Can you really blame me though? I didn't get this upset at him for no reason, now did I? :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Trans-Promo
~BB~
Printable View
Can you really blame me though? I didn't get this upset at him for no reason, now did I? :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Trans-Promo
~BB~
I have already seen the reduced amount of material from the brazil scene. If support goes to zero how can you expect anything new. I think there was a blitz of content producers getting material from brazil but now after the smoke has cleared only the real sites are left.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trans-Promo
Like I've said before, I'd be honored to have a stalker, if it wasn't this sad sack of shite.
If only I could be cited as the guy who created the word "shemale" - I've said, it was the only the word really used at the time a al "shemale club", "shemales xxx". I considered calling it "ChicksWithDicksYum.com" but it was a bit long.
Anyway,
"Let out the Daly!"
YouTube- The Rancor - "Jaws Theme"
LOL Well that makes sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by seanchai
But she was also on the bootleg version of HD, foaming at the mouth about... Well, you name it. lol
I know "Crimson Raider" barely tolerates the opinions just one tranny, and one tranny only, and that's Vicki. lol
There already is a system - It's called a Licensing AgreementQuote:
Originally Posted by SmashysmashY
I'd say it's more like "Boo hoo for you, chinless Scooby Doo." lolQuote:
Originally Posted by BellaBellucci
I give you 6-12 months to realize that porn and womanhood were not your destiny, and you go back to being a male lesbian, you fucking garbageman in a rancid muumuu. Your 15 minutes are almost up. :dancing:
Great, then do that and keep your beak out of my private communications and maybe I'll be more respectful of your right to make money off of smut.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trans-Promo
"Private communication" is not so cut and dry when you're using it to "privately" break laws and rob people.Quote:
Originally Posted by SmashysmashY
I'm sure you probably think your ability to acquire profit is more important than any silly thing like privacy or other people. Perhaps other people will begin to see the wisdom in that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicole Dupre
I am sorry Nicole, did he, the thief, just cop an attitude with me? That's just one of the funniest things on this forum so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by SmashysmashY
I was keeping my mouth shut about your childish 5 year old analogies but after that one... you dug your own grave babe.
Its only "private communication" when you are expressing yourself with your own thoughts and ideas. When you are trafficking in stolen videos, you are using other peoples thoughts and ideas. If someone stops you from reviewing a movie, you can complain, not when they try to stop you from copying and sending the movie itself.
FK
How does one know the difference without violating one's privacy to find out?Quote:
Originally Posted by Felicia Katt
~BB~
I'm not "acquiring" a damn thing. I invest effort, time, and money and I EARN my money. Profiting from one's own LABOR is a pretty basic concept. That's what we do.Quote:
Originally Posted by SmashysmashY
The only ones "acquiring" anything around here are the pirates who are ROBBING our products.
I have a hypothetical scenario to put forth. I'm curious about everyone's input.
Say I buy an album, I'm sure you're all okay with that, but what if I rip that album to my computer? Some have argued that even that is unacceptable, but I think most everyone here would agree that since you own the album then it is okay to copy it to your own personal computer (and if not please say otherwise). So now I have the album on my computer and on a legit bought CD. Is it okay for me to give this CD to someone as a gift? If so, why is that okay but not letting that same person download it? Ultimately the result is the same, a person is getting an album free of charge and I would still have a copy of the album myself.
I'm not going to kiss the ass of someone who calls me a criminal several times now. You don't even know me lady. Respect is a two way street and I've only been polite to you and the other people in here but if that's going to be your attitude then don't bother because I'm not a sadist who came here to be insulted.
Okay but what does that have to do with whether or not people can communicate privately? You said it's not cut and dry but either you can or you can't. You either have privacy or you have none.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicole Dupre
an IP address, attached to a torrent file is not a sealed envelope. Its a fingerprint on a burglar's tool that can be traced to its owner and no one can claim leaving their fingerprints at a crime scene is somehow private communication.
FK
Stop and read back your question...Quote:
Originally Posted by Instrumental
*You BUY a CD, upload it to you computer or MP3 - that is not in violation
*You give that CD to someone as a gift - Giving gifts is not in violation
Making a copy with intent to distribute is illegal as well
*That person starts making copies and selling them - VIOLATION
Even if I was to grant you that (which I don't, there are private trackers) that's not the only protocol that people use to send files.Quote:
Originally Posted by Felicia Katt
Huh? lol I don't know anything about you, and I couldn't care less. But don't piss on my back and tell me it's raining.Quote:
Originally Posted by SmashysmashY
Look. It's pretty basic. If you rob something, you're a thief. If you're trying to justify stealing porn, I'm not absolving you of your guilt. The bottom line is, people are robbing the industry I work in and it's not ok. So "if the shoe fits..."
And wtf would you like from us now? A pat on the back and a cookie? lol
Btw I don't know if you're a sadist or a masochist, and I don't give a rat's ass. Just don't steal porn, and you won't have to feel guilty.
I have a scenario:
Say your mom goes into a porn shop and shuvs a fisting rubber hand up her ass w/out lube and walks out of the store without paying. When she gets home she takes the shitty hand out and slaps it on your dad's face ( he likes it even though she stoled it ) He then accepts it as a gift and starts sucking the thing unwashed. Only later to shuv it in his own asshole with some Crisco.
Now let's say your dad goes to his mom's house and takes out the fisting hand out of his ass and puts it on the dinner table in front of the whole family...
Would your grandma consider it stolen?
What's not "cut and dry" is the excuse you're using.
Theft, on the other hand, is VERY cut and dry.
Sadist, masochist whatever that's not my interest obviously. The point is it's uncivil to address people like that when they didn't do anything to you first. So just like you think my privacy isn't cut and dry I don't think robbery is cut and dry in this situation.
I have no idea, but the part about someone's "mom going into a porn shop and shoving a fisting rubber hand up her ass w/out lube" makes my pussy moist.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trans-Promo
Wait. What was the question again? ;) lol
I'm not sure why you're asking me to re-read my question. I can't really tell if you have any qualms with the scenario I gave. Are you fine with it? And if so, are you okay with the person instead of receiving a CD as a gift, downloading the album from the person who did it. If not why? The end result is the same. If your only issue is in the person profiting from distributing the media that's fine, I don't agree with that either but then that leads to why one would persecute those that merely share the media with no profit involved (i.e. p2p networks). And why is copying with the intent to distribute to another person wrong if giving the album to someone as a gift is okay? The other person is getting the media for free, the artist receives no profit from it whatsoever and the original person who bought it would still have the album on their computer to use for his or herself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trans-Promo
And then you can go even further and get into people who buy a CD and when they grow tired of it, sell it to someone else. In that scenario and the aforementioned one, people are gaining access to the media without supporting the creator of it. Is that wrong? why or why not?
I have a scenario - Sit on an egg and wait for it to hatchQuote:
Originally Posted by Instrumental
Actually, Danielle, he was copping an attitude with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Trans-Promo
Usually they go for me first. My bad. lol
Well, since you obviously don't give a shit about privacy, can I ask if there is anything about copyright that you consider to be bad at all?
Did you know that in the last 99 years only 1 years worth of published material entered the public domain?
Except that an IP address can't point to a particular person. Some are even dynamic so they may not even point to a particular household or business. With so much IP sharing going on, you don't think a witch hunt is a violation of privacy? And sometimes against innocent parties even?Quote:
Originally Posted by Felicia Katt
You have to find stolen property in the possession of somebody to charge them in criminal court. Why should it be different in a civil suit? So you're saying that real criminals have more rights than casual torrent downloaders?
~BB~
O_o Wow. Not sure that was warranted.Quote:
I have a scenario - Sit on an egg and wait for it to hatch
Danielle your scenario should play before the start of all dvd's.
Its only a witch hunt if there is no one to find, since in reality, despite what personal opinions some may have of others, there are no witches. If an IP address is linked to a criminal act, that's probable cause to support a warrant or subpoena or further investigation. If the investigation clears you, that's the end of it. If your fingerprints are found at a crime scene, and can be traced to you, that's also probable cause for you to be investigated, and if there is an innocent reason for your prints to be there, that ends it. Its called clearing the latent prints. The standard of proof in a civil case is less than in a criminal one so it takes less evidence to make and support an accusation, but either way, there are facts reasonably supporting probable cause for further legal inquiry and no ones rights are being disrespected
FK
So you think it's OK to use a criminal investigative standard to find civil violations but you also want to exploit the lower standard of evidence that comes with a civil suit? Grooby has absolutely no evidence whatsoever that any one individual is responsible for any one theft. Are you implying that Grooby plans to clear all the 'latent prints' in search of the guilty? That's a lot of prints that don't really mean anything and a lot of accusations to be made against innocent parties.Quote:
Originally Posted by Felicia Katt
I mean, this would be fine if we were talking about a murder weapon or another piece of tangible evidence because a) it's linked to a criminal act of which there is already evidence, b) the maximum number of latent prints possible is much, much lower than 'electronic fingerprints' and simpler to clear, and c) those fingerprints belong to actual individuals, not groups of individuals. Not to mention of course, that IP's are regularly spoofed by the real professional pirates (i.e. those who do the most damage to the industry), meaning that once again, it's the casual downloader in the cross hairs because they don't cover their tracks as well.
Furthermore, wouldn't the first IP addresses tracked in each piece of content belong to the paying site members who shared the content in the first place? Aren't those people your real culprits? Wouldn't it just be easier to go after those people since you presumably have their sign-up information? But even still, content is easy to steal. You wouldn't be able to prove that another individual didn't steal the content from the paying member.
So it sounds to me like you have no objections to Grooby planning to potentially sue entire families and businesses because one member or another may be guilty of a civil violation and only if the content in question is even still in their possession. That only works when you have evidence beyond an IP address, because without it, you're just bluffing.
That's not a witch hunt? How do you figure? And in the end, the easiest and most efficient defense will always be, 'it wasn't me.'
~BB~
No Shade but when grooby gained control of the site it seems the site lost alot of members
Wow, not that I support piracy but I hope this "turnkey solution"* is more than just copying down IP addresses and looking them up, because IP addresses are not like fingerprints at all. And the Media Copyright Group website is the definition of fly-by-night.
I hope there's something more here than mass-mailed settlement letters hoping for a payoff. Google turned up another lawsuit, http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/n...p-lawsuits.ars, which just looks like some lawyers and techies willing to use homophobia to gin up a profit and cut porn studios in on it. I hope future anti-piracy efforts are a little more savvy than this.
*this sounds like empty buzz-wording to me, unless it's software, which Media Copyright Group makes no claim to be. All my googling can find is the website of John Steele, a divorce lawyer.
I'm certainly not one for criticising someone because of their pubic hair or whatever. (Although I agree that there are people who do, & like you, I have to say that sort of thing doesn't impress me much.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Trans-Promo
I must also say that I have subscribed to several porn sites, over the years. It kind of depends on what I'm into at the time. Right now I have a subscription to one of the Grooby sites, as it happens. I've never bothered with the whole torrent scene. Too much hassle, & I've never been too confident about the process, PC-security-wise.
The argument presented by deepthroater and myself is that one of the propositions used to support Grooby's argument appears to be false. So if they want to put forward a convincing argument, then they have some work to do. Which is a fair point.
Eastern European crime gangs were mentioned initially. Apparently they're responsible for stealing shemale porn and putting it up on to different websites for people to download. And apparently they're making money doing this. I suggest that these are the real criminals in this whole scenario. If Grooby wanted to do something to actually combat shemale porn piracy, then they should use the technical skills mentioned in the initial post to track down these Romanian/Bulgarian gangs, and get their websites shut down. That might actually make a dent. But if they leave these Bulgarian/Romanian crims alone, then nothing will really change. They'll keep on stealing Grooby's product, keep on putting it online, and keep on charging people to download it. What will this enterprise of Grooby's actually have achieved then, long term? Not a damn thing.
you know if some one rats the pirate out ,do they get paid too?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Niccolo
Makes me wonder if there’s a way of putting an ‘invisible’ water mark on each copy of a movie that would be directly tracable to the original buyer/pirater? Kinda like a secret serial number. I know some record companies are sending out water marked promo CDs of their new albums...
Also, why not put pressure on ISPs that host pirate sites? Surely they are hosting terabytes worth of illegal stuff on their servers (or at least facilitating illegal activity) and to some degree can be held accountable?
Just a couple of thoughts. Sorry if either or both have already been mentioned…
Erm....nah...nevermind. :shrugQuote:
Originally Posted by seanchai
The genie is out of the bottle, it's going to take new and upward thinking to keep the porn industry alive. Ask the record companies about holding on to the old ways.
How many people have paid for sheet music in the last 5 years?