egafd.com

Do you really think that putting material in members only sections protects it?
What about hackers, or for that matter, people who pay the sub. then download it.

Mart

Hi Tomsk,

Long time lurker, first time poster. Be gentle with me

There are several sides to this argument. Fundamentally, no-one (on this forum anyway) could be against the Supreme Court's decision to bounce the COPA (again). It's a draconian piece of fundamentalist nonsense, wrapped up in the "Won't Anyone Think Of The Children?" banner that most such garbage is parcelled in these days. It has nothing to do with free porn, and everything to do with supressing free speech.

Your issue (I think) is to do with your business case in an enivronment where information is widely disseminated with no regard to copyright or recompense. And for that there is no easy answer - just ask the Nazis at the RIAA who basically want our first-born to be able to listen to whatever manufactured pap they think we should be spending our hard-earned.

Your quote - "The moment free porn is destroyed is the moment we get rid of the idiots on the internet" - is informative. You're referring to the person that shared your photoshoot on Usenet? It's easy for me, whose livelihood is not dependent on such things, to offer an opinion, but there are opportunities too. You may have lost money on the photoshoot, but as the photos wend their way around the world your name will be on them, as will Ms. Hermansen - who's to say that won't open up new opportunities for you or your model? Who's to say that won't open up new revenue streams? Okay - awkward to sell that one to the bank when you have a mortgage payment due but the business model for anything is always changing.

I can only offer my opinion. I've freely partaken of the riches the internet offers. I've made my decisions as to what I like and I've subscribed to those places that meet my needs. This was radically different to the way I consumed my porn 10 years ago (hell, even 5 years ago) - why should the business model not also change? I accept that some may not do this, but when was it ever different?

Okay - so no answers there then Just an opinion ...

Mikey

Which is why you will never ever get any money from me. I'm not paying good money to 'rent' a video from you.

If people want to copy your stuff DRM is no hindrance. I already know of programs that will make a copy of a DRM enabled video with the protection stripped off. Its not a case of cracking the DRM algorithm either, just a matter of playing it and copying the output.
That and the completely stupid way that members passwords have to be kept on a server mean that the people presently putting your stuff on the net will still be putting your stuff on the net but the ordinary joe will just be cheesed off with this DRM nonsense.

The other thing that needs to be mentioned is if you get rid of the free content you won't get any members. No one is going to join a site when they can't see what they are getting first. Look at how the american web sites do it, seems to work well enough for them. Danni.com seems to have things under control and they do offer free stuff for new visitors. The people who run cumfiesta.com, Milfhunter.com etc offer pages and pages of sample movies and pics before you get to the join page. You also get access to all their sites for one membership fee. They don't seem to have the problems mentioned above. Though Danni.com do have a clever system where you can only view their members only videos by getting licence after you download. But they do offer free content before you have to decide whether to join or now.


NeilUK

I agree to that. I certainly won't join any site that has no free content or a decent sneak peek.
By the reasoning of removing free content to prevent idiots, if you stopped doing trailers or any press release for regular films, do you honestly think that as many people would go to a cinema and pay for tickets for films that they'd know so little about? And I suppose that taping music off the radio ratehr than buying the single is wrong as well?

Anyhow this censorship malarkey is testament to the phrase "the only price of freedom is tolerance".