nylon tickling piracy

[ftkl_haha]

You buy a movie, show it to your family and show it to your friends - that is within the personal rights use. You start giving copies away, you qualify for matching chrome bracelets and new accommodations with interesting folks, also in extended detention.

IMHO, pirating our expensively produced video clips is the "I take no responsibility for my own decision to NOT respect the producer's intellectual property rights" that has already driven several tickle video producers out of the market for good.

It's the kind of thinking that gets you lots of support in China from the growth black market of counterfeiters.

It's illegal and we all know it. But some try to rationalize it.

This month alone, my expenses to hire models is more than $2,900.

Making this stuff costs us actual money, not philosophical pretzeling.

I've heard some people try to rationalize piracy of our content by saying producers are too greedy. It's the same rationalization and mental drivel we heard from the "occupy wall street" gang, who view themselves as the arbiters of how much a company should make. I considered them to be chronically off their meds.

I've actually considered developing a video encapsulating format to allows producers to serialze video clips and disable them remotely if they are played from more than 1 IP address (within a given time span). Unlike those who jibber-jabber professionally, I've developed private video formats in the past.

Don't worry. I know what I write is the online equivalent of pissing in the wind. I just wanted to put it here as a dissenting counter-weight to what I view as irresponsible and destructive commentary.

JD

Good to see an intelligent, real-world breakdown of this issue. What so many fail to realize is why piracy hurts fetish producers so much. Each producer is a small business (very small, actually) that doesn't have
very deep pockets, despite appearances. Hearing that a producer makes $5K - $6K a month, tickling hot chicks, sounds less ideal, when you discover that they might spend $2K - $3K on independent contractors (models).
Add piracy to that equation and calculate the potential loss of sales, based on the illegally-posted content that's out there and ... well, it stings a bit.

Yes, sometimes that content attracts new customers, but the harm outweighs the benefits, especially when things like chargebacks (mostly from identity thieves and pirates using stolen credit card info) are factored in. Anyone who doubts this should ask Sergio of Body and Sole, Inc. why he isn't able to produce anymore.

Good to hear that you're working on a solution, JD. A fix that would enable producers to protect their content, without making said content inconvenient for the consumer (Anyone remember DRM encoding? Yuck!), would be most welcome.

 

[shark]

Uploaded versions of tickle clips are an old problem on youtube as well. I couldn't be bothered with an uploaded preview, but the full clips are something else entirely. Clip producers might as well camp out over there.

I do have a question that I'm not sure has been answered. How do piracy laws and/or policies apply to someone who wants to sell a collection of clips to another party, similar to selling other personal property?

 

[Oddjob0226]

I served as the subject matter expert for legal teams in the US, Canada and Australia on this issue class.

As I never intimated nor said that I am a lawyer, the question of 'case law' does not apply. I have been a technical advising member to cases involving tri-forcation, patents, Islamic finance, trademarks, copyrights and intellectual properties.

So no, I am not quoting the above mentioned cases.

JD

?????? But you're not webfiend - from whom I took my quote, and whom I'm addressing.

And, we're on the same side.

Arguing the same point.

And I've done stuff, too.

So ??????

 

[jmsdarke]

Snapnuts I love seeing your wife tickled. Wish I could tickle her myself sometime. Please make more clips of you tickling her.

Funny! I didn't know "Snapnutts" was somone's handle on here.

My apologies for grabbing Mr. "Snapnuts" ticklish wife shout out.

JD

 

[dskodj]

(Anyone remember DRM encoding? Yuck!)

Indeed...all DRM content I ever bought is now worthless and was money down the toilet as I can't ever view those 7 - 8 yr old clips again (I have several on back up discs that are now useless). Was the biggest rip off in the history of jackin off LOL

 

[webfiend]

Producers, as much as you guys worry about the piracy thing, I think a bigger issue might be unimaginative content and people just getting bored with your stuff. I myself find some of this getting tired and old pretty quick. Especially when I see the same models show up in 50 different places. Then this just becomes overplayed and lame. I do wish you all good luck in finding a solution for this. While you can't stop it yet, bear in mind that most of the clips are not getting pirated, so I might just concentrate on stopping the big sellers, let the lame ones go, it may bring you customers.

 

[Oddjob0226]

.... and if turns out that this ruins it as a business, so be it.

May I ask what case law you are quoting that used the "so be it defense" in regards to a legal business having their intellectual property used in an unlicensed way?

You're not arguing Booth vs. Look Magazine, are you? Or quoting The Dodd Files decision, correct?

 

[webfiend]

I am not sure what you are talking about here oddjob, what I am saying is that, if this model for business is not sustainable, then you go out of business. Once you release the clip, its mine to do with as i see fit. The owners don't retain a right to direct me as to how to use it, unless stated up front when purchasing, and I agree to it. I invite 100 friends into my house to view the clip, that is my right to do it. I do not need to purchase or charge a fee to be payable to the producer of the clip. That one could do the exact same thing on the internet is the point of all of this. I sympathize with the producers on this, and if it makes things such that you can't stay in business, then so be it. I am merely presenting the other side of this argument and pretty effectively I might add. Quoting licensing and other unrealistic crap does not change the argument. Kim dot com smacked the shit out of the govt on this, he was completely right. No one can realistically change this. Quoting morality is not the point, its happening, and there is not much one can do about it. I hope someone comes up with some middle ground that works, but it appears unlikely so far. Thats all this is, nothing more.