they really need the downloaders to keep downloading so they can keep threatening litigation and book the profits. Obviously it's more lucrative for a studio to extract $2900 from someone (even after the lawyers take their cut) than it is to sell that person a DVD. 2) This is being driven by the attorneys, who are surely keeping a good cut of that $2900 in legal fees. Click to expand Yeah it's basically a shakedown and extortion by the adult industry. And there may be others, but I know of only one other entity that so brazenly engages in shakedowns: organized crime. And based on history such behavior is rarely tolerated for long. [Link]
BlackSix All-Star Member pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07	Posted - Jul 26 2011 : 5:05PM Solar4 wrote: And there may be others, but I know of only one other entity that so brazenly engages in shakedowns: organized crime. And based on history such behavior is rarely tolerated for long. Click to expand What history are you talking about? Organized crime prospered in the US throughout its entire history, it's only since the late 70s that organized crime was actively pursued and prosecuted by the US government. [Link]
RandomPrecision Senior Member Enjoy! 8175 Posts 3/06	Posted - Jul 26 2011 : 6:15PM BlackSix wrote: it's only since the late 70s that organized crime was actively pursued and prosecuted by the US government. Click to expand Well, you know how it goes. The more powerful organization usually does get rid of it's weaker competition. [Link]
Digmen1 Member 629 Posts 7/07	Posted - Jul 26 2011 : 10:11PM Hey Random Precision Have you balanced your budget yet ? (he he) [Link]
Gentleman Jon All-Star Member 1881 Posts 6/05	Posted - Jul 26 2011 : 11:44PM If you shoplift from a brick and mortar store and get caught, it's not like they're going to let you off just by paying the retail price like you should have in the first place. No, there will be a punitive fine involved. Otherwise, what's the disincentive to shoplifting, if it's free when you succeed, and even if you get caught, you'd only pay retail? [Link]
Solar4 Deactivated User 183 Posts 10/10	Posted - Jul 28 2011 : 3:10AM BlackSix wrote: Solar4 wrote: And there may be others, but I know of only one other entity that so brazenly engages in shakedowns: organized crime. And based on history such behavior is rarely tolerated for long. Click to expand What history are you talking about? Organized crime prospered in the US throughout its entire history, it's only since the late 70s that organized crime was actively pursued and prosecuted by the US government. Click to expand Organized crime was always actively prosecuted in the USA. And if you're talking about the Italian Mob in the 70's it was only its weakness around that time that allowed it be largely eradicated from the major US cities. The Govt has had no such luck with the triads, ms-13, russian mob, etc.. because they're stronger than the Italians are. As for shakedowns though, if people have a choice they won't pay, and so it will be with this failed attempt by the adult industry to support itself with extortion. Edited by - Solar4 on 7/28/2011 3:26:16 AM [Link]
BlackSix All-Star Member pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07	Posted - Jul 30 2011 : 4:41PM Solar4 wrote: Organized crime was always actively prosecuted in the USA. Click to expand No sorry, that is not true. I'd suggest reading TJ English's history of the Irish Mob in the states to get an idea of just how far back the tolerance of organized crime goes back in American history. [Link]
LubeNLuv Senior Member 1854 Posts 3/06	Posted - Jul 31 2011 : 12:10PM Can call this whatever they want. I'm a big critic of piracy and have been ridiculed on here many times for speaking out against anyone who glorifies the act. But at the end of the day, an industry that actively sponsors a shakedown by effectively threatening to "out" porn watchers to the public as some kind of deviant criminals will find this backfiring horribly on their already-faltering revenue streams. This is a last-ditch effort to make a quick buck, which is the hallmark of porn purveyors for the most part. When you work THIS hard to push the image that anyone watching STOLEN porn is a closet pervert, you are basically saying the same thing about your PAYING customers as well. But then again, nobody ever accused porn producers of having a long-term vision or sustainable business model. They just aren't that smart. Gentleman Jon wrote: If you shoplift from a brick and mortar store and get caught, it's not like they're going to let you off just by paying the retail price like you should have in the first place. No, there will be a punitive fine involved. Otherwise, what's the disincentive to shoplifting, if it's free when you succeed, and even if you get caught, you'd only pay retail? Click to expand For shoplifting, many retailers follow up the criminal conviction with civil restitution. This is often the approach taken for juveniles caught shoplifting, since the retailer recognizes that the kid won't get more than a slap on the wrist and some community service. But with civil restitution, they use small claims courts to demand anywhere from triple to up to 1 hex face value of the product (plus legal fees) as 'damages.' These civil cases are often levied at the parents of the minor. This has been going on for decades now, pioneered by Wal Mart and now the SOP for Loss Prevention departments of all major retail chains in the USA. Of course, the big difference here is that civil restitution ONLY applies if there is a successful CRIMINAL prosecution against the perpetrator first. In other words, the guilty has already been found guilty before the civil proceedings commence. Unlike the porn model which is a complete intimidation and finger pointing racket. They can't even prove guilt in most situations...that much has already been proven via other piracy cases. They just want you to pay up or risk being 'outed' as a porn watcher. Notice that filing a claim and revealing your name to the public doesn't prove your guilt in the matter....it only proves that your name is associated with an IP address that was used to view pornographic materials. Like I said....they are really just broadcasting that watching porn = bad, so this will come back to bite them in the ass. Edited by - lubenluv on 7/31/2011 12:19:06 PM [Link]
Solar4 Deactivated User 183 Posts 10/10	Posted - Aug 1 2011 : 12:07AM BlackSix wrote: Solar4 wrote: Organized crime was always actively prosecuted in the USA. Click to expand No sorry, that is not true. I'd suggest reading TJ English's history of the Irish Mob in the states to get an idea of just how far back the tolerance of organized crime goes back in American history. Click to expand What do you seek to prove? That in some cases, in the USA, the cops can be just as criminally inclined as the crooks they're allegedly supposed to pursue? I don't think you'll find much disagreement on that point. It's a known problem in a number of American cities. But if you're trying to prove that the federal government collectively has ceded control to multiple mob organizations in a live and let live policy as if it were the Russian government, then I think you'll find that to be false. LubeNLuv wrote: Can call this whatever they want. I'm a big critic of piracy and have been ridiculed on here many times for speaking out against anyone who glorifies the act. But at the end of the day, an industry that actively sponsors a shakedown by effectively threatening to "out" porn watchers to the public as some kind of deviant criminals will find this backfiring horribly on their already-faltering revenue streams. This is a last-ditch effort to make a quick buck, which is the hallmark of porn purveyors for the most part. When you work THIS hard to push the image that anyone watching STOLEN porn is a closet pervert, you are basically saying the same thing about your PAYING customers as well. But then again, nobody ever accused porn producers of having a long-term vision or sustainable business model. They just aren't that smart. For shoplifting, many retailers follow up the criminal conviction with civil restitution. This is often the approach taken for juveniles caught shoplifting, since the retailer recognizes that the kid won't get more than a slap on the wrist and some community service. But with civil restitution, they use small claims courts to demand anywhere from triple to up to 1 hex face value of the product (plus legal fees) as 'damages.' These civil cases are often levied at the parents of the minor. This has been going on for decades now, pioneered by Wal Mart and now the SOP for Loss Prevention departments of all major retail chains in the USA. Unlike the porn model which is a complete intimidation and finger pointing racket. They can't even prove guilt in most situations...that much has already been proven via other piracy cases. They just want you to pay up or risk being 'outed' as a porn watcher. Notice that filing a claim and revealing your name to the public doesn't prove your guilt in the matter....it only proves that your name is associated with an IP address that was used to view pornographic materials. Like I said....they are really just broadcasting that watching porn = bad, so this will come back to bite them in the ass. Click to expand Well here we're not even talking about shoplifting, which is actual theft, we're talking about people sharing already purchased content with each other. Which is merely filesharing. The definition has been so warped though that it is now defined as theft by those who seek to profit from every single use of their content, no matter how limited. And when they're not allowed to do so it becomes wrong in their minds. And it is quite ironic that those in the adult industry are trying to shame others for using their product. Are they then conceding that their product is morally objectionable? Because I'm sure that some in religious community would be quite surprised to find themselves on the same side as those they oppose in the adult industry. Edited by - Solar4 on 8/1/2011 12:14:23 AM [Link]
BlackSix All-Star Member pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07	Posted - Aug 1 2011 : 4:43AM Solar4 wrote: But if you're trying to prove that the federal government collectively has ceded control to multiple mob organizations in a live and let live policy as if it were the Russian government, then I think you'll find that to be false. Click to expand We're way off topic but if you're actually interested in knowing about the long term collusion between all levels of the government and organized crime throughout American history read English's book or something by Thomas Reppetto. This is all well-documented history, not conspiracy theory. [Link]
Drebin Member 686 Posts 3/09	Posted - Aug 3 2011 : 2:59PM LubeNLuv wrote: This is a last-ditch effort to make a quick buck, which is the hallmark of porn purveyors for the most part. When you work THIS hard to push the image that anyone watching STOLEN porn is a closet pervert, you are basically saying the same thing about your PAYING customers as well. Edited by - lubenluv on 7/31/2011 12:19:06 PM Click to expand i read about this on some other sites, 99% of the john does they trying to get money from have been closet fags downloading gay porn- apart from 1 case of someone downloading a FTVgirl video off piratebay, nothing mainstream str8 that is discussed in these forum or we would know anything about. its funny because the discovery methods investigators/lawyers would have to go through in order to serve them with papers would definately be exposing themselves to explicit gay images. its gays chasing down there own kind in closet gays for money lol [Link]
BlackSix All-Star Member pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07	Posted - Aug 4 2011 : 3:10AM ^ I doubt pretty much everything you've said here. Also, your assumption that the lawyers would have to be gay is bizarre. [Link]

Author

Post

warrenwest67
Member

Thanks for the mammaries.
966 Posts
1/07

Posted - Jul 20 2011 : 10:13AM

I know there are lots of threads on this issue but this article looks unique.
click here for the MSNBC article

[Link]

Goldstein

All-Star Member

"You have sacrificed nothing and no one."
3689 Posts
8/10

Posted - Jul 20 2011 : 10:31AM

Excellent article.

[Link]

shark1
Senior Member

1219 Posts
5/04

Posted - Jul 20 2011 : 3:23PM

Very interesting article!

[Link]

Peoples Temple
Member

People tell lies my friend. Some people like publicity. I don't like publicity.
674 Posts
5/11

Posted - Jul 20 2011 : 4:13PM

This is a situation where technology has grown so fast that content is extremely hard to protect. File sharing sites enable people to take content on their home computer and exchange it with anyone, computer to computer. I understand why adult industry people are angry when the public can view their content and not pay for it as in the past, but what they are really griping about is the modern day technology has made the content easily viewable. I embrace the free exchange of content. What would you prefer, shutting down the Internet?
Take for instance, if I purchase a product and choose to share it with others, that is my choice to do so. I used to share my VHS adult movie collection with friends and after they viewed it they would return it to me. Is that a crime? If I purchase a CD, put the music on my computer and then choose to share the file with others, who is anyone to tell me I can't do it? Same thing goes with videos. If people do not like the free exchange of content your real problem is with technology. How nice it is not to have to go into a video store to get adult content as we used to have to do for years.

[Link]

LCF

All-Star Member

Non Prevalebunt!
10364 Posts
1/05

Posted - Jul 20 2011 : 4:36PM

It has already been used in Europe for mp3 music sharing but it has been ruled out as being a mere blackmail and violation of privacy and outlawed. A lawyer can track down a song but only if a judge allows it because there's a prosecution running.
nobody exept the Authority can track personal data or put a tracker into a computer without permission of the owner
they charged for example € 430 as a price for an mp3 song adding attorney's payment one of them even arrived to me but I would not for sure download a song like the one they accused me, not even for life
Most people though knows that if the police put under exam a PC will surely find something illegal considering that even a youtube flash clip could be labeled as such for example if you have filmed your nephew first birthday and there was Alicia Keys in uour background , you might find that you need her permission to put a song in a movie even when private.
So everybody paid to avoid any risk and thats why the judge did not allowed such way to prosecute the downloaders , if you find them or suspect one them call the internet police have a proceeding opened and le them to prosecute.
You will ask your payment in a court hall
they ceased

[Link]

Black Market Danny
Member

BlackMarketxxx.com
92 Posts
5/11

Posted - Jul 20 2011 : 5:02PM

interesting article indeed
www.BlackMarketxxx.com

[Link]

crazy8ight
Member

You Gotta Go There To Come Back
114 Posts
7/11

Posted - Jul 20 2011 : 11:54PM

i agree with you Peoples Temple. The industry made this bed, and they too have to lie in it. i read somewhere that the boom of the internet actually came to life because of porn. they were the industry leaders, they pushed for the technology. Sadly.. a one or two or a few people payed to watch or stream content or record it.. and they shared it to the masses like movies and music.

[Link]

warrenwest67
Member

Thanks for the mammaries.
966 Posts
1/07

Posted - Jul 22 2011 : 9:27AM

Well the biggest news to me in this story is the effort to track down the biggest downloaders. If there is money to be made in busting pirates you know there will people all over it.
I know what piracy did to the music industry and though Napster was forced to change, the buisness never really recovered. Gone are the days of big investment into artists and long term commitments to growth. Just mabey the hunt for the quick buck + return and thats it.
The "Edison" plan of controling recordings from inception, mastering, distrabution, even archiving seems to be breaking down.
But I still beleive in supporting our Adult industry. I hope we can figure out a way to keep it going.

[Link]

LCF

All-Star Member

Non Prevalebunt!
10364 Posts
1/05

Posted - Jul 23 2011 : 6:42PM

As I said this thing has already been tryed in Europe it went well for a while but you know any blackmail goes well at first.
But when you go on the false assumption that anyone who use a file sharing site is a pirate but it is not then you may crash onto legal troubles.
This happened to ME personally I had to receive a file from a client which was of about 24 MB , I cannot receive that through email , because it was too big and I had a limit of 5 MB so I suggested to upload it in a file sharing site and to send me the link , he did so and I eventually download my file.
a month later I received or better my office receive a letter from a lawyer stating that an IP in a day and at that hour downloaded a song of his client and thus we had to pay € 428 for the song or we will be sued and have to face way more money or even imprisonment.
You can imagine the reaction of my chief sine the computer related was mine and I was the one who downloaded that song.
My job was at risk I had my emails and showed to my chief that indeed I DL from that site a file but it was for duty and it absolutely wasn't a song , plus he knows my musical tastes and I put his attention on the fact that I could have never downloaded anything of that author not even for life , he believed me than I had to sue that attorney to save my job, My lawyer explained that fact and said that I indeed DL a file but I had proof that it was not what he claimed to be and that he on my behalf was going to file a criminal claim for a blackmail attempt and a possible violation of privacy collecting randomly some IP from the file sharing site and then trying to get money from them.
We didn't arrived to a court hall because their lawyer apologized with excuses and a free CD of his client which I promptly trashed.
Now in my case was a little thing but those guys surely bothered so many people that this way to act got the attention of some news and thus judges an parliaments and that procedure has been ruled out as illegal: a private citizen cannot get such informations he can indeed ask for them, but then had to file a clime and have the police to collect evidences to hit the culprit.
I don't know your laws so well to exprees anything but to me this appears a dangerous way to proceed.
Edited by - Laurie Cameron Fan on 7/23/2011 6:44:43 PM

[Link]

sodomyonsunday
Member

I am Andy Levy's Tyler Durden
115 Posts
7/10

Posted - Jul 23 2011 : 11:44PM

isn't it ironic that the free speech coalition is sponsoring this PSA and yet that is precisely what they are adamantly opposed to with the advent of tube sites. Filesharing should fall within the confines of the First Amendment and should not be subjected to litigation… I am against filesharing in principle, but to make it illegal would be a violation of the Constitution.

[Link]

Digmen1
Member

629 Posts
7/07

Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 1:03AM

I read the article.
I liked the sentence where the lawyer said "The Industry is on its knees! (that kind of ironic !)
We all know that piracy is bad and wrong.
But I dislike it when they say I can lend a DVD that I have bought to someone else for a few days.
But If my friend copies the DVD, then that is wrong as there are now 2 copies out there!
Just as bad is computer software - you are only licensed to use it. You do not own it.
If you sell the PC you are not allowed to leave the software on it!
That to me is just plain wrong.

Edited by - Digmen1 on 7/24/2011 1:09:29 AM
Edited by - Digmen1 on 7/25/2011 1:11:52 AM

[Link]

LCF

All-Star Member

Non Prevalebunt!
10364 Posts
1/05

Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 4:13AM

How can you make illegal the sharing of personal files?
that's precisely why it is so difficult to prosecute those pirating videos you can't forbid the filesharing for itself (I.e. a photo of you on facebook or any other social network)
Also remember that many of those sites weren't born for piracy but to a real need of big room to store files in times when an HDD was at best 20 GB and when the most part of the internauts had a slow sometime expensive dial up connection so to have a server always available online with an entire archive was their only choice.
Believe it or not but there still are many using some of these sites for legitimate purposes as it was in my case a couple years ago.
If you have to send a big file a design of an apartment for example or a blueprint of something it may prove to extend the limit of your email so you have no choice but to use one of these servers.
I'm adamant on this because I happened to fall victim of the assumption that anybody using these services is a pirate which is not
However I admit that in these days piracy is the main use of these sites

[Link]

johnshaft820
Member

271 Posts
1/05

Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 10:33AM

So these lawyers are extracting $2900 from downloaders who could have purchased the same product legally for like $15? This indicates one of two things:
1) The porn studios' business model is fucked and their only profitable activity is intimidating downloaders into paying hundreds or thousands of dollars for something that normally sells for $10-$20. In this case, they're acting in bad faith as they really need the downloaders to keep downloading so they can keep threatening litigation and book the profits. Obviously it's more lucrative for a studio to extract $2900 from someone (even after the lawyers take their cut) than it is to sell that person a DVD.
2) This is being driven by the attorneys, who are surely keeping a good cut of that $2900 in legal fees.

[Link]

LCF

All-Star Member

Non Prevalebunt!
10364 Posts
1/05

Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 10:52AM

^
The second case does not exclude the first , actually it could be the same the only change is the perpetrator , a Porn Studio or its lawyer.
Also you can even get more if you threat gay people which even being innocent might pay to avoid exposition , there many places in the world , even in (decadent ?) Europe in which a gay might have hard times if exposed I personally know a gay , we all know he is gay but his father is a strict bigot and is more than hostile with gays he threatened more than once his son he would kill him if he discovers he is gay.
What would he do if a Letter accusing him for having downloaded some "Come here and break my ass big boy" gay movie.
I tell you he'll pay in terror even if he has never seen an adult movie in his life.
What would happen if this become public in a court hall?
He cannot even defend himself without exposing he's gay to his father.

[Link]

johnshaft820
Member

271 Posts
1/05

Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 11:50AM

What's pathetic in that MSNBC article is the gay performer who says that porn studios are more justified than Hollywood in pursuing copyright violators because porn is viewed as "morally questionable" and possibly not deserving of legal protection. Yet they're using precisely that "morally questionable" reputation to threaten downloaders with public humiliation. So, if they're going to leverage porn's sleaziness against donwloaders, they should expect that same sleaziness to make it hard for them to be seen as victims.

[Link]

LCF

All-Star Member

Non Prevalebunt!
10364 Posts
1/05

Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 12:20PM

^
I'm not American so my question could sound ridiculous but wasn't Homosexuality itself who was considered "Morally Questionable" not long ago?
and that for many groups it still is morally wrong?
I mean can't that man see that if he for first states that what is morally questionable should not be granted legal protection he himself will be the next target?
There's a story
Hey joe the police is pursuing Brenda because she's lesbian she's asking for help
J: good I hate lesbians , it is wrong but I'm not lesbian so be it.
Hey Joe the Police is pursuing John because he's gay he asks for help
J.I hate them too , it's wrong but I'm not gay so be it
Hey Joe the cops are pursuing Annie because she's fat she's asking for help
J I cant stand those fat they should eat less, besides I'm not fat so be it.
Some policemen are running toward Joe
Hey joe we're here for you because you're ugly
J. but it's wrong , help me people, help me, he shouted , he watched around but nobody was there not Brenda , nor John , nor Annie
Joe was alone.
The lesson of this is obvious everytime you allow the authority to shrink the field of your freedom be aware that'll be a first step. When you give up a piece of your freedom because you don't use it be aware that sooner or later that shrinking of your freedom will reach a point you care and at that point there'll be nothing you could do.
Freedom in history has never been cheap , has always been paid in blood , and it's worth it be aware the cost you will have to pay to regain what you are giving up now.
And remember that porn itself is morally questionable so according tho that man should not be granted legal protection nor Free Speech rights
Edited by - Laurie Cameron Fan on 7/24/2011 12:44:06 PM

[Link]

Peoples Temple
Member

People tell lies my friend. Some people like publicity. I don't like publicity.
674 Posts
5/11

Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 1:07PM

It is a constant Cat and Mouse game going on. I installed Windows XP on my computer and like you said it is only licensed on my computer. It will not work on another computer, even in my same household unless I purchase another license. The installation code on my software CD did not even work. I had to phone Microsoft and they provided me with literally over 100 digits to repeatedly input before it became operational. Also, to purchase another license is comparable to having to purchase a new software disc.
I welcome the file sharing, the companies are trying to screw us and box us in, so screw them!!!

[Link]

LCF

All-Star Member

Non Prevalebunt!
10364 Posts
1/05

Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 1:29PM

^You sure?
I have two licenses for Win XP professional with original CDs both OEM I bought them with my computers but I've been told that each license could be used on three computers
though Win Vista and Win 7 can only get a recover CD for 1 PC only.
Anyway I decided to migrate to Linux which I was used to long ago (Mandrake 7 and a Red Hat) now I'm on Ubuntu Linux but most likely will pass to Linux Mint 10 soon both debian based
EDIT
I remember a friend of mine got a PC with XP the same way as yours pre-installed and with a recovery disc that can be used only on his PC , I did differently I bought Win XP separately and have him installed an thus get the OEM drop of price but with all the advantages of a regular license bought on its own

Edited by - Laurie Cameron Fan on 7/24/2011 1:36:17 PM

[Link]

Peoples Temple
Member

People tell lies my friend. Some people like publicity. I don't like publicity.
674 Posts
5/11

Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 1:40PM

Yes, this is what I was told by Microsoft, my software is only usable on one computer. I only spent about $75 for the XP operating system, not professional edition, so likely that is why they only permitted me one license. I now only purchase software that will work even when my subscription expires. You have to choose carefully, some software is disabled after the expiration date while others work fine, only prevent you from downloading updates.
My CD is called a Reinstallation CD, it is a fresh copy. I wiped off windows 98 and put a clean copy of XP. My computer never had XP on it before, that's why the product key did not work and I had to deal with Microsoft on the phone.
Edited by - peoples temple on 7/24/2011 1:46:11 PM

[Link]

LCF

All-Star Member

Non Prevalebunt!
10364 Posts
1/05

Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 1:50PM

Linux is open source ,thus completely free and so is ANY program working on it , it can even work without installing it just from a CD or even from a Flash-drive , there are some anti-virus (of no use on linux) tou can use to examine a windows based computer from outside so that even beagle cannot touch it.
Linux is also virus free only rootkits taken through windows in a shared computer might affect it

[Link]

Hardware

All-Star Member

Your other left
14595 Posts
3/02

Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 1:56PM

^ But Linux requires one to actually exercise one's brain. Stealing other people's work is so much easier. [/sarcasm]

[Link]

Peoples Temple
Member

People tell lies my friend. Some people like publicity. I don't like publicity.
674 Posts
5/11

Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 2:11PM

I have no experience with Linux. I manage to figure out any computer problem with Microsoft. I've wiped clean my HDD a couple times and put it back fine. Nothing is known to be a bigger headache than Microsoft so don't know about exercising one's brain more with Linux.

[Link]

LCF

All-Star Member

Non Prevalebunt!
10364 Posts
1/05

Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 2:14PM

^ This could be true , Linux has a logic after all

[Link]

twistedvincent
Deactivated User

Juelz....Fucking Juelz
3960 Posts
5/09

Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 3:19PM

Excellent article.....since being a part of this forum and interacting with some of the stars (here, freeones, and on twitter) I can't bring myself to download much if anything. I used to think twitter was retarded and useless, but it's helped alleviate the temptation for me to download because after getting tweets about their day to day activities, I feel like I'm personally stealing from my favorite starlets.
However, I disagree with pink visuals in the respect that if I could only stream content from a site and NOT download, there's no way I'd buy a membership.

[Link]

Harri Patel
Senior Member

#SDNY he's all yours. -- Michael Steele
5110 Posts
3/03

Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 6:58PM

While that may be true for the core Linux distributions and some of the applications, to get a Linux machine to really function as a Windows or Mac replacement, particularly in the multimedia realm, you have to install a fair amount of stuff that is not open source -- either copyrighted stuff that the rights-holder allows to be distributed free for Linux users, or stuff that is basically just ripped off and distributed over back channels.

[Link]

just_me
Member

133 Posts
4/09

Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 11:27PM

Grow up.

[Link]

just_me
Member

133 Posts
4/09

Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 11:29PM

We live in a capitalistic society where one person provides goods or services in exchange for payment. This is how our world works.
Just because one person is willing to spend his time and resources to give you something for free, DOES NOT ENTITLE YOU TO FREELY OBTAIN THE GOODS AND SERVICES OF OTHER PEOPLE.
Edited by - just_me on 7/24/2011 11:30:29 PM

[Link]

just_me
Member

133 Posts
4/09

Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 11:35PM

You are showing a clear lack of knowledge of software licensing.
You are confusing open source with GPL.
And you are confusing the way these agreements are applied to developed software. If a software is bound by a GPL license, then you are free to use the source code of the software to create anything new, but whatever you create is also bound by the same GPL license. If an open source software is not bound by a GPL license, then you are free to create your own commercial product from the source code. If you are developing software to run on an open-source, GPL'd operating system, but do not use their source code to create your own software, then you are free to create a commercial product.
*and*
http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=linux+virus
Edited by - just_me on 7/24/2011 11:52:54 PM

[Link]

just_me
Member

133 Posts
4/09

Posted - Jul 24 2011 : 11:41PM

Nope.
Windows XP Professional licenses, both OEM, retail, and upgrade versions, are only licensed for one computer. Microsoft did offer a 3-pack for triple the price but the package included three cds, three manuals, and three COAs.
Microsoft Office 2007 and 2010 Home & Student versions were sold for use on three computers with only one product key.

[Link]

Digmen1
Member

629 Posts
7/07

Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 1:16AM

But the point is if he sells that first computer can he install his XP on a new computer ? probably not.
And he is not allowed to give the XP away on the first computer !

[Link]

Harri Patel
Senior Member

#SDNY he's all yours. -- Michael Steele
5110 Posts
3/03

Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 3:29AM

If you buy a "retail" copy of Windows, you can transfer it from one machine to another; you just can't have on more than one machine at a time.
An OEM aka "system builder" copy is only good for the machine that it's initially installed on.

[Link]

LCF

All-Star Member

Non Prevalebunt!
10364 Posts
1/05

Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 10:07AM

True but this can't be avoided if lots of movies are in flash or Windows media or Real Media
as for ripped off material, I don't know I only use what is in regular repositories

[Link]

LCF

All-Star Member

Non Prevalebunt!
10364 Posts
1/05

Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 10:19AM

Digmen1 wrote:
just_me wrote:
Laurie Cameron Fan wrote:
^You sure?
I have two licenses for Win XP professional with original CDs both OEM I bought them with my computers but I've been told that each license could be used on three computers
though Win Vista and Win 7 can only get a recover CD for 1 PC only.
Click to expand
Nope.
Windows XP Professional licenses, both OEM, retail, and upgrade versions, are only licensed for one computer. Microsoft did offer a 3-pack for triple the price but the package included three cds, three manuals, and three COAs.
Microsoft Office 2007 and 2010 Home & Student versions were sold for use on three computers with only one product key.
Click to expand
But the point is if he sells that first computer can he install his XP on a new computer ? probably not.
And he is not allowed to give the XP away on the first computer !
Click to expand

I don't know what you are talking about as said I have two licenses because I thought it worked the way you say but it's not one of the disks had been broken so I called MS assistance for a replacement and THEY told me that it was unnecessary as I can use my Product KEY on THREE machines and that if I Install an OS using an original disc and a valid product key I should have no problems, and so I did.
I don't have a recovery disc I have a complete OS disc and both my machines have been activated online even though one of them have been partitioned and I useit with Linux
as for the lack of knowledge I didn't want to lecture anyone it was a simple undetailed statement
As for the virus I knew dozen of linux users none of them has ever had a virus nor have I in over 10 years os usage

maybe we have different laws on consumer's rights but I assure you I can install an XP professional on ANY machine I want with a proper Product Key I bought it as an OEM but separately from my PC and had it installed at a lower price (€ 127 instead of 340)
This can't be possible anymore with Vista or Win 7
Edited by - Laurie Cameron Fan on 7/25/2011 10:25:44 AM
Edited by - Laurie Cameron Fan on 7/25/2011 10:28:03 AM

[Link]

Michaelxavier
Member

Women, wine and song...there is nothing better.
152 Posts
7/11

Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 10:30AM

Music, movie and porn industry have a common situation they need to rectify. Interestingly enough, the music industry is rebounding a bit and iTunes and other services like Napster are making it easier for people to pay for music. Porn industry needs to the do the same thing.
GGG Models and Pornstar Archive

[Link]

johnshaft820
Member

271 Posts
1/05

Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 10:41AM

Could the discussion of WIndows XP licenses or whatever be continued in the Tech Talk forum? This seems very far off topic.

[Link]

ninja1
Senior Member

2939 Posts
1/08

Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 12:30PM

Based on your description, there is no reason for the € 340 product to exist.
In the USA, The advantage of the full/retail version over the OEM version is the freedom to legally re-install it on subsequent computers (one at a time). But you have to pay a much higher price (double price or more) to buy that freedom.

[Link]

ninja1
Senior Member

2939 Posts
1/08

Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 2:06PM

Correct. It is so easy to find illegal download porn links, by simply using Google. Most of the filesharing filehosts have a standing policy saying (essentially) "we will remove any copyright-violating links on request". I have been on filesharing boards where someone posted a link to an illegal download, and within 2-3 hours they post again to complain about "snitches" who reported their link and had it removed. It would be simple for the major studios to hire a person or team to troll the internet to find violating links and notify the filehost to get the links removed. But that does not generate real money in the way that the lawsuit threats/shakedowns do.

[Link]

LCF

All-Star Member

Non Prevalebunt!
10364 Posts
1/05

Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 2:57PM

Also there's people getting money each time one of their files has been downloaded and these usually keep claiming to get competitors deleted so that only their file could be downloaded , which is good as a general effect but leads to the deletion of file by request of someone who has nothing to do with them.
I know of a site of a guy which charges a little amount to get the drawn he does on request he has not a big server so i put them on a filesharing service as a premium that way was cheaper than running a website on a server , someone put a claim of violation of copyright and he got all of his files deleted although he was the author and the owner

[Link]

ninja1
Senior Member

2939 Posts
1/08

Posted - Jul 25 2011 : 3:59PM

This is the way the filehosts have to operate in order to help their reputation. The filehosts already have "bad guy" reputation. So they are quick to delete files by request without a lot of hassle. I believe any random person could probably get any file deleted by just requesting it. I mean, how does anyone prove they are the official copyright owner?
And how would anyone verify it?
Edited by - ninja1 on 7/26/2011 8:23:51 PM

[Link]

Solar4
Deactivated User

183 Posts
10/10

Posted - Jul 26 2011 : 8:15AM

johnshaft820 wrote:
So these lawyers are extracting $2900 from downloaders who could have purchased the same product legally for like $15? This indicates one of two things:
1) The porn studios' business model is fucked and their only profitable activity is intimidating downloaders into paying hundreds or thousands of dollars for something that normally sells for $10-$20. In this case, they're acting in bad faith as they really need the downloaders to keep downloading so they can keep threatening litigation and book the profits. Obviously it's more lucrative for a studio to extract $2900 from someone (even after the lawyers take their cut) than it is to sell that person a DVD.
2) This is being driven by the attorneys, who are surely keeping a good cut of that $2900 in legal fees.
Click to expand

Yeah it's basically a shakedown and extortion by the adult industry. And there may be others, but I know of only one other entity that so brazenly engages in shakedowns: organized crime.
And based on history such behavior is rarely tolerated for long.

[Link]

BlackSix

All-Star Member

pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world
12377 Posts
9/07

Posted - Jul 26 2011 : 5:05PM

What history are you talking about? Organized crime prospered in the US throughout its entire history, it's only since the late 70s that organized crime was actively pursued and prosecuted by the US government.

[Link]

RandomPrecision
Senior Member

Enjoy!
8175 Posts
3/06

Posted - Jul 26 2011 : 6:15PM

Well, you know how it goes. The more powerful organization usually does get rid of it's weaker competition.

[Link]

Digmen1
Member

629 Posts
7/07

Posted - Jul 26 2011 : 10:11PM

Hey Random Precision
Have you balanced your budget yet ?
(he he)

[Link]

Gentleman Jon

All-Star Member

1881 Posts
6/05

Posted - Jul 26 2011 : 11:44PM

If you shoplift from a brick and mortar store and get caught, it's not like they're going to let you off just by paying the retail price like you should have in the first place. No, there will be a punitive fine involved.
Otherwise, what's the disincentive to shoplifting, if it's free when you succeed, and even if you get caught, you'd only pay retail?

[Link]

Solar4
Deactivated User

183 Posts
10/10

Posted - Jul 28 2011 : 3:10AM

Organized crime was always actively prosecuted in the USA. And if you're talking about the Italian Mob in the 70's it was only its weakness around that time that allowed it be largely eradicated from the major US cities. The Govt has had no such luck with the triads, ms-13, russian mob, etc.. because they're stronger than the Italians are.
As for shakedowns though, if people have a choice they won't pay, and so it will be with this failed attempt by the adult industry to support itself with extortion.
Edited by - Solar4 on 7/28/2011 3:26:16 AM

[Link]

BlackSix

All-Star Member

pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world
12377 Posts
9/07

Posted - Jul 30 2011 : 4:41PM

No sorry, that is not true. I'd suggest reading TJ English's history of the Irish Mob in the states to get an idea of just how far back the tolerance of organized crime goes back in American history.

[Link]

LubeNLuv
Senior Member

1854 Posts
3/06

Posted - Jul 31 2011 : 12:10PM

Can call this whatever they want. I'm a big critic of piracy and have been ridiculed on here many times for speaking out against anyone who glorifies the act.
But at the end of the day, an industry that actively sponsors a shakedown by effectively threatening to "out" porn watchers to the public as some kind of deviant criminals will find this backfiring horribly on their already-faltering revenue streams.
This is a last-ditch effort to make a quick buck, which is the hallmark of porn purveyors for the most part. When you work THIS hard to push the image that anyone watching STOLEN porn is a closet pervert, you are basically saying the same thing about your PAYING customers as well.
But then again, nobody ever accused porn producers of having a long-term vision or sustainable business model. They just aren't that smart.

For shoplifting, many retailers follow up the criminal conviction with civil restitution. This is often the approach taken for juveniles caught shoplifting, since the retailer recognizes that the kid won't get more than a slap on the wrist and some community service. But with civil restitution, they use small claims courts to demand anywhere from triple to up to 1 hex face value of the product (plus legal fees) as 'damages.' These civil cases are often levied at the parents of the minor. This has been going on for decades now, pioneered by Wal Mart and now the SOP for Loss Prevention departments of all major retail chains in the USA.
Of course, the big difference here is that civil restitution ONLY applies if there is a successful CRIMINAL prosecution against the perpetrator first. In other words, the guilty has already been found guilty before the civil proceedings commence.
Unlike the porn model which is a complete intimidation and finger pointing racket. They can't even prove guilt in most situations...that much has already been proven via other piracy cases. They just want you to pay up or risk being 'outed' as a porn watcher. Notice that filing a claim and revealing your name to the public doesn't prove your guilt in the matter....it only proves that your name is associated with an IP address that was used to view pornographic materials. Like I said....they are really just broadcasting that watching porn = bad, so this will come back to bite them in the ass.
Edited by - lubenluv on 7/31/2011 12:19:06 PM

[Link]

Solar4
Deactivated User

183 Posts
10/10

Posted - Aug 1 2011 : 12:07AM

What do you seek to prove? That in some cases, in the USA, the cops can be just as criminally inclined as the crooks they're allegedly supposed to pursue? I don't think you'll find much disagreement on that point. It's a known problem in a number of American cities.
But if you're trying to prove that the federal government collectively has ceded control to multiple mob organizations in a live and let live policy as if it were the Russian government, then I think you'll find that to be false.

LubeNLuv wrote:
Can call this whatever they want. I'm a big critic of piracy and have been ridiculed on here many times for speaking out against anyone who glorifies the act.
But at the end of the day, an industry that actively sponsors a shakedown by effectively threatening to "out" porn watchers to the public as some kind of deviant criminals will find this backfiring horribly on their already-faltering revenue streams.
This is a last-ditch effort to make a quick buck, which is the hallmark of porn purveyors for the most part. When you work THIS hard to push the image that anyone watching STOLEN porn is a closet pervert, you are basically saying the same thing about your PAYING customers as well.
But then again, nobody ever accused porn producers of having a long-term vision or sustainable business model. They just aren't that smart.
For shoplifting, many retailers follow up the criminal conviction with civil restitution. This is often the approach taken for juveniles caught shoplifting, since the retailer recognizes that the kid won't get more than a slap on the wrist and some community service. But with civil restitution, they use small claims courts to demand anywhere from triple to up to 1 hex face value of the product (plus legal fees) as 'damages.' These civil cases are often levied at the parents of the minor. This has been going on for decades now, pioneered by Wal Mart and now the SOP for Loss Prevention departments of all major retail chains in the USA.
Unlike the porn model which is a complete intimidation and finger pointing racket. They can't even prove guilt in most situations...that much has already been proven via other piracy cases. They just want you to pay up or risk being 'outed' as a porn watcher. Notice that filing a claim and revealing your name to the public doesn't prove your guilt in the matter....it only proves that your name is associated with an IP address that was used to view pornographic materials. Like I said....they are really just broadcasting that watching porn = bad, so this will come back to bite them in the ass.
Click to expand

Well here we're not even talking about shoplifting, which is actual theft, we're talking about people sharing already purchased content with each other. Which is merely filesharing.
The definition has been so warped though that it is now defined as theft by those who seek to profit from every single use of their content, no matter how limited. And when they're not allowed to do so it becomes wrong in their minds.
And it is quite ironic that those in the adult industry are trying to shame others for using their product. Are they then conceding that their product is morally objectionable? Because I'm sure that some in religious community would be quite surprised to find themselves on the same side as those they oppose in the adult industry.
Edited by - Solar4 on 8/1/2011 12:14:23 AM

[Link]

BlackSix

All-Star Member

pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world
12377 Posts
9/07

Posted - Aug 1 2011 : 4:43AM

We're way off topic but if you're actually interested in knowing about the long term collusion between all levels of the government and organized crime throughout American history read English's book or something by Thomas Reppetto. This is all well-documented history, not conspiracy theory.

[Link]

Drebin
Member

686 Posts
3/09

Posted - Aug 3 2011 : 2:59PM

i read about this on some other sites, 99% of the john does they trying to get money from have been closet fags downloading gay porn- apart from 1 case of someone downloading a FTVgirl video off piratebay, nothing mainstream str8 that is discussed in these forum or we would know anything about.
its funny because the discovery methods investigators/lawyers would have to go through in order to serve them with papers would definately be exposing themselves to explicit gay images. its gays chasing down there own kind in closet gays for money lol

[Link]

BlackSix

All-Star Member

pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world
12377 Posts
9/07

Posted - Aug 4 2011 : 3:10AM

^ I doubt pretty much everything you've said here. Also, your assumption that the lawyers would have to be gay is bizarre.

[Link]