It's not exactly a secret that the porn industry (along with lots of media spheres) has seen a significant drop in business due to the proliferation of piracy & tube sites broadly. Some sites attempted to shift to a 'streaming only' model, and that appeared to fail pretty quickly. Consumers have been accustomed to an industry model that allows them to either own a DVD, or have a local copy available for on-demand viewing that doesn't eat up their data.
This may or may not have been discussed among various producers/site owners, but a potential solution could be utilizing app-based media players to allow for more traditional 'offline' viewing. A real-world example of this being something like Netflix's PC & tablet apps. A person downloads the Netflix app, and they can stream from their own device or download shows & movies for viewing directly on the device without an internet connection. Admittedly there would be some costs in getting an app like that spun-up, but it would be a big advantage for content owners in keeping their content within a walled-garden, while allowing for the consumer to not have to worry about burning data every time they want to watch a specific scene/movie (especially with the explosion of large-file 4K video).
This may have been discussed or even implemented at some juncture, but I certainly haven't seen it attempted by any of the major sites. There could be something I'm overlooking, but it seems like a worthwhile avenue.
(Not sure if this is more appropriate for 'Tech Talk', but I figured since it's a more general discussion this might be the appropriate spot)
I think the big issue with that idea is that it would have to be under an umbrella site, such as Netflix. None of the umbrella sites that have popped up, FyreTV for example, have done that well except Gamma, and Gamma seems to own many/most of the studios they represent. You'd either have to convince many studios to agree to take a hit on what they make per movie, or find a way to make an umbrella site that doesn't make much per movie.
[Link]
ruinedwomen Deactivated User
8 Posts 5/21
Posted - May 31 2021 : 9:50AM
^ also apps that are for streaming adult content are unlikely to get approved to be on the Apple or Google App Stores.
Streaming model loses more customers than it gains. For e.g a few sites only offer a 1 year sub for streaming/downloads which has put some consumers off including myself in the past so instead of getting few months of sub end up not subscribing. The walled garden approach wont work imo as too many like to have some ownership of the content and due to the internet history of porn in last 15 years or so the genie has escaped the bottle.
The way forward is quality 4k content to download and stream using various media devices at the $35 dollar a month/$300 a year type sub. Decent bitrates which the majority of sites still dont get right. Offering 15mbit 4k isn't cutting it. Filming with quality 4k cameras and then encoding to 15mbit which seems the standard for mainstream porn sites. 30mbit is the minimum. It is like buying a Ferrari but only driving 30mph. Quality over quantity. Possibly also more sites offer a pay per download as well as a subscription for the same videos as in many cases a site might have only 10 videos of interest but only worth a 1 month sub.
Somehow the porn industry needs an answer like Spotify and the likes did for the music industry when piracy was rife 10 years+ ago. But that also has its issues when to comes to rewarding the performers.
I'm not suggesting you're doing it deliberately but relying on bitrate alone can be very misleading as not all bitrates are created equally. 10Mbps video on one site may be better quality than 15Mbps video on another site if the former's codec is more efficient than the latter in its compression during the transcoding process. Then you've got the optics, the ISO settings and the sensor size of the camera to take into consideration. A high video bitrate is no guarantee to compensate for low quality optics, poor lighting or a lack of technical skill with post-production putting out a crap quality video.
[Link]
somenamehere Deactivated User
40 Posts 5/21
Posted - Jun 1 2021 : 5:48PM
I think if they do it that way where you lose the content when your subscription ends, it will just lead to more people trying to pirate. There's really no solution other than sell it at whatever price will get enough profits to be worth it given how many will buy it. I have made programs/apps and I know without even searching that people surely have pirated them, but just nothing that can be done really so i try to forget it.
That's true, it would probably only work for the very large companies like Gamma or MindGeek. I was thinking something like Brazzers would be an instructive example: They have thousands of scenes in their catalogue, so in this example they would have a standalone app which you would use if you wanted to watch their content on your device instead of streaming directly on their site. But yeah for the smaller & niche sites, I doubt it would be a realistic avenue unless they were willing to partner up with a conglomerate like Gamma
Yeah that's kind of what I was alluding to with the Netflix app, but Spotify would be a better example. Access to a large library, with an 'offline' feature that allows you to consume the content without it eating up your data (solving the streaming issue with giant 4K videos). It would certainly make for an interesting test-case. Because while piracy certainly still exists for music, to your point it's nowhere near as rampant as it was during the '07-'14 years.
I agree but 10Mbps on all filming techniques isn't high enough for 4k. 12Mbps was the standard for 1080p which over time dropped to 8Mbps sometimes improvement in codecs sometimes not. While I don't know I suspect encoding is not done on a frame by frame basis but more a mass process depending on what the studio wishes probably at what bandwidth they want to use for their pricing model. Agree is not just about bitrate but the correct use of encoding as well.
While on subject of piracy people are willing to pay for a quality product even if the product is available through piracy. The key is what price do the studio want to charge and will people pay for that. The issues as it is a price driving product or a mass content of 1000s of scenes to attract the customer it usually means standards drop across the board and with it protection against piracy. As time goes on I see Gamma/Mindgeek type companies buying more studios and porn will be driven by 2-3 major companies only with Onlyfans/Clips4Sale and Chat based communities bringing in the money as a side income for performers.
^ I don't recall stating that 10Mbps was fit for purpose with 4K or specifying a suitable bitrate for 4K for that matter. I merely stated that 10Mbps can have better video quality than a 15Mbps video if the 10Mbps video's codec works far more efficiently. I'm not sure what part of that statement can be inferred that the apparently lower bitrate is suitable for 4K.
The solution to piracy is to make a good product people want to buy for a good price. As for streaming video, the answer is adaptive bit-rate via protocols that every device can access. Encoding to a specific number (15-30mbit as you call it) is usually done for finite space such as optical disc.
^So you are claiming that people only use tube and torrent sites to watch shitty porn because if it's good then they will buy it. It's hard to debate the merit of a statement like that because it's rather delusional. The only way you mitigate porn piracy is with laws the same way that the music and film industry did it. You target the parent companies of the biggest tube sites and I can guarantee you that there will be a significant drop in porn piracy.
that's only partially true. Basically all porn streaming is encoded to a specific size and is not adaptive streaming, simply because it's easier this way and you don't need a player that after every 5 seconds or so tells the server "give me the next seconds of stream xyz from the 1MBit/s version, because currently the bandwidth is pretty low" or "give me the next seconds of stream xyz from the 50Mbit/s version because now there's plenty of bandwidth"... Instead, it's easier simply pointing to the same stream (at least for the resolution), and shrink that stream's size to the lowest (acceptable-to them) bitrate, as brazzers is currently doing.
That method would require more space on the servers... but it could use less bandwidth overall (which is usually what is driving up the price the web hosting costs)
So what does that say about those who happily pay for their porn? I say there is a good product out there that isn't extortionately priced. Porn needs a trade organization akin to the MPAA or RIAA to fight against copyright infringement though lobbying for that probably won't be so easy compared to the lobbying done by the mainstream movie and recording industries.
politicians won't support porn. The porn industry doesn't have Hollywood type money to lobby anyone. The main money makers in porn have no issues with piracy. The main porn trade group FSC is friendly to mindgeek. No Hollywood studio has ever done business with megaupload or rapidshare, the porn industry legitimized tube sites by signing up for partner accounts and premium content provider.It is the consumer who gets shafted. What this proves is that porn isn't on the edge of technology anymore (if ever). Adaptive streaming is basically mandatory for any serious video site.mindgeek makes 500mil a year according to some sources. Surely zz could afford some cheap ssd yes? Can't be running the same spec servers forever. There isn't any excuse not to do adaptive bit rate from a company of any size. Video is expensive but revenue is coming in.those who access porn via those methods shouldn't be the target audience of content producer, they weren't going to pay it anyways.those who register for copyright/trademark are in the minority. The majority don't care for their content to register it meaning they don't think their product is any good. Just film on iphone and upload same day, no content review, no registering, no promotion other than a tweet with a 10 second video on social media (why are they promotion sexually explicit content on social media?)Have you not seen members of the porn industry (new and veteran) openly defend and work with mindgeek and xv?
[Link]
kesont Deactivated User
77 Posts 11/19
Posted - Jun 3 2021 : 8:02AM
restricting downloads doesn't restrict piracy one iota imho
the porn industry basically needs the Netflix of porn, as others have mentioned. Sexflix?
Do you really think nobody here is aware of that? Saying the porn industry needs a trade organization isn't a statement that it will get one or that it has the financial means. I openly acknowledged it won't be so easy (something of an understatement). The posturing of family values and monogamous sexual relationships as being the only path of virtue by politicians will conflict with porn.In this case, the porn industry isn't a monolithic abstract as not all of it fits this narrative you push. MindGeek and its subsidiaries may have few qualms about tube sites as they profit. However, other studios and individuals partner because they are in an extremely uncomfortable dilemma where they choose to accept a reduced revenue stream compared to what they could receive through studios or their own platform as there is seemingly no protection to against tube sites. The alternative is that they stick to their guns with nobody to fight their corner and lose more revenue until they run at a loss. That may sound noble but it is unsustainable for a studio or individual. The last time I checked, their business requires revenue to operate sustainably and profit to expand.
Just wondering, what would happen if porn companies follow the YouTube format where porn companies create their own tube site(s) and have ads before the scenes/movies start so they can make ad revenue? If they get paid per views or clicks and fans will watch scenes over & over again, there will be a lot of views of clicks for each scene/movie. That way, porn companies will make money and customer can watch the clips for free (like on YouTube).
And that's going to happen by uploading 5-20 minute previews of every scene to a site with 15million free videos and hoping someone buys a sub? the adult industry accepted defeat by getting bed with tubes.
go to the top adult sites social media and look at the latest posts. They're done talking about piracy.
Well yes, they still receive revenue that way because someone else will take it if they don't. Ginger Banks herself said the alternative was that a random stranger could upload her content and profit from it instead of her taking the money. I can't name other performers but some.
As you said, the money isn't there to lobby so there probably isn't the money for a legal team capable of taking on MindGeek and other platforms that proliferate tube sites. What would you have them do? Making a "good product" at a "good price" doesn't do much if it's not marketed and promoted well - the phrase about a taking a horse to water springs to mind. You need a strategy behind the product. Before time is wasted with a straw man argument, I am not suggesting the strategy or route to market is with a tube site.
Is there a reason why you seem more interested in denouncing studios that sided with tube sites than denouncing those who frequent such sites or distribute content illegally? Is the industry easier to target and blame because it's not a faceless base of pirates?
I'll play along. In that alternate world where companies are happy to be associated with porn. You would have top Porn You Tube Channels raking in the money with all the advertising, the mid level porn channels who make more than decent money (but strive to become a top tier channel) and a bunch of low level channels who don't make much money but being on a platform with such a following still helps them get people to their site.
Of course we know that most companies don't want to be associated with porn so even if someone wanted to have a porn You Tube platform. They could never get anyone to advertise on it.
^ Yeah, I'd imagine the only viable sponsors would be other players in the sex industry. Perhaps you'd get advertising from companies selling sex toys, condoms, lingerie, etc?
Because they set a precedent to new entrants and customers. most porn viewers will always choose free, especially if it's a free channel being run by the actual producers of the content.
^ So what would you have them do as an alternative when the lack of legal protection leaves them in a "damned if they do, damned if they don't" position? Lick their wounds and just die "honourably"?
I doubt the studios in this unfortunate position are too happy with their circumstances nor do I think they can afford the luxury of idealism and delusion.
I think condom companies and Viagra (and similar companies) would be cool with advertising on there. There's also a chance that beer/alcohol companies would advertise on there. There are also adult companies (that sell sex toys, lingerie, etc.) that would advertise on there. If those companies do better business due to the advertising on a porn YouTube channel, then other companies would try it out if it means they'll have more customers & money.
^I think sex toys company would do it. Especially if they got product placement opportunities. Pretty sure that the parent companies of Viagra and similar drugs would never want their name associated with porn even if the people in the industry and porn fans use their product. Condom companies probably would do it but since the porn industry is anti-condom then it would make very little sense to have a product advertised that no one uses. Of course this is a moot point because even if all three types of companies were interested. Their combined advertising money would still be negligible and therefore not be profitable for anyone.
^I would like to see a company try it out to see how much money they would actually make. What do you think of the idea of performers doing something like a porn YouTube channel on their own website to make extra money along with what many of them get for OnlyFans?
^I welcome anyone that finds a way to support the industry as a whole so if a group of performers/producers/sites wanted to do something like that then I would support it. I would gladly support OF if their business model was one of transparency but it isn't and therefore I oppose them regardless that some performers likely earn good money form their OF account.
^Hopefully, someday, someone or a group of people can figure out away where they can make money from advertising or sponsorships, etc., so that performers, companies and fans would all benefit from it!
-change paysite model to streaming only w/ drm (no downloads) -put old content (over 12 months) on Blu-ray/UHD -Stop uploading 5-10minute teaser clips to tubes (500 clips on tubesite, why join paysite?) -drop price -build forums into paysites so members and actors can interact w/ each other -add bts footage -live shoots (vovuer cam), director pov cam, make up artist cam -live q&a with performers, directors, site owners (podcasts ect.) -sue hosting companies (of pirate sites) and issue press releases and updates -offer standalone native apps for Windows, MAC and android -add alternative billing -member only merch -member shout outs during the actual shoots
Introducing Natasha Carter
Posted - May 30 2021 : 4:08PM
