Busted for Copyright Infringement

[laughinggaszone]

I go with laughinggaszone on this one. His words were "me calling you an assfuck is me being angry." Nowhere else in that post did he say assfuck. You calling me a stupid a-hole would be a good indicator that you're angry with me, however as far as I know you have never done so. He was using an example, not flaming. In regards to the original post, I agree they shouldn't have posted the video and the public apology was a good call even if the user's name is "random."

Exactly. The last thread revolving around piracy got derailed by a nick hopping troll. Lets keep this one on point. Whether or not public apologies are effective or not is certainly arguable, but most people would opt to do it rather than pay monetary restitution they don't have. Truthfully, there is little to be done with pirates. They have to decide to stop on their own.

 

[Mrcool]

Jesus I was right...sorta

 

[TrishaXioj]

He or she should be tickled to tears for this crime!

 

[weezl]

Anonymous apologies are about as useful as umbrellas in a hurricane. Most likely here only to stroke Stryker's ego.

I'd have to agree with this one. "Okay, so I have to go on an obscure website/message board and post an apology that a bunch of strangers on the internet will read; most of whom won't give a shit"..

IMO. It just sounds stupid and boring. Especially since most of the people on here are going to continue pirating the materal, continue sharing the material and will continue the credit card fraud.

It's not effective at all.

 

[SharonP]

My thoughts exactly. While I can't pretend to relate to what producers go through and agree that illegally uploading is wrong, I feel like these forced public apologies (assuming that's what happened here) are rather vindictive and make me not want to purchase anything they produce.

I see no evidence that Stryker Entertainment had anything to do with this thread. There's no way any business would accept a public apology from a random 1-post account; that's not meaningful in any way to anybody. A meaningful apology needs to cost something, whether the cost is emotional, social or financial. Especially in this case, as we all agree that it sounds forced because it sounds insincere.

 

[oldgeezer]

I failed to acknowledge the damages I had caused both the company and the model by doing so.

This sounds odd to me. I can see it being proven that you caused damage to the producer from potential sales loss. The question would just be putting a number on the potential sales. Did they also prove you caused damage to the model? I am guessing the model was paid by the hour for making the video and not a percentage of the sales. The model making a video, intended for sale, wouldn't have much of a complaint that someone actually saw the video.

 

[Blue Soda]

I see no evidence that Stryker Entertainment had anything to do with this thread. There's no way any business would accept a public apology from a random 1-post account; that's not meaningful in any way to anybody. A meaningful apology needs to cost something, whether the cost is emotional, social or financial. Especially in this case, as we all agree that it sounds forced because it sounds insincere.

Hey, that very well may be the case. Personally, I'm not really familiar with anything Stryker has produced or how they conduct business. My comment was more broadly directed at these public apologies, that to me, seem very contrived. In the past there's been references made about producers who demanded these apologies as a condition of their settlement. Whether or not that's the case here, I don't know and perhaps I wrongly assumed it was.

 

[weezl]

This sounds odd to me. I can see it being proven that you caused damage to the producer from potential sales loss. The question would just be putting a number on the potential sales. Did they also prove you caused damage to the model? I am guessing the model was paid by the hour for making the video and not a percentage of the sales. The model making a video, intended for sale, wouldn't have much of a complaint that someone actually saw the video.

It was posted on pornhub and subsequently the model was outed by friends, family or coworkers. Now she has to deal with the consequences

 

[laughinggaszone]

It was posted on pornhub and subsequently the model was outed by friends, family or coworkers. Now she has to deal with the consequences

If that's the case, it's unfortunate, but it's largely a naive model and a producer not giving the model enough warning. I've scared off plenty of models from this genre that I knew were so incredibly naive. They had zero clue what they were getting into and what a pandora's box adult and fetish videos are. It also doesn't help that some fans of the clips and or models have zero clue how much grief they can cause models with some of the things they do. It's not even on their radar. I mentioned this in another thread. I get emails asking me for a model's real names and contact info (addresses, phone #, email ect). So the idea of posting stuff, especially stuff that's no longer available doesn't register to a lot of fans.

 

[oldgeezer]

It was posted on pornhub and subsequently the model was outed by friends, family or coworkers. Now she has to deal with the consequences

So her friends, family, or coworkers accidentally stumbled upon pornhub and found her videos. Did they claim they were looking for stupid cat videos and think they were on youtube. How do you get paid to make a video that will be for sale to as many people as the producer can sell it to and expect that no one will see it. The piracy is unfortunate and a vast number of mostly men like to feel sorry for the mostly female models. But if they are truly being outed for a tickling video and had no clue this could happen it's probably a good thing this happens before they do something far worse on camera that they regret.

 

[tickletherapist]

He or she should be tickled to tears for this crime!

Haha, that's fair! 🙂

 

[firegod86]

I like Asshat more. Has a certain ring to it.

 

[Rage]

So slightly off topic. There's no way a producer can guarantee that a model's reputation will be safe if her face is recorded and the video is online. I've wondered do producers tell models of the risks? Like "just so you know, I'll do everything to keep this video behind a paywall, but there's always a risk someone might post it to Pornhub and distribute it which may out you to friends and family."

 

[laughinggaszone]

So slightly off topic. There's no way a producer can guarantee that a model's reputation will be safe if her face is recorded and the video is online. I've wondered do producers tell models of the risks? Like "just so you know, I'll do everything to keep this video behind a paywall, but there's always a risk someone might post it to Pornhub and distribute it which may out you to friends and family."

I used to, when I dealt with fresh faced models. I started dealing only with pros, so they already were involved and knew the score. A few times I've had models contact me, years later, and ask me to retire a video. I once had a very naive model ask me how she could remove her videos from the internet. She meant the whole internet.

 

[Phineas]

This sounds odd to me. I can see it being proven that you caused damage to the producer from potential sales loss. The question would just be putting a number on the potential sales. Did they also prove you caused damage to the model? I am guessing the model was paid by the hour for making the video and not a percentage of the sales. The model making a video, intended for sale, wouldn't have much of a complaint that someone actually saw the video.

It may not hurt the model directly, but it definitely hurts her indirectly. If a particular model doesn't bring in enough income to at least break even on her shoot, the producer is not going to hire her again. Pirating all of her videos thus means she will no longer get any work.

 

[Coda]

Just don't post people's content in ways they didn't intend or don't want. People really sink care and skill into stuff they create for other people's enjoyment. Whether it's a purchase or not, whether there are legal terms or not, respecting people's intentions is just part of getting along – especially within a specialized community. If they express it's fine to repost, share or make derivative work, then yay.

 

[oldgeezer]

It may not hurt the model directly, but it definitely hurts her indirectly. If a particular model doesn't bring in enough income to at least break even on her shoot, the producer is not going to hire her again. Pirating all of her videos thus means she will no longer get any work.

I'll by this as a reasonable explanation.
And if Tasha returned to tickling I would return to buying her videos even if they were available for free.

 

[Tenebrae]

So her friends, family, or coworkers accidentally stumbled upon pornhub and found her videos. Did they claim they were looking for stupid cat videos and think they were on youtube. How do you get paid to make a video that will be for sale to as many people as the producer can sell it to and expect that no one will see it. [...] But if they are truly being outed for a tickling video and had no clue this could happen it's probably a good thing this happens before they do something far worse on camera that they regret.

I wholeheartedly agree with this, and it never ceases to baffle me. Piracy aside, these videos are essentially plastered all over the Internet for the world to see. And outside of the clip itself, there are free previews here, with pictures, full body shots and whatnot. That people eventually see them is the logical consequence, and I think those models who complain afterwards should have known better.

However, that is no excuse for the piracy, loss of profit for the producer or even worse: assholes making money using someone else's work, by reselling those clips. THAT is truly outrageous.

I once had a very naive model ask me how she could remove her videos from the internet. She meant the whole internet.

I do not wanna brag because I am pretty naive too when it comes to the professional aspect of the tickling world, as you have yourself verified on that Priya post. But if I were you, I think silly me would have gone with an answer along the lines of: "Oh simple: all you need to do is to detonate an EMP device in Google's sever room, and voilà!" 😀

 

[Dolphingirl9]

copyright trolls are only that, throw that letter from the cable company in the trash, and the ensuing 4-6 that they send. too expensive to actually pursue legal action for niche whack-off material. then stop pirating all together dumb dumbs

 

[laughinggaszone]

I do not wanna brag because I am pretty naive too when it comes to the professional aspect of the tickling world, as you have yourself verified on that Priya post. But if I were you, I think silly me would have gone with an answer along the lines of: "Oh simple: all you need to do is to detonate an EMP device in Google's sever room, and voilà!" 😀

I just told her to watch the end of Fight Club.

 

[sniper]

Just commenting out of geekiness and curiosity, but what sort of tech lets you trace a particular clip purchase back to someone? I'm guessing something automatically encrypted in each download?

 

[SharonP]

Everyone on the Internet just read that as:

Just commenting out of fear of being caught, b-b-but what sort of tech lets you trace a particular clip purchase b-b-back to someone? (*shivering and shaking*) I'm guessing something automatically encrypted in each download?

 

[oldgeezer]

Everyone on the Internet just read that as:

Not true. They could not have committed copy right infringement but still be curious. If they did commit copy right infringement they could not have a fear because they used a pre-paid credit card. Even if caught they could reasonably claim someone hacked their computer. Even top level government employees have had their computers hacked.

I can appreciate the fact that piracy is hurting the business and do not condone it.
However, the anonymous forced apology still seems odd to me.

 

[MalevolentCha0s]

I can appreciate the fact that piracy is hurting the business and do not condone it.

It is, but sooner or later the community needs to adapt rather than just continuing to demonize those who frequent tube sites, as if a large majority of this board isn't guilty of the same thing. I myself used to sink lots of money into C4S, but it no longer makes sense to frequently buy clips at $10-$15 a pop, when it'll be elsewhere for free in a few days or a week. You can flame me for that, but I'm just being honest, and I'm far from the only one.

Not to say that producers shouldn't keep going after those distributing material illegally. But it's a game of whack-a-mole that can never be fully won, and eventually we have to look to other industries (movies, music, etc) to see how they curbed piracy. The formula there has always been the same: make content accessible and cheap, and people will pay for it. Which is why subscription services like Spotify, Apple Music, Netflix, Hulu, Prime, etc are all thriving.

Would the same thing not work in our community? I'm not talking about individual membership sites, which still miss the mark. They're too pricey to buy more than one or two subs, and people can still download your videos and re-upload them elsewhere. But what about a C4S-style site that for ~$15 a month, I can access and stream clips from any stores? If a few of the top producers worked together on an initiative like that, I think you'd see a lot of subscribers...and without being able to download the MP4s, a lot less piracy.

I know that's a lot easier said than done, but it's not 2007 anymore, and I don't think the C4S model works today. Very few people are willing to drop $35 for half an hour of content when they can go to Pornhub and find the same videos for free. We can "tssk tssk" at that all we want, but if we really want to stop it, we have to create incentive for buying clips again.

 

[tickles4fun]

I am sure the settlement referenced here had more terms than just this apology so I am glad the company went after the guy.

I also disagree with Malevolent, I think the model is fine. If you see something you want, you pay for it and you have it. It doesn't seem like the stream model would make enough money for such a small niche like we are. I see it works well for bigger players though like HBO Go or the like.