egafd.com

don't aggree at all mate.
So what your saying is that if i went and copied loads of Phils videos and then gave them away free on the street, then that would be ok as i was not making money out of it. When people get pissed at webmasters nicking pics its not the fact that the webmaster is making money from the product its that they are not.

Phil, What i said about webmasters being naive was aimed at new webmasters who see 'this pic is believed to be public domain' all over these free sites - that in turn perpetuates the idea that images can exist in the public domain, which, unless pre 1910 porn floats your boat is most certainly not the case.
And er, send you what down...?

copies are everywhere today,porn,videos,clothes etc but the internet gives access to original quality music,porn and films people who have internet would be stupid not to take advantage of this.

i'm with you on this one oid,what does a court case in the usa have to do with us.

if somebody has a site with copyrighted pics and is asked to close it by whoever.

1.the copyright owner will not get paid whatever
2.the webmaster just moves url/host and point 1 happens
3.the webmaster closes his site and point 1 happens
4.the webmaster "gives" his pics to someone else point 1 happens
5.the webmaster deletes the photos and point 1 happens
6.the copyright owner gets a lawyer involved costs him loads and point 1 happens
7.the copyright owner goes off on one, wastes his time moaning about how they are a victim when they should thinking of new ways of using their stuff,oh and point 1 happens.

you cant stop it and we can now download videos thanks to broadband


failure is the opportunity to begin again more intelligently

oh well seems like the end of the web as we know it no more screen caps, no more scans from adult mags, no more newsgroups, I do not think so, who could govern the web, who has the time, the money to go about all this, as far as I am concerned this could only happen in America, the land of the lawsuits, but will probably hit this fair land round about 10 years time, but wasn?t the world wide web made to share information, pictures, scans, stories ...

Buttsie wrote:
>
> The right click and save as i see is a minor point its what
> you do with the pics. if they can stop right click & save on
> pics why not the page?

If you can see a pic in your browser then there's just about always a way you can save it. It is possible to add a few hurdles, but just about impossible to stop completely. A disabled right click is very trivial to get round for example.

what's your position Phil? Do you own the copyright to anything on this site? Do you own the copyright to the words I am writing?(I own the copyright I think - I can save this text(after creating it) )

Yeah, He bought and paid for all the shots he got from me! (one of the few!) Thanks again Phil.

The reason they are so keen to give it away for free is it never cost them fuck all, Like I said do the crime do the time. Nick my stuff or sell downloads without my permision and I will close your site down in hours and thats just the start. If you want something pay for it. I give loads of freebies away if I get a bad tape back I alway send two back plus extras. Fair is fair guys like John can only survive if they make a small profit over a long time on their photos, don't grudge them making a living.
Anyway I would alway rather buy the real McCoy from a producer cause I likes my porn best quality I can get it,,,Live in front of me is best and that costs meg-bucks,


>>>>>ben,rocco,fuck truck,strand<<<<<<tell me where?????????

Phil McC

Haven't heard such crap for a long time. Zasuna, are you completely without common sense or morals?

A copyright holder owns the material and HE ALONE can sell it, give it away, hoard it for future gernarations, keep it to himself, or whatever. It's not yours, it's his. Just like his car, you can just steal it.

It's a CRIMINAL as well as a civil offence to steal copyright material. Webmasters who make a habit of theft will (once the internet becomes more recognised as a legitimate part of society) be jailed for their activities. And none too soon.

Someone above mentioned Model Release conditions. Quite right. If the photographer agrees not to publish a model's photos in her own country (for example), and some bastard scans it from a foreign magazine and plasters it over the net, what would the model think of the (innocent) photographer? She is entitled to sue him!

It's quite simple, if you are an honest guy (as I'm sure most Forum contributors are) then don't steal anything from the net. Encourage photographers to create their own sites and visit these. The copyright owner will make a buck and spend it on producing more of the material we all want.

Pete

PS Can we start a "NAME & SHAME" area listing sites blatantly selling stolen copyright material, either in their paysites or videos by mail order, etc?

Your 100% right, Phil. Shut the bastards down, or better still sue them. One day the authorities will accept this activity as theft and a PRISON TERM will be handed down. The sooner the better. That will give them food for thought. It will also make Service Providers more wary of sites they manage, as they can be charged with aiding and abetting.

In my view every contract between ISPs and their service users should have a written agreement that users are not displaying or dealing in stolen material. ISPs should then provide copyright holders with the identy and address of users who are shown to be in breach of this condition.

Pete