Warning
-
Due to our receiving a multitude of takedown requests regarding material you have uploaded, your upload privileges are hereby revoked for 90 days.
This is a bit absurd. The whole website contains a lot of copyrighted material.
It happens.
no upload for 90 days?
Who made this rule? -
@TonyManero75-0 did u post film911?
-
@TonyManero75-0 No warning that all your uploads were getting DMCA'd? Or was it a case of your uploads were getting removed and you kept reposting them (or reposting files from the same source/studio)?
In all honesty, I can't help but wonder if it would be beneficial to have a viewable list of material that's been removed due to DMCA so that members can actually KNOW what shouldn't be uploaded.
-
@frostycab I expect there are good reasons the site owners don't have a list, as well as good reasons they don't share more about that or host discussion of it.
-
@TonyManero75-0 I have already stated how useless this rule is. It doesn't benefit the community, it doesn't bennefit the staff and it doesn't benefit the copyright owner. The only thing it does is harm the user who's put effort into feeding content into the site.
Other people who have donwnloaded will eventually notice that said content's absence and re-upload them and get some ratio boost and even some seedbonus. It might or might not be removed again, and the user might or might not be punished.
Can't even say it's an arbitrary rule, I think it's pretty much objective... The only issue it serves no purpose other than punishing the people who are actively helping the community grow, because as I said before, not a single person/entity benefits from that rule. The amount of DMCA requests will not decrease because of a few banned users.
But go and tell that to the site owner...
-
@tnar Yeah, that is a GREAT idea (being sarcastic). To have one's uploading privileges revoked for no specific reason, without any prior warning, with no chance to appeal, without a list of titles which are forbidden, without those DMCA takedowns being verified (I KNOW FOR FACT THAT THEY ARE NOT VERIFIED!!!).... All while the same titles remain on the site in other formats.
I have wondered why no content from Ru Paul and that type of video ever gets removed. That is absolutely copyrighted stuff broadcast on television - and is NOT pornographic. Porn cannot be copyrighted because porn is intrinsically illegal. For instance, if someone steals your television, that is a crime. If someone steals your cocaine, that is NOT a crime. Ru Paul's content is legal, and therefore has a valid copyright. Just because someone SAYS something has a copyright on it, does not make it so.
Imagine if real copyrights were enforced. If that were true, they would have to arrest everybody who ever copied a page out of a book at a pubic. library.
The reason for copyrights is primarily to protect a company from having their product copied and SOLD - such as Apple Computers being cloned and sold as Peach computers. It also prevents people from reproducing recordings of music and mainstream movies and selling them. While rarely enforced, even sharing music and mainstream music can get one in trouble. Since porn is illegal, it is impossible to enforce any alleged copyright infringments, and never have.
Someone posted a couple of days ago about getting threatened by the FlavaWorks studio. Anybody who has watched a FlavaWorks video has already been punished enough! What garbage!
Stand by - ignorant, snarky replies to my message to follow.
-
@lololulu19 said in Warning:
Stand by - ignorant, snarky replies to my message to follow.
Stand by - Informed response to ignorant, snarky message to follow:
@lololulu19 said in Warning:
Porn cannot be copyrighted because porn is intrinsically illegal.
Fuck me sideways, are you still trying to bang that drum???? You've tried to argue this before and been given numerous reasons why you're wrong.
@lololulu19 said in Warning:
The reason for copyrights is primarily to protect a company from having their product copied and SOLD
Surprisingly, you're almost heading in the right direction with this one, but you're wrong about the "sold" part. In truth the copyright protects the value of the creator's product. Taking your example. If Apple computers were cloned and given away that would detract from Apple's market. A doesn't care if B gives or sells B's own products away, but if B starts to give away copies of A's product then that adversely affects A's market, so of course copyright has a place here even if the product isn't sold.
Taste the rainbow! Eat crayons!
-
@frostycab ... There is a mute or block button from the user profiile, instead of feeding the trolls ...
-
@john32123666 Yes, but somebody needs to try to edjumucate them somehow...
Taste the rainbow! Eat crayons!
-
@frostycab I doubt he'll ever become edjumakated but I think occasionally pointing out the ridiculous fallacies, of whatever happens to be in his addled mind that makes it past his keyboard, serves a marginal benefit in that he is not taken seriously by other community members..
-
@jrewingwanna plus, his postings are occasionally (unintentionally) amusing.
-
To those who dispute what I have repeatedly said about DMCA, I would remind you that if I were NOT correct, then this site would not exist!
I believe it was about 10 years ago, this site vanished for about 3 months because of the DMCA issue. When it was determined that the things I have mentioned were correct, the site returned.
-
@lololulu19 LOL. Because we know your theory is the only possible explanation...
-
Shit? Porn isn't copyrightable?
I'll tell you what I'm going to have to do, I'm going to have to go back to the High Court in London and tell them that nasty man from that nasty studio was wrong when he obtained a judgment for £35,000 for infringing on his copyright a few years ago.
I wonder if they'll accept the word of some random internet dude. I hope so otherwise my legal fees will be massive.
I mean, he never got his money, despite sending HCE officers out to where he thought I lived, but still... now I have heard the gospel from random internet dude #3492813131 I'll be able to get it all reversed!
-
@tnar imagine if he were to find out out that there are other torrent sites, that have been around for years, that focus specifically on mainstream movies and broadcast & premium tv shows which he thinks is sole scope DCMA... the remaining logic circuit would melt.
-
@frostycab said in Warning:
No warning that all your uploads were getting DMCA'd?
I've had a few torrents taken down for DMCA reasons, but I always get a polite note from the mods saying what's happened and that my identify is safe. After a while, I realised what studios were on this warpath, and I've avoided uploading from them since. I do grab their material if someone else posts it
-
@TonyManero75-0 said in Warning:
no upload for 90 days?
Who made this rule?In accordance to DMCA POLICY AND PROCEDURES
The site has the right to terminate the account of repeat copyright infringers -
Referenced by
john32123666
