I searched in forums but didn't see much. Why is it exactly that the tube sites can't shut down? Isn't it a pretty straight forward rico case? You prove that the majority of the stuff there is a copyright violation, and whoomp there it is so to speak. I know that a new one will pop up, but can't you keep whacking the big ones down and threaten the small ones with financial ruin? Surely the big boys could band together and have some clout. Are they all offshore or something? Is there some legal precendent I am not aware of? I posted in another post that they have gotten so big they're almost legal or something, which is so far from the truth it's comical. I remember napster's lame argument that they were so popular they had to be legal, lol. The argument that they don't police their individual users has fallen flat every time it's been challenged on other social network sites. It's no different here. If your business model depends on your users committing massive cumulative copyright violations, it's illegal, lock stock and barrel, right? God in the settlement you could probably take their domains as well. Pornhub's domain gotta be worth a fortune. It's got wiki like authority. Wonder if google could be convinced to slap them because they are enabling copyright violations? Man this sounds so slam dunk, but what do I know? As I understand it RICO cases have a whole different standard and are much easier to bring. Hell if I were a lawyer, I'd take up the case pro bono. Having friends in the adult biz would not be a bad thing. ;)
This has been a frequent topic of discussion for quite some time here. First off, If Google chose to do so, they could virtually cripple tube sites and torrent sites of both porn and Hollywood content, not to mention the thousands of peer-to-peer sites that engage exclusively in the exchange of copyrighted works. They choose not to. The biggest reason why tube sites can't be shut down is their sheer numbers. The "big" tube sites (owned, operated and completely sanctioned by the good folks at Brazzers) aren't even the biggest problem. It's the thousands of smaller and less visible ones that fly under the radar. The big sites will usually remove your content when you send them a DMCA notice but it's like playing whack-a-mole because it will be back up within days. This is because they make the claim that their sites contain only UGC: user generated content. Unlike youtube where this is true, on porn tubesites it's used as a ruse to upload copyrighted material and get away with it, at least temporarily. And yes, many of the most egregious offenders of copyright theft are located outside of the United States. A hundred people working full time for a porn studio could never get all of their content removed permanently from every tube site. That isn't to say they shouldn't try, but it's a losing battle. But keep in mind that a lot of the content on tube sites is completely legal. When a porn studio gets into a money crunch or goes out of business, they sell off their content for pennies on the dollar and much of it inevitably ends up on tube sites. So then the issue shifts from one of copyright violation to the simple argument that offering anything for free begets consumers who no longer see a reason to pay ever again. This impacts every producer of content who attempts to actually make a profit selling it. Even if you removed the content of all the top studios in porn from every tube site, there is more than enough free content available to satisfy the needs of all the but the most selective consumers. Here's what I can't figure out. You make a good point when you mention that pornhub must be worth a fortune. I'm sure it is, but to whom? It receives millions upon millions of hits every day from people actively seeking to NOT pay for anything. How valuable are the eyeballs of a hundred million people who have no intention of ever spending money on porn? Yes, advertisers such as adult friend finder and a gazillion "live cam sites" advertise but how much of this traffic actually converts? Is it enough to justify the massive amount of bandwidth it takes to host all of that content? Aside from creating a generation of people who believe that every thing digital is free, I don't understand the motivation to own and operate a tube site or a torrent site. It's possible that I am just ignorant and entirely too "old school" to understand it. If so, I wish someone would enlighten me. Edited by - mike quasar on 6/28/2010 2:02:08 AM
[Link]
screwcap Deactivated User
I'm walkin' here........ 1032 Posts 6/10
Posted - Jun 28 2010 : 11:29AM
^ you've enlightened me greatly with that reply. Thanks, I guess it is a mission impossible scenario.
The good thing with tube sites is that they help me to some extent to choose what titles to buy. For my favorite taste of POV I´m always looking for movies similar to yours (BL M SW). And it showed me which of the early 14 pieces were worth buying. I think those who don´t care about picture quality and watch tubes only would never buy anyway. So for me it´s more information than a surrogate for the real thing.
"The trouble with our times is that the future is not what it used to be" P. Valery 145 Posts 6/07
Posted - Jun 28 2010 : 1:08PM
^ I agree. For the habitual porn movies buyer tube videos can be a pretty kind of "long and low-quality picture" trailers. They can be, consequently, an incentive to buy dvd and find out new stars or directors.
"First off, If Google chose to do so, they could virtually cripple tube sites and torrent sites of both porn and Hollywood content, not to mention the thousands of peer-to-peer sites that engage exclusively in the exchange of copyrighted works. They choose not to." Yes they could and should cripple them. They deindex all kinds of sites everyday for a lot less reason. But google uses the UGC logic as well. But it's funny how if my hash value on an inconsequential scraper shopping site runs slightly afoul of them, they deindex me permanently with no notice, and no recourse. But in a rico suit I am not sure the UGC crap holds water. I think even evil big brother could be forced to bitch slap a site knowingly engaging in DMCA violations on a wide scale. "This is because they make the claim that their sites contain only UGC: user generated content." That didn't work too well for napster, or some of the other social sites when they had issues with offensive content, etc. To my knowledge in a rico suit all you have to do is show that they can't really exist without the copyrighted content or force them to proactively review every clip which of course they can't do. They can't continue a business model that depends on a criminal activity. Instead of playing a no win whack a mole game, maybe logging all the content for a rico suit would be better. "And yes, many of the most egregious offenders of copyright theft are located outside of the United States." Well that's a whole different story. But I bet the money trail ends here eventually. The best success in shutting down email spam was that the can-spam act held advertisers responsible for the actions of the spammers. Yeah there is still spam, but it's for shitty offshore stuff. No more mortgage spam underwritten by Ameriquest. Same principle might work here as well. "But keep in mind that a lot of the content on tube sites is completely legal. When a porn studio gets into a money crunch or goes out of business, they sell off their content for pennies on the dollar and much of it inevitably ends up on tube sites." And that might be the biggest enemy. Although from my somewhat limited experience with tube sites it's the good current content that is the real draw. "Here's what I can't figure out. You make a good point when you mention that pornhub must be worth a fortune. I'm sure it is, but to whom? It receives millions upon millions of hits every day from people actively seeking to NOT pay for anything. How valuable are the eyeballs of a hundred million people who have no intention of ever spending money on porn? Yes, advertisers such as adult friend finder and a gazillion "live cam sites" advertise but how much of this traffic actually converts? Is it enough to justify the massive amount of bandwidth it takes to host all of that content?" The answer is yes. It's a numbers game. I don't think the bandwidth issue is as important as it used to be for the streaming technology we have today. And their product is free. But you're right, I bet the numbers aren't that great. I have noticed recently that pornhub has gotten much more aggressive with popups. Probably due to the quality of the advertisers and conversions sucking. The domain and traffic might be worth something to somebody with a good porn product to sell though. I'd take it, lol. Sometimes people underrate secondary monetisation. I hear all the time from people that they don't click on adsense ads. Well somebody is! Google is the most profitable company on earth, and it's all from ad clicks, lol. My general point is that the numbers for any tube/torrent sites can't work without stolen content. I think that is the whole point of rico lawsuits. If somebody doesn't do something soon they will become legit by default which is where it's headed. It's kind of fucked up really. But what the fuck do I know though. After Adultcheck I couldn't ever really figure out porn and went into shopping. Hell come to think of it Adultcheck was pretty much stolen content with a 19.95 /yr. pass. They didn't police it very well at all.
well as i remember it that argument didn't fly for the music sharing sites. and if i also remember right either myspace or facebook was faced with a big slap due to either copyright or objectionable content and they had to institute some pretty wide ranging moderation standards because of it. they didn't get away with the "we don't moderate every post" crap. regardless IMO if the big porn and non porn producers targeted one big tube site and kicked their ass in court, it would at least put a dent in the onshore guys. the big isp's did it with spam. gotta do something or the next step is just to start uploading current full length HD movies right? how far does it go? what happens when somebody creates a tube site and scripts fake user accounts using foreign proxies and starts uploading full blown HD content off the same proxies and charging by the minute for site access? is the "we don't moderate user content" going to fly then? "here's our server logs. as you can plainly see, we can't regulate our "users"". is it that easy? the advertisers on these sites are onshore. they can be stopped. just hard to believe that it's come to this. i can remember the first time i saw youporn. i was like "this can't last long". i guess i am just naive.
Call me crazy, but I'm of the opinion that porn companies should be USING tube sites instead of trying to get them closed down. What better place to put up trailers, clips, interviews, and such to draw people to your own website and advertise your movies, new and old? A company like Vivid could upload hundreds of trailers and when someone does a search of a porn starlet trailers of all the Vivid movies she's done would come up. It's free advertising. The great thing is, it's a good place to advertise old movies that a lot of young guys might not know about. You're not going to pay to advertise an old movie, but you've still got the trailers for them. Put them up on the tube sites for free with a link to your website.
The visitors to the tube sites are there for the free porn, plain and simple. There is no way a trailer can compete with a sex clip, no matter how lousy/amateurish the sex clip and no matter how flashy/glitzy the trailer. Also, how many studios are equipped to smoothly convert those visitors into buyers? If the trailer leads them to the website...then what? They have to jump through hoops to get inside the site, they have to jump through more hoops to find the movie which goes with that trailer, only to discover the DVD costs $25 even though it's 5+ years old and even though a new-new-release DVD costs $30. Mind you, this is the same visitor who's perfectly content with browsing the tubes sites for free porn.
Not always. Some people use tube sites to preview movies or see what scenes a particular actress did are good. A lot of people that download shit (some statistics say the majority of people that download shit) will pay for things they like. It isn't about getting something for nothing. It's about trying before you buy. I know this because I'm one of them. I download movies, albums, porn, video games, ect. and watch/listen/play them and if I like them, I buy them. I've got stacks of CD's and DVD's I bought after having had downloaded them for free. I don't mind paying for stuff I like, but I just got fed up of wasting my hard-earned money on crap. I mean, I spent $40 on an Evil Dead Playstation game and beat the piece of shit in three hours. No more, I say! No more! The two main reasons why people download shit is because a) the vast majority of movies, music, porn, video games, ect. put out these days is pure shit and b) that shit is too expensive and people are broke. The average price of a movie ticket is $8.50 and can be over $10 in some places. That's a lot of money to gamble on a movie that could very well be one of the worst pieces of shit ever made and that's just for one ticket. If you've got a wife and kids, you could be spending $20-$30 just to watch a movie one time and you don't even get anything like a t-shirt or poster or anything. All you did is watch a movie. Once. And there's no refund if you hated the movie. So, people are downloading movies for free, watching them, and then buying the DVD if they like them or, in some cases (and I've seen people say they've done this several times) even going to watch the movie in the theater after having had seen it for free. Some bands and record companies have finally caught on and have started streaming albums for free so people can listen to them first and then buy them later and it's a great idea. When the Metalocalypse Dethalbum was streamed for free, hundreds of thousands of people listened to it free of charge and then the album sold out. It works. A lot of TV chanels have started putting up episodes on their websites that people can watch for free. This draws people to their websites instead of them downloading the shows from where ever and the chanels make money from advertising. What the various entertainment industries really need to do is lower their damn prices but they won't do it because they're too greedy. If movie tickets were $3-$5 then there'd be a lot more people going to the theaters again. If CD's were $5-$10, people would be more inclined to go out and buy them. If video games were $15-$30 people would buy more games instead of just one or two and sticking with them for a year. Porn, most of all, should be cheap. The reason is that people watch porn to jerk off to and a person only needs so much porn to do said jerking off. You've got to give people a reason to buy more porn than they need (produce good content) and you need to make it cheap enough that they can afford to buy it even when they don't need it. The reason why crack was such a successful drug was because it was extremely addictive and also extremely cheap. Porn is addictive, but it's not cheap. There are porn sites that charge a $25 per month subscription. That's assinine especially since you don't even know what you're getting until you subscribe. Most sites charge full price for a digital download of a movie. Most people won't pay $20-$30 to download a movie becuase a) you can pay that much for a physical DVD that will last as long as you take care of it b) there's no shipping costs, storage costs, or manufacturing costs for digital content and people know this and expect a digital copy of a movie to be cheaper because of that and c)digital copies are virtual and easily lost (permanently) so people don't want to invest a lot of money in digital content. What porn companies need to do is make digital content cheap like crack. While most porn afficianados will go out and buy the latest new release, most people aren't going to shell out $30 for the hot new movie when they can pay $5-$10 for some older movie and jack off to it just as well. Sell your new movie on DVD for $20 (available from your website, of course) and also have it for download at $10. Of course, the download won't have the bonus features of the DVD which will still give some incentive to purchase the DVDs, though since digital downloads require no shipping, no storage, and no manufacturing, I don't even know why porn companies even sell DVD's anymore. In addition to that, you sell your older movies even cheaper like $3-$5. Then you sell individual scenes for just a dollar (buy five get, get one free!). Make them impulse buys. Companies like Vivid and Wicked that have huge back catalogs can make money of movies they made ten or twenty years ago if they make them cheap enough. Look at how much money Apple is making with iTunes (estimated over $300 million a year) selling songs at a dollar a pop. Now, imagine a site selling good porn clips at a dollar a pop. You use the tube sites to host your trailers for you with links to your site where you sell those movies or scenes cheap. Let people watch scenes (or part of a scene) for free so they can see what they're getting and them make it cheap enough so people will say "What the hell? It's only three bucks!". That works. I was reading about a video game the other day that had just been on sale at Steam for $2 and a lot of people were saying things like "I'd never heard of this game, but it was only $2 so I bought it". I know I've bought some shit video games because they were on sale for five or ten bucks. Also, put a lot of free shit like interviews and behind the scenes stuff on your site and make money from advertising from the toy companies, porn mags and such. Maybe even make a weekly show where you talk about the porn biz and interview people and whatnot and put the episodes up on your site for free to draw people to the site at least once a week to see the show and while they're there, maybe they'll spend five or ten bucks on some scenes or an older movie that they missed. With the economy the way it is, it seems to me like lots of little sales will generate more income than a few big ones. Of course, I could be wrong.
[Link]
screwcap Deactivated User
I'm walkin' here........ 1032 Posts 6/10
Posted - Jun 30 2010 : 8:07AM
being that the 4th is just around the corner I'm thinkin more about Tube Steak than Tube Sites.
Many of the tube sites won't allow studios to post just trailers, they insist on full scenes.
[Link]
Haze Deactivated User
769 Posts 7/04
Posted - Jan 28 2011 : 7:45AM
Kids have it so easy with the tube sites today. I remember having to go to the video store backroom to rent porn. Tube sites are great though anything I want at the click of a button and free.
[Link]
mikesalami Deactivated User
1505 Posts 7/10
Posted - Jan 28 2011 : 10:00AM
Traffic counts for a lot... Facebook, Google, YouTube (worth hundreds of millions) are also free. Also, I know [MOD: please don't post torrent sites] (torrent site) has a do not post list, which they actually enforce. I don't get why more porn distributers don't get on the list. I know it can be a good thing... people will see certain clips and will then go join the site... but I would imagine the amount they lose from the video being distributed freely is more than they'd gain from people joining up. Edited by - Flash on 1/28/2011 11:54:23 AM Edited by - killbillvol69 on 2/2/2011 1:21:13 PM
MOD: I'm convinced that you work for this site now as you have received repeated warnings from me about posting about them in this forum. DO NOT FOR ANY REASON EVER POST THEIR NAME AGAIN. Edited by - Flash on 1/28/2011 11:57:05 AM
It's hardly a surprise that tube sites are popular and everyone uses them. I don't see how online pay sites can level the blame completely on the users. They want to whine and cry foul when their content becomes free on a tube site, yet they have been screwing the people that subscribe to their pay sites for years now through fine print, "trial" offers, blatant hassles that kept people from unsubscribing and various other shady tactics. WTF did they think people were going to do after forking over their cash to a pay site, only to get slapped in the face as a "thank you for your business, sucker" ? Granted, not all pay sites are like that. There are a few that have integrity, cater to the customer and conduct business honestly and without taking advantage of them. But it seems to me that the stigma of pornography is that it's a dirty business run by dirty people. When a pay site only confirms that stigma as being reality through their business practice, the very same people that trusted them enough to give a credit card number and their hard earned money have now adopted the same line of thinking as the people that look at the adult industry (at least online) as shady and dirty. Just my opinion, of course.
^You're correct that many sites used to have pretty nasty business practices but most of those have since then disapeared. Probably because they went out of business. I'd say that the majority of sites today aren't like that anymore. It's true that sometimes a trial membership is a waste of money and my rule of thumb on any site is that if the preview pages haven't given you a good enough idea of what's inside then skip the site. You might lose out on a good site that has a poorly done preview section but it's more likely that you'll just waste your hard earned money. The only itch with your argument is that tube sites don't just have website content but dvd content as well so porn studios producing dvd's are losing money for no other reason than people don't mind stealing their work.
Not everyone, I can assure you. That's the rub, these people are stealing from everyone who does pay for content.As a business owner and having to fire people over the years for theft after being caught red-handed, I've heard the same argument dozens of time. " If I made more money, I wouldn't of stolen." or " I deserve more for my work and me taking that was only what you owed me." Some people are just going to steal and that's the way is and will always be, but I'm not buying the bullshit explanations that it is somehow justified in the case of something as nonessential as pornography.
[Link]
DrexlSpivey Deactivated User
Face sitting is the Simon to pegging's Garfunkel 837 Posts 1/07
Posted - Jan 28 2011 : 3:43PM
So basically the people at Brazzers are huge dicks and are purposely trying to force the dvd producing studios out of business? There's better ways to win in business than subterfuge. Like putting out a superior product. My number one beef with Brazzers before reading this thread was that their scenes were extremely vanilla and corny. Which is a quality issue in my eyes. No imagination or actual thought put into the scenes, unless you have the intellectual capacity of a twelve year old you're probably not going to be entertained or turned on by the scenarios offered up by Brazzers. It's all pretty juvenile humor and I don't watch porn to laugh. The only things that have kept me from cancelling in the past is the strong performances of the performers and that you can get a year's worth of porn for $89 if you get the yearly membership. I feel partially responsible, I believe in not pirating. I've been a member of Brazzers for a few years thinking I wasn't contributing to the piracy that's driving the business that I "grew up" on into extinction.It would suck to see my favorite directors go under. On an unrelated note I also think that Brazzers caters and panders to racists. Their interracial site was quickly taken down after numerous racist remarks were left on the comment sections of the scenes. Very lame Brazzers, you should be ashamed of yourselves. Brazzers has numerous sites that you get access to for one price. Why take down the interracial site when the redneck racists and or bigots still have like twenty other Brazzers sites that have no interracial? I should note I'm not trying to stir up the interracial talk that is prevelant on this board. I think it's rediculous when guys badger the girls on here about it, but what Brazzers did is just wrong and weak. Keep fighting the pervy good fight porn studios!
I don't really see the problem with tube sites. It's just hard for me to imagine the same people who actively search and view on those sites, would ever be the same people who purchase DVD's, or digital copies etc. Most viewers are probably underage anyways. If all the tube sites shut down forever, do you really see a big jump in adult film sales? It just doesn't make sense. The people viewing those sites most frequently, would probably start jerking off to Victoria Secret catalogs like the good ol' days.
Tube sites probably aren't that big of a threat, just a bunch of secondary (P2) viewers getting off to 3 and four minute clips. It's the file sharing that is killing the entertainment world, and it's very strong in porn. You've probably all heard jokes that the most popular websites are porn sites, The Internet is for Porn, etc. Naturally, the most content piracy is probably porn. Now that countries or supernational entities (The European Union) are embarking on an anti-piracy campaign of graduated-response systems, will porn piracy be targeted? I mean intellectual property law protects adult entertainment and unaccountable bureaucrats shouldn't have any political pressure to avoid prosecuting porn pirates.
I think Google and Bing are partly responsible for all this. Because when I search for porn, Google and Bing lead me directly to all the tubesites we hate! Google and Bing have no problem with leading me to illegal porn, but if I try to Google "Black Swan" I get absolutely no results from the Black Swan bootlegs (even though they're out there). Before I started reading ADT opinions on tubesites, I thought they were totally legal because all I had to do was google them and, without downloading any special software or even going through an "Enter/Exit" page, the videos would be there, ready to watch! Does anyone know why we get these illegal tubesite results when we google, but no results for illegal mainstream movie sites?
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Jan 28 2011 : 8:53PM
Those 'statistics' come from two inherently flawed studies conducted by interest groups with a bias in favour of downloading. I don't believe that the majority of people who are downloading are also buying, if that was true album sales, DVD sales, etc wouldn't have fallen into a black hole.
tubesites will not ultimately win because their quality is low compared to DVD and legal downloads. The porn industry needs to get together and create a Hulu/Netflix for porn (eg FyreTV). JohnS sez: "Although from my somewhat limited experience with tube sites it's the good current content that is the real draw." My experience says that the draw is thousands of videos of every category. The categorization is nowhere near as good as a legal site, but there's still thousands of videos. Anything you want you can find..that's the draw. It's like a sucky version of a Hulu for porn. But they thrive because there is no actual Hulu for porn. Harry: I don't think porn companies should use tube sites for the same reason I don't think Hollywood should use the illegal mainstream bootleg sites. The porn industry has more money and talent than the bootleggers, so the industry should make its own legal, well-designed sites. ninja1 sez: "There is no way a trailer can compete with a sex clip, no matter how lousy/amateurish the sex clip and no matter how flashy/glitzy the trailer." I disagree. Before I knew the tubesites were illegal I used them. At the same time, I used porn studio websites that had trailers MORE. Because the quality was better. Evilangel.com was my favorite site for free porn trailers because they had the BEST clips. I also used the preview clips on online retail sites. So yes, a free 3-6 minute preview made by the studio CAN beat a low-quality but 30-minute porn scene. In fact I think that the next step in porn development will be directors who make their full movies as fast-paced and well made as these trailers. So what if you can only make 1 hour of movie in the time it took to make 2.5 hours? The final product is HOTTER! Harry Palm sez: [a bunch of stuff encouraging porn to reduce its retail price] Permanently lowering the retail price of a good DOES NOT make customer buy more of it. cheaper /= more sales. You learn that on day one of business school. Make a product do exactly what the customer wants it to, and price won't be as important to the customer as you'd think. Notice that all the while you were complaining about the prices of things, you were also admitting spending all that money each and every time. You also admit that the games you bought cheaply were "shit video games". You cannot directly compare music buying with movie buying because a movie is FAR more often a one-time encounter compared to music. People watch movies once and that's the end of the encounter for most. Pop music, at 3min30secs, is designed to be engaged with many times. In this internet age, I think the porn industry has realized that its unit is no longer the movie, but the scene. Primarily online sites like BangBros and Brazzers realize this. There should be more selling of scenes instead of movies. Just like iTunes has found success in breaking down the primary unit from the Album to the Track, so we can find online success in making the scene the primary unit. I would much prefer that than fucking selling by the minute (man I hate websites selling by the minute). Mainstream can't do this because movies are whole, as opposed to collections of disconnected scenes like in porn. We must copy mainstream's successes and adapt it to our business. But always remember that the rental is important, whether it be in DVD or streaming form. The rental is that sweet spot for the movie consumer where they can ingest the movie, then throw it away. Keep that option available in some form. screwcap: you do realize that tube steak should never be grilled, right? =)
Give the customer what they want in an easy way. The mainstream industry has all these same problems. Porn has tubesites, and mainstream has private youtube account bootlegs, torrents, and straight-up tubesites for mainstream (like tu*** and f***v*****on**** and m**av****). Mainstream is winning by offering better product for a good price. If I want to see The Dark Knight I can take a lot of time and effort to steal a low-quality version, or I can spend 3.95 on iTunes or Warner Bros Online and see it immediately--in HD, and without the risk of viruses or illegality. Porn studios must never forget their power. YOU have HD quality product. YOU can deliver your product instantly. YOU have access to your entire catalog in an easy-to-navigate form (as opposed to googling PORN FUCK #39 and crossing your fingers). YOU can band together to create projects like FyreTV and have 20,000 titles at a customer's fingertips. Fuck...if you really got your shit together you could have 100,000 titles at a customer's fingertips. Being EASILY able to watch what you want when you want is something only YOU, the united industry can offer. Tubesites and other pirates will NEVER be able to offer that as well as you can. Be innovators and jump in front of the mainstream on this. They are resistant to allowing Netflix to offer all their product on instant streaming. But the customers are begging for it, and they'd be willing to pay cable-subscription prices for it. Your solution is to create the Hulu-Plus of Porn, the Netflix of Porn, the iTunes of porn. I would LOVE it if I could simply pay $5 to download any new porn release. I would LOVE it if I could pay one website $30 a month and have access to 100,000 streaming pornos from all the major studios. I think valid my belief that Hollywood dealt its biggest blow to piracy by, in the past year, dramatically *increasing* its legal online content on studio/network websites and websites such as Hulu and Netflix.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Jan 28 2011 : 10:14PM
In porn unfortunately history tells us that quality does not actually matter for most consumers, that's why VHS, which looked horrible but was more convienent, won and that's what will happen here I think.
I want all the studios to contribute to a single place to both rent and buy movies and scenes, period. AEBN has started to get it right but pay-per-minute as the defining pay system is just difficult to deal with, as scene lengths vary. I like Digital Playground's model but download-to-own on new releases would be the absolute best. Give me that, in one place, and I'm set. I know I'm not alone. Will that trump tube sites? No. But those are mostly P2 viewers looking for whatever will get them off for a few minutes each day. Will that kill torrents? No. But it will bring content to users that will in turn pay for porn and if my case is any indication, pay a lot more than before. Also, damn this website - since joining my porn collection grew immensely. I'm not surprised though. More people need to come here. lol
Quality is what will be the bacon saver for those legit companies that are left standing in both the DVD and Website venues. There is a segment of the market that puts content shot in Hi-Def with top shelf people and solid production values, in demand. That fact was not lost on the like of Brazzers,Naughty America, Reality Kings, and Bang Bros, all of which now offer HD 1080p download options. I think we will see that same thing happen in the studio segment. Zero Tolerance, Third Movies and Elegant Angel have stepped up to the plate with 1080p, and undoubtedly others will follow. Maybe I'm a Hi-Def snob, but if it's not at least 720p I don't even give it a glance, and I know there have to be a lot of other people out there or there would not be this press to HD material by producers.
Blacksix: DVD or HD download vs the pixelated-even-on-a-small-screen crap that is loaded onto tube sites? I'm sorry, but...no. That's a big difference in quality, not the "you can only see the difference if you're a tech-head" difference. Tubesite quality is low, bro...like YouTube low. Has YouTube destroyed mainstream? Nope, and YouTube's low quality is part of the reason why. Hulu and Netflix stream better than YouTube. I think an important point that many miss is that we're at a point where the media consumer base has split movie and porn watching into 2 giant camps: DVD and online/digital. When put together, both show a larger audience than ever before. But apart, it looks like "oh no DVD sales are down!" Well, remember that 10 years ago you didn't even have a significant revenue stream from online movie watching, and now it's huge. It's like the newspapers who all cried about physical paper subscriptions going down. Stfu newspapers! You are just exchanging formats; people still read the news, just online. Cody: you and I are of the same mind. I think that the most effective way to combat stolen free net porn is to copy Mainstream's model: *A studio sells it from their website (a la Warner or CBS) *A retailer sells downloads of all the material from all studios (a la iTunes or amazon) *Conglomerations of studios or distributors stream free content with ads(a la Hulu or Joost) *A retailer of streamed material sells an ad-free subscription service from all studios (a la Netflix or XfinityTV) from the Wall Street Journal: "When Hulu was created in 2007, NBC Universal and News Corp....were concerned about the growing influence of YouTube and pirated copies of their programs showing up on the Internet. Hulu aggregated the networks' TV shows online and made money by selling advertising." A history of Hulu: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703779704576074283037958472.html
btw, porn parodies have always been about generating sales because of name recognition. Porn newbies are always likely to buy something they think has a connection to the "real" world
It's huge for both industries. Just ask Brazzers, Naughty America, AEBN and the other top online pay sites how digital media is revolutionizing their businesses. But it's not like online sales are on par with DVD sales. Just like the music industry, the revenue stream from online sources has plateaued. It doesn't appear that either will be able to replace losses due to piracy with online revenue. Newspapers have it even worse. Local newspapers cannot get by on ad revenue alone. The big papers lock the majority of their online content behind subscription firewalls but bloggers lift it anyway. Television is the only medium that appears to be on track to sustain itself while watching annual profits diminish slowly. But even Hulu's average ad lengths have grown. Still, I know the business model we want will work. Quality may diminish, but probably not as much as it would if we just stay on the same course. I signed up with Digital Playground in 2010 and their pay-to-rent system has already got more money out of me than anything before. Toss in a pay-to-own option and I'd throw even more money their way. So I'm on board. Give me a pay site with the ability to download films/scenes to watch once, rent, and own and you might as well just stick a vacuum in my safe.
You have a point about shady tactics (at least some of them used them in the past). However, I don't think that's why people use tubs sites. They do it because they can. Most people who use them have probably never been "burned" by shady business practices. IOW, I don't think it's driven by any real anger or desire to get even. If you sit valuable stuff out by a busy road and put a sign on it that says "FREE!" it'll probably all be gone soon. People don't take it because they're angry. They do it because it's there.
RandomPrecision, my old son, you've got it right on. If you google any sex-related word, you get mostly results from tubesites. That's why I used to watch them and never suspected they were...suspect (especially since they had Brazzers ads all over them). Now I know better. Cody: I've recently been looking into all the online porn rental sites, and it appears that WantedList has all the things you want. However, ADT's reviews about it aren't so positive.
[Link]
Bert Piel Deactivated User
195 Posts 8/10
Posted - Jan 29 2011 : 7:38PM
If I want to watch a German dude fist his wife's ass for 10 minutes, you really think I'm interested in DVDs or going to a VOD?
[Link]
DrexlSpivey Deactivated User
Face sitting is the Simon to pegging's Garfunkel 837 Posts 1/07
There is also the problem with europe not using CC as their primary bank cards, we got debit cards, which all the adult studios dont have any option for to pay with, and to get a CC you need to request one from your bank, but they only give it to you if you got a minimum income of 1100/1300 euro a month, any student who is busy with his college wont get anything near that a month, so the first thing to watch porn is free tubesites. Ofcourse there is paypal who is a godsent for those people, and accepting debit cards, but they dont offer it to anything having to do with porn, so once again is the majority of EU fucked.
Katherine, I had mentioned the same thing in earlier posts - the difficulty of people outside North America to pay for porn with credit cards even if they wanted to. A person in Asia or Eastern Europe will find his card rejected by cc bill or whatever billing processor is used these days. Many can afford to pay $25 for a monthly subscription to adult websites, but it is not accepted. This is one factor driving traffic to tube sites.
Google recently implemented some changes in their instant search. Links containing certain keywords (eg. torrent) won't be suggested if you type just the title of a movie. Presumably they did it because of pressure from MPAA/RIAA. I think it's a bad idea. Google is a search engine - it's not their job to police Internet. We don't want to give Google or Microsoft 'de facto' power to decide what we can and cannot find, even if it's supposedly for the good cause.
The MPAA/RIAA wanted to hold Google and other search engines, as well as content sites and internet service providers, responsible as a partner in crime. Making search engines into complicit 'internet police' forces is a compromise, and one the engines readily accept.
Hello I read a bit (but not everything) by Cody McLarge and Bustdowngal and decided to put some ideas here. Here is my 5cents on tube sites. Let me first say that I have never bought services (VOD, joining/per month, downloading minutes). I have only used free tube sites and used them mostly to identitfy titles, scenes and performers. The owners of the works should attack the sites where the quality is very high, also those without a comment section. On those that still qualify make sure the full title is in the comments and also where it can be purchased at top quality today. I think the future is in downloading and making your own DVD or HDsomething. I might as well keep on ranting here. As for ownloading might as well also make snippets (clips) available. Here's an example. Parts of a movie selleable everywhere = main download. Parts frowned upon in some states or that contain fisting = upload to some site in Belgium that can be purchased as a snippet (with the info as to where it belongs in the main movie). Parts only legal in Denmark upload to Denmark of course and destroy it here. All other footage, BTS etc sell as an extra again dowloadable at top quality. Snippets could be numbered Snippet 1 to Snippet 7291734 as long as they name the movie that it goes with. The feature in a recent DVD of Candy Stripers where you can navigate up, down and sideways and the fisting scene will appear is ok but not the greatest in my opinion. I don't like fisting that much but I really hate american fisting (4 fingers or 5 fingers covered with a black spot). I hope this does not look too bad. When I pasted it from notepad it decided insert blank lines between the real ones.
Gravity as Curved Space: Bootymeister's Theory of General Relativity 1589 Posts 11/08
Posted - Feb 6 2011 : 5:59PM
Almost everything porn fails to give an instant search result on google. One can literally search 'torrent' and get the complete list of Google search results. Anytime one searches a porn star on Google, the results are dominated by results containing 'toorent', 'rapidshare' and anything pirate. One has to use the advance search to exclude results containing words indicative ofpirating. Google is not at all complicit or at any risk becuase of a tube site or anything else related to intellectual property rights appreaing in its search results. Google has separate motivations for curbing how it caters to porn on the internet.
Here is an example of what I was talking about on feb 5 (Free tube sites). Found an interesting clip, looked at the comments, no title of the movie listed, recognized a male performer from a DVD that I have, went to IAFD, looked up my title, identified John West, found out that he performed in 1132 titles. So now I have narrowed down a title that I want to 1132 titles. Meanwhile the money is still here.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Feb 15 2011 : 5:43AM
Early on VHS looked like garbage, you didn't need to be a tech head to pick it up. But it won out because it was convienent, a lot more convienent than seeing a film in a theatre. Can't get more convienent than free. The casual porn viewer is looking for something to whack off to for 10 minutes and then they're out of there. The quality on the tube sites is all over the place, some of it is pixelated but some of it is quite clear and crisp, and besides, it's free.
but Blacksix, with a site like Videobox you can find what you want quickly and easily and the quality is good and it's a good price. Convenience trumps free for anyone with money. It's called the Netflix effect. I myself...I mean...I know someone who hasn't torrented a single movie since she joined Netflix. With torrented movies there's a lot of waiting and false leads and movies losing a seed at 98.6% and getting a movie only to find out it's a bootleg with "For Your Consideration" floating across the screen every 20 seconds. Fuck that bullshit. I'll gladly give $20 a month to a service that gets me video entertainment when I want it the way I want it. Quality counts, even for wankers. Thinking about it, my reasons...I mean...my friend's reasons for torrenting or watching chinese tube sites for mainstream stuff was that cable wasn't doing it for her. She paid $50 a month and never watched it because she hated commercial breaks and hated being limited to watching by their schedule. She had to work Thursday nights...why SHOULDN'T she be allowed to watch 30 Rock when SHE wants to? And to get a DVR Time Wannayourmoney told her she had to pay $20 a month for what is basically a 21st century VCR. She wanted to watch 30 Rock at 1230am when she got home from the video store, and she wanted it without ads because WTF was she paying TWC $100 a month for if all of that TV and online entertainment is interrupted with advertisements (even Hulu). Fuck that. Her vengeance was warranted. She would take that "free" entertainment [that she was paying $100 a month for] with impunity and not look back. Slip the AVG condom over her dual WIFI antenna and let's DO THIS! Then along came Netflix and gave her what she wanted: the ability to watch whatever "TV" she wanted whenever she wanted. All was good, and she cut the cord. [And TWC charged her $70 for internet instead of the previous $40, but at least she's giving $30 less to the bastards].
#SDNY he's all yours. -- Michael Steele 5110 Posts 3/03
Posted - Feb 16 2011 : 1:00AM
Streaming Netflix looks fine to me with a 3.0 Mbps DSL line, which I'm paying about $27/mo for under a 1 year contract which is nearing an end (and which my ISP, dslextreme.com, appears to be charging new customers ten bucks less per month for, again with a 1 year contract). So no need for a $70/mo cable (?) line if you just want to watch Netflix.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Feb 16 2011 : 3:40AM
I watch legit VOD and downloads all the time, so you're preaching to the choir, I just don't think the average wanker does care and prefers to get their porn for free, because they see little value in it and hold it in contempt.
Gravity as Curved Space: Bootymeister's Theory of General Relativity 1589 Posts 11/08
Posted - Feb 18 2011 : 12:29PM
If the tube sites were shut down, any of these porn viewers who actually like porn well enough to pay for it, would most likely be only interested in the ultra-cheap compilations for either rental or purchase. I think the tube sites have a minimal effect on overall revenue for the porn industry. Perhpas much less effect on porn industry revenue than the previous ability of anyone to copy any VHS porno tape at will.
Having said that, I prefer to err on the side of the porn industry and have the tube sites shut down.
Edited by - bootymeister on 4/28/2011 8:25:53 PM
[Link]
Solar4 Deactivated User
183 Posts 10/10
Posted - Feb 18 2011 : 12:51PM
The industry doesn't wish to give the public what they want, a cheap iTunes of adult content system, so tubesites, torrents, and file download sites take up the slack. And all the wasted money going towards futile lawsuits against the aforementioned sites isn't going the change their fundamental problem, namely their refusal to change their business model.That's preposterous. A search engine merely indexes sites on the internet. It's job isn't to do the bidding of private companies and block certain sites to protect the profits of those companies. Edited by - Solar4 on 2/18/2011 12:52:36 PM
