Posting Of Pay Site Images - All Read.

[seanchai]

Please don't post more than 3 photos from any one set of a the below sites here. As producers, we work very hard and spend a lot of money to produce the content we do and as a fan myself, I certainly understand why you want to show off the content and share it. However, this is detrimental not only to our companies, but to the models, the fans and ultimately the production of TS porn in general as well as the welfare of this site and opening the possibility of the site and yourself, to legal action - something we'd not want to do, hence the requests here.

We allow forums and fans to use a small amount of content as it helps forums like this generate members and in turn, sell our sites which keeps them active and alive as they make money from each sale, which covers the servers and expenses. However, when you post massive amounts, people don't need to join a site and therefore everybody loses money - and the productions WILL stop or slow down ... then what will we all be jerking off to?

Independent producers like Grooby, or Bobs-Tgirls, Krissy4u, DeliaTS, HotWendyWilliams work on small budgets that rely on membership levels to allow us to continue to produce and remain profitable and a massive amount of our budgets go directly back into models fees.

So, I'd like to ask you all to please, refrain from posting links to tube sites showing stolen content, uploaded content, showing more than 3 photos from any one set from a website (and multiple users showing 3 photos each would be a breach of that rule) and to respect our property rights.

If you want to see more content, then please go to a site whose product you like, take a look at their tours and their membership options, and join.

Thank you.
seanchai

CLARIFICATION ADDED 09 OCT - IF YOU WISH TO POST THE IMAGES FROM CONTENT SPECIFICALLY GIVEN BY THE SITES FOR MARKETING, THEN THAT IS FINE. THIS SHOULD FIT INTO THE 15 IMAGES PER SET, DEEMED AS FAIR BY THE FORUM OWNERS. THIS DOES NOT MEAN YOU CAN TAKE ANY 15 IMAGES FROM THE MEMBERS SITE OR OTHER FREE/STOLEN CONTENT SITES

for
http://www.shemaleyum.com
http://www.black-tgirls.com
http://www.shemale-pornstar.com
http://www.brazilian-transsexuals.com
http://www.franks-tgirlworld.com
http://www.bobs-tgirls.com
http://www.shemales-from-hell.com
http://www.shemalepornstar.com
http://www.transexdomination.com
http://www.zoefuckpupper.com
http://www.straponjane.com
http://www.deliats.com
http://www.kimsanalheaven.com
http://www.clubcrossdresser.com
http://www.lucimay.com
http://www.karentvslut.com
http://www.candilovedoll.com
http://www.nylonbitchyvette.com
http://www.kirstystgplayground.com
http://www.latinatranny.com
http://www.shemale-club.com
http://www.kimberjames.com
http://www.kellyshore.com
http://www.mariammicol.com
http://www.tsfoxxy.com
http://www.tsjesse.com
http://www.hotwendywilliams.com
http://www.interracialtgirlsex.com
http://www.privatetranssexual.com
http://www.jasminejewels.com
http://www.mandymitchell.com
http://www.natassiadreams.com
http://www.hazeltucker.com

[Jenae LaTorque]

Hi, I can appreciate your self interest here. I would like you to clarify something for all of us. Pretty much all of these picture do come from pay sites as the originating source. I, for one, have never contributed a single penny to a paysite directly. I may have some pics that did come from one directly through the sharing on this forum and others, but primarily the vast bulk of my files are from "gratis" sites. Are you asserting that we should not post more than 3 pics from a shoot when there is a free web page that shows up to twenty? In my mind, I see those pictures as paid for since we have to endure the advertising, pop ups, and other miscellania that accompany them.

Final Question:lol: Do you consider the pics from the "free" sites as falling under your request?

[seanchai]

Hi, I can appreciate your self interest here. I would like you to clarify something for all of us. Pretty much all of these picture do come from pay sites as the originating source. I, for one, have never contributed a single penny to a paysite directly. I may have some pics that did come from one directly through the sharing on this forum and others, but primarily the vast bulk of my files are from "gratis" sites. Are you asserting that we should not post more than 3 pics from a shoot when there is a free web page that shows up to twenty? In my mind, I see those pictures as paid for since we have to endure the advertising, pop ups, and other miscellania that accompany them.

Final Question:lol: Do you consider the pics from the "free" sites as falling under your request?

If you've grabbed those photos from "free" sites you haven't paid for them - I'm dreadfully sorry you had to endure advertising and pop-ups but that content was more likely than not, stolen and the producers or models, saw not a penny.
If it was from legal content released by the producers ie; FHG sites, then view than there and please don't repose more than 3 shots from any one set, here.
Thanks hope this clarifies for you. Maybe you'd want to consider contributing a few pennies to a website directly?

[ladyboyadmirer]

Please don't post more than 3 photos from any one set of a Grooby site here. So, I'd like to ask you all to please, refrain from posting links to tube sites showing stolen content, uploaded content, showing more than 3 photos from any one set from a website (and multiple users showing 3 photos each would be a breach of that rule) and to respect our property rights.

Hello Seanchai,

I fully understand your point but I personally thought we were actually promoting your sites by posting the promo pics. This forum has a rule that forbids members to post full 'sets' of models or video clips over 9 mins. This is to ensure that the 'copyrights' of the pics etc you are speaking of, are not violated. Also members are asked to mention the site to promote the producer. I personally respect that and I do know that the cost of running such websites are astronomical because Ive often exchanged mails with the site owners that I have been a member of.

But my question is: Are you saying that we should only post 3 pics that are shown in the original site, even when there are sometimes 50 or more in the preview sections, because otherwise the members will lose interest to look the site up and take the tour?

Im sure the majority of members do not wish to infringe on your property rights and will take your request into consideration.

By the way, thanks for that list of sites you posted and of course, your efforts regarding the Grooby sites.

Regards Lba

[seanchai]

Hi Lba
All we're asking is for 3 images from each set not each site. Not even each model! I don't know many companies which show more than this small amount in a tour.
Whilst the forum might ask members to abide by rules, quite simply, not everyone has the same respect as you.
The Linetrap/Harley Quinn post has had full sets of ours posted and links to the whole video on *******.com Another poster has posted about 40 images from the same set of Chrissy.

We work diligently on our own promotions and we like and respect forums like this, which is why the websites do allow so much of their content to be used but ultimately showing too much is hurting producers too much.
Regards
Steven

[Jenae LaTorque]

I am a bit affronted by your tone. You use the word "grabbed" instead of "downloaded" which implies I took them like some kind of thief. No I did not grab them; I downloaded pics that were freely offered. There are hundreds of web sites out there with links to gallery pages. Once you go to these pages, you are then free in most cases to download the pics there. Kinda like a free samples page from the producer who is hoping you will go their pay site and join. To this end, there is advertising and a link provided.

Example - I go to one of my favorites: http://www.maxshemales.com/main.shtml (http://www.maxshemales.com/main.shtml). There I find numerous links to other free hosting gallery pages along with many pages of samples. I pick out one I wish to look at and go there; in this case it is http://galleries.hotwendywilliams.com/gallery/t=british/s=47lisa/i=1834419 (http://galleries.hotwendywilliams.com/gallery/t=british/s=47lisa/i=1834419) which is one of yours. Since she is acceptable, I download the pics. And I am done there. Nowhere do I see a claim of copyright which forbids the further dissemination of the pics. The closest thing is that each pic has a small logo on it which says Hot Wendy Productions on it.

Now are you trying to tell me that none of your income is derived from the benefits of this process. Are you saying that you don't have new paying members join as a result of these free pics? Of course not. Whether I join or not is irrelevant, many do. And we will not even get into the subject of cookies, trojans, malware, etc that are foisted onto site visitors without their knowledge. Not saying your sites do this, but many sites do. As you well know, this forum has a rule limiting the number of pics and asks members to identify the site they came from. That is sufficient. And fair.

For you to come on here and plead for a lower limit is ridiculous. I say if you don't like, it then limit your distributed free pics to 3 per shoot. That would be a surefire way to ensure your aim here. I seriously doubt you are willing to do this in the competative market you are in. I also doubt whether the amount of sharing here affects your business all that much, in fact I would guess it is microscopic in figures.

Final words:

"I think you are barking up the wrong tree"

and

"Why buy the cow when you are happy with the free milk."

P.S. While I was composing this, I see other posts have been made. I will agree with you that the posting of material by members who have joined your sites and then proceed to post what I assume is copywrited and restricted material is ethically wrong. I would also agree that you have the right to try and stop these actions. I suggest you concentrate you efforts at your own sites. Perhaps you could encode information in the digital information of each pic that would allow you to identify the culprits; or would that be too cost prohibitive?

[seanchai]

Jenae
Whether you like my tone or not is irrelevant.
Let me explain to you as your obviously unaware of intellectual copyright law so you may better understand it and won't have to appear so ignorant in arguing against it.

The sample you gave:
http://galleries.hotwendywilliams.com/gallery/t=british/s=47lisa/i=1834419

All those photos belong to Wendy Williams. She has produced these galleries for her affiliates to make sales to her sites. Nobody has permission to steal those images, from her server and post them elsewhere. It's theft and any host that puts those images up, can be punishable by law. Most companies affiliate programs have strict Terms and Conditions on the usage of material.

This content is NOT free. You can watch an advertisement on TV which based on your argument is "free" but you cannot take the content of that advertisement and use it to your own purposes.

There does not have to be a copyright statement on a page. Wendy holds the intellectual copyright to that content.

I don't care what YOU think is sufficient and fair. I'm asking for people to respect producers copyright, including our own and show a fair amount of images. YOU are technically breaking the law if you upload content that doesn't belong to you.

I respect your opinions if you don't think this would make a difference to our business but I've been very successful in this business for over 12 years and in my opinion, it does make a difference and that's what I'm asking for the help of the board. More aggressive companies or companies who aren't part of the tgirl culture may simply DMCA the owners of this board and demand that all content must be removed - and the owners, legally, would be forced to oblige.

If you don't like that, then just don't post anything.

[rockabilly]

I think the 3 pic rule is reasonable. If you like a certain girl and want to post pics to help promote her then just do three from one set then three from another to show variety. The more exposure she gets then the more fans and members will join pay sites. Just use the rule of three.

[LeeIII]

I must say Wendy is very pretty:drool:

[violet lightning]

Seanchai,
I read your post, and while I can understand and appreciate your basic statement, I do think you are possibly being a little unrealistic and you definitely sound a little snarkey and rude to other members of this forum who like you, are just trying to voice their opinion and perhaps engage in some dialog with you on this subject.
Are you saying that by law no one should be to allowed to repost any material from any of your sites?

I have been a paying member of some of your sites, and I have never posted any full set (or even much content-there are so many other sites out there). Most of us just post our favorite pics from each set or girl.
But I am confused a little. I see dozens of promo free sets on all kinds of freebie sites(each with up to 10 or more pics) that change daily, and I assume that those are free for anyone to download. Are those free pages done without your permission? If not, do you expect people to just download the same 3 pics only from a free page of 10 or more pics? Thats absurd. Why even have teaser or free pages at all? (because, I suspect, that its good for your business)

Like our posts, the preview pages aren't the full sets, just teasers. If you want the really good pics, you need to join, (as many do). In a forum like this, eventually people can post enough pics from various sources, that maybe eventually there is almost a complete set, but this is pretty rare and happens with only the most popular girls.
I agree people should not post entire sets from the actual pay sites, but almost everyone here just posts freebies, or pics they have had for years.

I don't see any possible way you could limit any given set to 3 pics unless thats all you ever released on the free sites, and encoded any on the pay site so they could not be reposted. (you would also have to oversee what/who/how many pics get posted here and on every other forum)
("Porn Czar"?) or as you said, shut down every site that offends you.

Also, isn't it similar to TV/movie copyright? That is, I can tape anything I want on TV, radio, etc.for my own use, but I cannot re-sell it or rebroadcast it for profit. (that is , its OK for private use)
Isn't that similar to what we are doing? We are just posting pictures that we have for others enjoyment, and the site is free. Its also not exactly a major site. It took me years, and I just happened to stumble on this forum.
(so in the major scheme of things, is this site really taking away business from your sites, or is it all forums like this in their totallity?)
And are you posting this message on their forums as well?

(I do understand your "Why buy the cow, when you can get the milk for free" argument)...but
another phrase which comes to mind is "Your trying to close the barn door after the cow has escaped".

I would hate to see it happen, but it almost sounds like you would have to make it to where no pic can be downloaded unless you bought it. No freebies, only pages where you can see the pic, but could only download it/them if you became a member. (isn't that how some of the early sites worked?...or maybe didn't work..)

Perhaps you could try going after the main offenders who are posting complete sets or videos. Most of us here are respectful of the rules and appreciate what business people like yourself are trying to do. I support your sites, your intellectual rights, and your right to voice your concerns.
I hope you can appreciate what we are doing (and not doing) here as well.

[Jenae LaTorque]

The quote is from the character "Frenchy" in The Cotton Club movie.


So I did some research on copyrights, and I believe I now have a better grasp of the situation. Technically you are pretty much right, concerning the issue of copyright infringement, but I still think you are "barking up the wrong tree."


There are still a lot of "grey" areas in the matter of copyright infringement over the internet. You have several problems with your case:


1. Your Subject Matter - Your area is pornography, and to make matters worse, it is transgender porn which is even more repugnant to a large segment of the public. True, this should not matter in terms of the application of the law, but you know, as we all do, that justice is oftentimes not served when it comes to T-people. I don't expect that you will find a lot of sympathy out there for your plight. You will find more here as long as you are civil.


2. Proving Your Case - I can see where you may have a hard time proving damages here when you already have a multitude of porn images elsewhere availible on the internet for down loading free of charge. When it comes down to the numbers, the number of downloads here will be dwarved by the daily number of downloads at the original page. You will also need to prove that a significant number would have joined your site if they were unable to download the pics here.

As part of researching this subject I had to check out the Harley thread since I am not a fan of hers. And, I found that there are not really that many pics there. I am going to assume that there were a lot of them since you are bitchin' about it. That leads me to the conclusion that you have already coerced the site authorities into removing a great many of the disputed pics. If you did this solely on your own as a moderator, I suggest that there may be a "conflict of interest here." This would be further evidenced by the fact that I am aware of several threads where there are sets represented by many more pics than the 15 pic limit, and they have not been pruned or removed entirely.


3. The Question of Who is Liable - You suggested or threatened that you could hold us, the members of the forum, responsible for the copyright infringement. You know, or your lawyers should know, that this would be a very difficult road to follow since we are not the owners of the site. Now there are a whole lot of legal issues concerning that..... so, I won't go into that since you have lawyers for that. Suffice it to say, that most forum members have stayed within the requirements of the forum rules. You may have a case against members who posted pictures that they obtained as a member of your sites, but I think your case against those of us who simply posted pictures that are freely available is very weak at best, almost nil in fact.

:D Now I have a question here. By posting on here, did you solicit our opinions, and are you thus obligated to compensate me for my advice if you use it in any way to form your legal position. If you feel so, I would accept a free membership to the SM Club site:lol:

[ladyboyadmirer]

Hello Seanchai, Jenae, Violet lightning and fellow members,
I think I was the second to read the post from Seanchai and I already thought....this is going to cause a lot of discussion.
Firstly, I think you guys are being a little unfair to Seanchai. His initial post was polite and certainly not flexing the usual muscles that other site owners do with threatening legal action to the forum and its members and this ridiculous FBI crap statement ( Im sure the FBI have other things on their minds) ...it was merely a request stating his concerns and I think words like snarkey, rude, feeling affronted etc., uncalled for. Hey people, isn't this what a forum is for? Seanchai has the right to voice his opinions and of course his 'tone' is going to match the replies. Im sure none of us want to ruin the good work done by Grooby and indeed any other producer, so it would be in all our interests to settle this in a amicable manner. I think only sensible dialogue will bring a solution without any animosity. I see that you are all educated people, so a slanging match would be somewhat out of place.
Im surprised that the moderators here have not made a comment regarding this topic...after all, the fact that the post is in the 'sticky' section, proves it's of a legitimate nature...so lets hear your views from above please.

PS. Just for the record Jenae and Violet lightning, Im on your side but 'lest we forget'...without the pioneers like Seanchai, this forum wouldn't exist and we would all be still just dreaming of tgirls like before the internet era.
Regards to all Lba

[seanchai]

Hi Violet,
Some excellent questions there and I'll try to answer them in turn, so the information is easier to decimate, rather than from one long post.

Unrealistic, maybe but we (TS producers) have had a number of initiatives for the past year aimed at piracy and over saturation of our content that has worked, and better to be unrealistic and try to do something about it, rather than not at all, while our business erodes. I wouldn't need to be "snarkey" to other members of this forum, if they didn't feel the need to be rude and insulting to me, showing ignorance without the facts, so it's a bit give and take.


Are you saying that by law no one should be to allowed to repost any material from any of your sites?
Correct. By law, one persons copyright cannot be re-posted or reused. This is why you see many mainstream companies taking exception with companies like Youtube. Of course, the internet is still fairly new and technology is changing but look at the legal requirements to post something on Wikipedia and you'll get a rough idea of the true legal requirements.


I have been a paying member of some of your sites, and I have never posted any full set (or even much content-there are so many other sites out there). Most of us just post our favorite pics from each set or girl.

Thank you. I wish everybody had that same level of respect and commitment but they just don't, which is why we've got to spend time and money monitoring usage of our content.




But I am confused a little. I see dozens of promo free sets on all kinds of freebie sites(each with up to 10 or more pics) that change daily, and I assume that those are free for anyone to download. Are those free pages done without your permission? If not, do you expect people to just download the same 3 pics only from a free page of 10 or more pics? Thats absurd.
Free to download and use for your own purposes is fine. Free to upload them to any other server, use them for your own purposes is not. We're talking about two very different things. I assume your talking about what's called "FHG's" (Free Hosted Galleries) - see some examples below:

http://galleries.grooby.com/nats/092509/smy/?nats=NzUxOjI6NQ,0,0,0,1611
http://galleries.grooby.com/nats/yum/danielle-foxx3/?nats=NzUxOjI6NQ,0,0,0,1583

These are content given by site owners to their affiliates to promote their website. The general consensus by most site is it's ok if you use this content to post, providing that it's not been resized and there is a link to the website or company it was taken from. This would be acceptable on the 15 image rule. However, what people have been doing is posting 15 images from the members areas and not the 12-15 images posted for promotion, they've also been posting multiple posts, of 15 images each.




Like our posts, the preview pages aren't the full sets, just teasers. If you want the really good pics, you need to join, (as many do). In a forum like this, eventually people can post enough pics from various sources, that maybe eventually there is almost a complete set, but this is pretty rare and happens with only the most popular girls.
I agree people should not post entire sets from the actual pay sites, but almost everyone here just posts freebies, or pics they have had for years.
Again, if it's the content the site has given for promotional purposes, then that's fine. If it's content stolen from other places (regardless of if you found it in a free place, that's not an affiliate of the company ... then it's stolen). The poster is responsible for what they post. ALL CONTENT remains the intellectual property of the individual company.



I don't see any possible way you could limit any given set to 3 pics unless thats all you ever released on the free sites, and encoded any on the pay site so they could not be reposted. (you would also have to oversee what/who/how many pics get posted here and on every other forum)
("Porn Czar"?) or as you said, shut down every site that offends you.
We close down multiple sites on a weekly basis.



Also, isn't it similar to TV/movie copyright? That is, I can tape anything I want on TV, radio, etc.for my own use, but I cannot re-sell it or rebroadcast it for profit. (that is , its OK for private use)
Correct and a perfect analogy and my point exactly. What people are doing here is rebroadcasting it. Profit has nothing to do with it.



Isn't that similar to what we are doing? We are just posting pictures that we have for others enjoyment, and the site is free. Its also not exactly a major site. It took me years, and I just happened to stumble on this forum.
(so in the major scheme of things, is this site really taking away business from your sites, or is it all forums like this in their totallity?)

Many small sites showing multiple images add up to a lot of content that people can get for free. This is stolen from our sites and inhibits the production of new material. This is nothing new, these rules have been in place for 10 yrs.



And are you posting this message on their forums as well?
Yes, or I have the moderator status to simply delete their posts. I wanted to request that the users of this forum, respect our rights without having to take it any further. It is a very few members who post massive amounts and I've contacted some personally in the past, which are usually ignored.



(I do understand your "Why buy the cow, when you can get the milk for free" argument)...but
another phrase which comes to mind is "Your trying to close the barn door after the cow has escaped".
Pointless really trying to respond to that. We're a business, if someone has shoplifted before, it doesn't mean you don't stop the next one.



I would hate to see it happen, but it almost sounds like you would have to make it to where no pic can be downloaded unless you bought it. No freebies, only pages where you can see the pic, but could only download it/them if you became a member. (isn't that how some of the early sites worked?...or maybe didn't work..)
I'd welcome that. The only content that would be released would be the previews we wanted to release. Why see the movie if you've seen 15 different trailers showing the whole movie for free?
I expect that will be the way the internet will go (and it's already happening) which is why you should support independent companies like the ones listed here.




Perhaps you could try going after the main offenders who are posting complete sets or videos. Most of us here are respectful of the rules and appreciate what business people like yourself are trying to do. I support your sites, your intellectual rights, and your right to voice your concerns.
I hope you can appreciate what we are doing (and not doing) here as well.

Most people are respecting it, a few aren't. My message was to everyone, with an explanation why it has to be like this. As I previously stated, I'm first and foremost a fan and if I wasn't in the business, I'd be an active member here, I just don't have the time.
We produce more content than any other one company and work with 100's of models a year, worldwide. I don't want to reduce the productions, that would hurt us all.

Thanks again for a good dialogue and I hope this has answered some of your questions.

[seanchai]

Hi Jenae
I'm not going to get into a long and lengthy debate about copyright laws. I don't want to go that route, I know my rights and the rights of all producers which is why their is a DMCA law and why servers, site owners and ISP's are so strict about. What you "think" is the law is frankly and with due respect, irrelevant as is your "grey areas".

I'll answer a couple of your more pertinent points but please read the post in response to Violet above this




Your Subject Matter[/B] - Your area is pornography, and to make matters worse, it is transgender porn which is even more repugnant to a large segment of the public.
Barely needs response. This is absolutely rubbish and irrelevant. Copyright is copyright. We work within the boundaries of the law and have regsitered at copyright offices, our names are Trademarked. Your point makes no legal sense at all.



Proving Your Case - I can see where you may have a hard time proving damages here when you already have a multitude of porn images elsewhere availible on the internet for down loading free of charge. When it comes down to the numbers, the number of downloads here will be dwarved by the daily number of downloads at the original page. You will also need to prove that a significant number would have joined your site if they were unable to download the pics here.
Again, complete wrong and irrelevant. Copyright infringement is just that and each image that has been infringed is copyrighted. We wouldn't have to prove anything, having the screen capture is simply enough. For sites like this, (user uploaded) the DMCA Safe Harbour law protects them (for the time being) as long as the owner removes the content within a set time, upon notification from the copyright holder. Failure to do so, or if it was found that the owner uploaded the content themselves, would be an infringement.


As part of researching this subject I had to check out the Harley thread since I am not a fan of hers. And, I found that there are not really that many pics there. I am going to assume that there were a lot of them since you are bitchin' about it. That leads me to the conclusion that you have already coerced the site authorities into removing a great many of the disputed pics. If you did this solely on your own as a moderator, I suggest that there may be a "conflict of interest here." This would be further evidenced by the fact that I am aware of several threads where there are sets represented by many more pics than the 15 pic limit, and they have not been pruned or removed entirely
Correct, full sets of Harley were removed, 40+ images from Khloe Hart (per set), links to stolen content sites with full videos.
There is no conflict of interest, we both want to provide this site with good legal content, to generate discussion and fan base. The site owners and myself, would like people to join the sites, which in turn, keeps us able to produce content and the owners to pay the server fees in keeping this running.


You suggested or threatened that you could hold us, the members of the forum, responsible for the copyright infringement. You know, or your lawyers should know, that this would be a very difficult road to follow since we are not the owners of the site. Now there are a whole lot of legal issues concerning that..... so, I won't go into that since you have lawyers for that.
Come on, it's not going to get to that point. A free site owner would kick the offending people or close the site before getting lawyers involved and it's not something I would ever want to do. However, for clarification purposes, the site's rules are also irrelevant. I could point you to sites whose rules are that you can only show full Hollywood movies, in HD for free ... and that's illegal! Technically, we could go after any 1 person posting our content, request their IP and information from the server ... blah ... blah ... blah but I'd much rather produce porn.



:D Now I have a question here. By posting on here, did you solicit our opinions, and are you thus obligated to compensate me for my advice if you use it in any way to form your legal position. If you feel so, I would accept a free membership to the SM Club site:lol:

Frankly, I had no interest in your opinion on this matter legally. The copyright laws are set. I'm not the owner of Shemale Club as much as I'd like to be. Apart from the top 10 links on that list, all the other companies are part of a group of producers with whom we work with on initiatives like this. I did put the wrong link up, their actual link is : http://shemaleclub.com/ and well worth investing a months membership on.

I do however, welcome an open dialogue. Legal issues are not really opening to question, take them up with your politicians.

Thanks

[ladyboyadmirer]

That reply must have taken you ages to compile Seanchai, some interesting facts there...thanks for your time

[seanchai]

That reply must have taken you ages to compile Seanchai, some interesting facts there...thanks for your time

:innocent:
It's not the first time I've answered the same questions.
Thanks

[Excaliborg]

seanchai you sound very much like the RIAA who blame the end users of a product for the loss of business. consider this, i can do a google search right now for just about anything and i can guarentee you i will find what i am looking for without having to pay. whose fault is that? mine or yours? as a provider of a specific kind of content it is upon YOU to secure you data or IP(Interllectual Properrty) or whatever you want to call it. dont go after us poor plebs. go after the saucy knaves who are stealing your IP. it is not my fault that more that more than three pics of any given galllery is available on the internet. it is YOUR responsibility to ensure what is available to us poor plebs.

sure you can enforce a three pic rule on your own site via tours. as Jenae LaTorque said(i think), we help to promote your paysites.

now as to copyright. you have to PROVE what the INTENTION is. not what i'm actually doing. read them laws again. just because im searching for pics of shemales or tgirls (reminds me of a thread in the Shemale Chat section, they are women not just objects of sexual desire) does not mean im going to your site with the purpose of stealimg. i want to jack off to something that i find appealing. so im going to go where the freely availabel content is, not to a forum that only allows three pics of any given set.

so it comes down to this. if you want to protect your content, only make three examples available per set availanle to the public. do not have teaser sets of nine, twelve or fifteen examples available. once again the onus is upon YOU to protect your content. not me, not Jenae LaTorque or any other member of this forum.

to quote you "...Legal issues are not really opening to question, take them up with your politicians." why involve politicians? this is not a polical matter. secure your IP, make your data is protected. dont make us the scapegoat.

violet lightning and Jenae LaTorque(she has such nawty eyes:inlove:) :respect:

[Bionca]

While I have obviously mixed feelings about the adult industry, I have to go with Seanchai here. I doubt there would be very many times when this is the case.

The porn industry does not have huge margins to begin with unless you are Playboy, Hustler, Vivid, or Private. Grooby may be the big fish, but they are still in a tiny pond. We are being nicely asked to actually support the industry that has made this site possible. We can join a pay site and/or stop snagging and posting their stuff. Simple really.

If Seanchai's request was unreasonable, you bet I'd be on it like stink on a skunk. However, I think this is a very realistic compromise.

[seanchai]

seanchai you sound very much like the RIAA who blame the end users of a product for the loss of business. consider this, i can do a google search right now for just about anything and i can guarentee you i will find what i am looking for without having to pay. whose fault is that? mine or yours? as a provider of a specific kind of content it is upon YOU to secure you data or IP(Interllectual Properrty) or whatever you want to call it. dont go after us poor plebs. go after the saucy knaves who are stealing your IP. it is not my fault that more that more than three pics of any given galllery is available on the internet. it is YOUR responsibility to ensure what is available to us poor plebs.

I'm not blaming anyone for our loss of business, I'm moving with the times and the current times indicate that this is what is necessary to protect the business as a whole. If you had any interest in the future of TS porn and the models, you'd respect that.
Pretty much with searching and hard work, you will find stolen content, we spend time and energy trying to delete and restrict access to stolen content so that the average surfer will get better value for his time and money, by spending on one of our sites and helping perpetuate more content.
I've already stated more than 3 pics can be posted if it's from content we give away freely, but not from membership area content.


sure you can enforce a three pic rule on your own site via tours. as Jenae LaTorque said(i think), we help to promote your paysites.
I can enforce a ZERO infringement of our copyright on any site or server. As you rightly paraphrased me, "you do help to promote our paysites" which is why we're not enforcing that rule as we've done on some sites.


now as to copyright. you have to PROVE what the INTENTION is. not what i'm actually doing. read them laws again. just because im searching for pics of shemales or tgirls (reminds me of a thread in the Shemale Chat section, they are women not just objects of sexual desire) does not mean im going to your site with the purpose of stealimg. i want to jack off to something that i find appealing. so im going to go where the freely availabel content is, not to a forum that only allows three pics of any given set.

I think you need to read the laws and my posts again before you jump on your high horse. It's not about searching or viewing pics - it's about posting them. Any server that hosts the photos, without permission, is in breach of copyright laws.


so it comes down to this. if you want to protect your content, only make three examples available per set availanle to the public. do not have teaser sets of nine, twelve or fifteen examples available. once again the onus is upon YOU to protect your content. not me, not Jenae LaTorque or any other member of this forum.

a) It doesn't come down to this. Abide by rules set by producers or expect to see material from those producers removed from all sites other than those they've expressly given content to.

b) I've stated, that they can use the sample photos ... the 3 image rule, is for those from the website members area. If in doubt, don't post as you more than likely, got them from illegal postings.


to quote you "...Legal issues are not really opening to question, take them up with your politicians." why involve politicians? this is not a polical matter. secure your IP, make your data is protected. dont make us the scapegoat.

Negative. How ridiculous, a shopkeeper should lock up his wares because if he doesn't then he's responsible for people stealing them and the thieves are the scapegoats.
My point was, if you have problems with the current copyright laws, take them up with politicians and not with us. We act within the current laws and all we're asking, is for you to do the same.

[violet lightning]

:) Thanks for answering all my questions seanchai. It all sounds reasonable, and it seems like your really after a few major offenders who don't respect the money and effort that goes into actually producing original material and maintaining websites.

I hope you don't mind a few more thoughts/questions/observations as this seems like a good opportunity to learn more.
Are you a moderator or owner of this site? Is this forum connected in some way to commercial sites, or was it established for members to enjoy and share pics, etc?
Is there a legal precedent for forums like this to exist?

Also, an example of an earlier point: I visited a site earlier today,(juicyshemales.com) that is a freebie-link page, and there were two different sets of Carla Novais from shemaleclub that had 20 pics each. (thats 40 free pics from just two sets on a page with hundreds of free sets--and they change daily!) Multiply that by the hundreds of other freebie pages and your talking thousands of free pics daily. Does releasing so many free photos hurt yours (and others) business much? How do you differentiate between the free pics and the ones that are on the pay-site?
It also seems like the free pics are so good, you would have just as many people being satisfied with those as being tempted to join. (I would assume this is not the case or you wouldn't be doing it)

Does any problem arise when free sites like this begin getting "too good"?
(The content is excellent, traffic goes up, the word gets out and perhaps people start wondering if we are cutting into their business....?)

Are you generally ok with this site and others like it as long as they don't post whole sets or proprietary material?

I won't belabor the point. These are just a few thoughts and questions. As I said, I get where you are coming from, and I believe your concerns are legitimate. I just hope you can solve the problems without becoming too draconian.
I enjoy your sites as well as others, but I enjoy this site very much too.

(Note-in the time it took to compose this, you answered or addressed some of my questions already in other posts, so forgive some of the points)
It sounds like you are ok with this site and members, as long as we follow some basic rules...and that seems reasonable enough to me.
Now you just have to convince everyone else!

[johndowe]

Hi there.

One thing that HAS to be said is that everything that is posted on the internet becomes de facto public domain, so copyrights are a bit of a non issue, if you don't wany your pics to be shared, don't post them on the internet in the first place, free or not, because they will always be someone that will resent having to pay for something and not be "allowed" to do what they want with it, which is the real issue here.

The same is true for software, what is it we realy pay for? The disks, the manuals, the box? No we pay for the software, and since software is data, and easily copyable, why should i have to pay for 3 identicle copies of a piece of software for my 3 computers? I shouldn't, i paid for the software and i should have the "right" to do with it as i please, within reason of course, but again if you don't want others to have your software, don't publish it or accept the FACT that there will be some copy, even if you put all kinds of copy protections, someone ALWAYS finds a way to overide them.


JohnDowe.

[violet lightning]

:frown: I just noticed you (seanshai) deleted 3 photos of Meghan Chavalier from one of my posts. (Meghan Chavalier Post in freebies, #5)
Since I got these pics from a legitimate free site, (www.juicyshemales.com) and they are NOT stolen or from a members area, why did you delete them?
I thought you just said 15 pics from the same set were ok with you as long as they were free "marketing" pictures.
What gives? I'm playing by your rules! Is JSM not a legitimate marketing site? Are you saying they stole your content?
Grrrr.

[johndowe]

Hi there.

I live in Canada and the gov had pretty heft tax on cigarettes and after a new increase of the cigarette tax the people revolted and a big black market cigarette "market" opened up to the point that the gov lost more revenue due to the black market and removed the new tax, but the dammage was done and the cigarette black market (from native tribes) is still booming not as well as when it was at it's strongest but it is better than it was before the gov put the new (but removed) cogarette tax, so actions often have unforseen concequences.

Remember the OLD lawer addage; don't ask a question you don't already know the ansewer to? The reason is simple in a courtroom, if you ask a question you don't know the ansewer to, you may very well blow your own case out of the water.

The same principle applied to the Germans in WW2 they attacked England to erode their morale, but to the German's dismay, it gave the Allies a new war cry "For England" and the end came several months sooner than expected.

So in trying to protect yourselves and make more money off of the pics and vids on the internet through legislation you may create a backlash that will end up biting you in the ass.

JohnDowe.

[Jenae LaTorque]

OK! You have cleared up some matters. You are not against us posting 15 pics from those pages that you have already made available on the net for free. OK You are against people who post material from the members section of the sites you are representing here. OK Perfecty understandable and justified. When we are talking about such material, and you wish to set the limit at three, I say fine. Not that it affects non-member me, but it isn't something I would do anyway due to ethical considerations. I am sure there is a clause in your member agreement prohibitting such behavior. I can't find any excuse for such contract breaking save that of sub-normal intelligence.

Even with that being said, I still believe that "you are barking up the wrong tree." But then, that is okay as long as you are barking up the other more likely trees also. I think this forum would have to be a very minor part of your problems. I think you would have to agree that the entry into the Tgirl market by big players like HUSTLER has cost you far more. The last five years have seen an explosion in the number of Tgirl related internet sites. When such an event occurs in any business, usually it is because the demand is there and there is money to be made. When this reaches a certain point where supply exceeds demand, then there will be a leveling out. Some producers will fall, while most others will have to become more efficient to survive. Also, we are now in a world-wide recession and perhaps you are feeling a crunch between the effects of that and a reduced demand due to the increased competition. And I have noticed that the competition is increasing not only in quantity, but in quality. There have never been so many truly attractive Tgirls on the net as there are now. No longer are photoshots like something that could pass for home candids or crappy movie stills. There are pics out there that approach closely to the standards as set by PLAYBOY. There are even some who are retouching their photos, like PLAYBOY, to such an extent that it is hard to recognize the silky smooth skinned model as the same one you just saw in another set with an acne pitted face. Speaking of Playboy; has anyone in the western world ever tried to emulate them by having a Tgirl club complete with Tgirl hostesses?

So here you are. And here I am. I have been looking at the numbers. Lol I am a great believer in numbers. When people say this is so or that is so, I want to see the hard data; the numbers. Home page says we have 35, 969 members, 4,371 of whom are active members. Now I am unsure of what constitutes an active member as opposed to a non-active member. Perhaps one of you moderators or SSL could explain this distinction. Furthermore, it says there are 72 users online-18 members and 54 guests. Looking at the stats for where these members are currantly viewing, we see that the large majority of them are in the freebies section. So we can see that only 25% of those viewing at one point in time are members. It would be interesting to know how many visitors we get a day. Now it is true that one is not able to download pics unless one is a member and that is limited until you get enough points to where you are allowed more than you need or want. All in all, I don't see where those numbers can support a contention that you are losing much business here. Now links to video sites may well be a whole differant story. Visitors would be able to use those links to go there just as much as members. And if as you say, some of these links do lead to sites with stolen content; would it not be possible to create some kind of software linked to a database of known thief sites that would alert moderators to their posting, or even better, disallow the posting at all. Yes, I know that software doesn't grow on trees:)

In summation, I still think this tree ain't worth barking up. But I really would not be bothered with a total limit of five or so pics from any one shoot. Because when you get down to it; there is so much availible free for the downloading out there, that there is no need for this forum to be a pic supplier. Five should be enough to convey the essence of any single shoot of a Tgirl. I am hereby assuming that limit. No longer will I post more than 5 pics from any one shoot. If they want more, than they can darn well go search them out on the FHG sites like I do.

P.S. The whole thing about my legal fee was a joke - that is why there are the smilies with it. Perhaps you are not in a receptive mood for humor at this point in time. Well, that's OK too! I wish you the best of luck in your endeavors.

"When the wolf gnaws, smile." - Robert Heinlein

[Excaliborg]

Hi there.

I live in Canada and the gov had pretty heft tax on cigarettes and after a new increase of the cigarette tax the people revolted and a big black market cigarette "market" opened up to the point that the gov lost more revenue due to the black market and removed the new tax, but the dammage was done and the cigarette black market (from native tribes) is still booming not as well as when it was at it's strongest but it is better than it was before the gov put the new (but removed) cogarette tax, so actions often have unforseen concequences.

Remember the OLD lawer addage; don't ask a question you don't already know the ansewer to? The reason is simple in a courtroom, if you ask a question you don't know the ansewer to, you may very well blow your own case out of the water.

The same principle applied to the Germans in WW2 they attacked England to erode their morale, but to the German's dismay, it gave the Allies a new war cry "For England" and the end came several months sooner than expected.

So in trying to protect yourselves and make more money off of the pics and vids on the internet through legislation you may create a backlash that will end up biting you in the ass.

JohnDowe.

also knwn as the streisand effect.

now we can bandy words as to who is write and who is wrong. the fact remains that if you dont want more than say five of any given set floatnig about the internet, its your responsibility to ensure that.

reading through the posts again, your request is a fair one. but wouldnt it have been more efficient to first open a dialogue with SSL and the moderators? they could then enforce you request as a rule for content from those sites listed.this way just looks like you are out to get us.

[gabby]

Please don't post more than 3 photos from any one set of a the below sites here. As producers, we work very hard and spend a lot of money to produce the content we do and as a fan myself, I certainly understand why you want to show off the content and share it. However, this is detrimental not only to our companies, but to the models, the fans and ultimately the production of TS porn in general as well as the welfare of this site and opening the possibility of the site and yourself, to legal action - something we'd not want to do, hence the requests here.

We allow forums and fans to use a small amount of content as it helps forums like this generate members and in turn, sell our sites which keeps them active and alive as they make money from each sale, which covers the servers and expenses. However, when you post massive amounts, people don't need to join a site and therefore everybody loses money - and the productions WILL stop or slow down ... then what will we all be jerking off to?

Independent producers like Grooby, or Bobs-Tgirls, Krissy4u, DeliaTS, HotWendyWilliams work on small budgets that rely on membership levels to allow us to continue to produce and remain profitable and a massive amount of our budgets go directly back into models fees.

So, I'd like to ask you all to please, refrain from posting links to tube sites showing stolen content, uploaded content, showing more than 3 photos from any one set from a website (and multiple users showing 3 photos each would be a breach of that rule) and to respect our property rights.

If you want to see more content, then please go to a site whose product you like, take a look at their tours and their membership options, and join.

Thank you.
seanchai

CLARIFICATION ADDED 09 OCT - IF YOU WISH TO POST THE IMAGES FROM CONTENT SPECIFICALLY GIVEN BY THE SITES FOR MARKETING, THEN THAT IS FINE. THIS SHOULD FIT INTO THE 15 IMAGES PER SET, DEEMED AS FAIR BY THE FORUM OWNERS. THIS DOES NOT MEAN YOU CAN TAKE ANY 15 IMAGES FROM THE MEMBERS SITE OR OTHER FREE/STOLEN CONTENT SITES

for
http://www.shemaleyum.com
http://www.black-tgirls.com
http://www.shemale-pornstar.com
http://www.brazilian-transsexuals.com
http://www.franks-tgirlworld.com
http://www.bobs-tgirls.com
http://www.shemales-from-hell.com
http://www.shemalepornstar.com
http://www.transexdomination.com
http://www.zoefuckpupper.com
http://www.straponjane.com
http://www.deliats.com
http://www.kimsanalheaven.com
http://www.clubcrossdresser.com
http://www.lucimay.com
http://www.karentvslut.com
http://www.candilovedoll.com
http:///www.nylonbitchyvette.com
http://www.kirstystgplayground.com
http://www.latinatranny.com
http://www.shemaleclub.com
http://www.kimberjames.com
http://www.kellyshore.com
http://www.mariammicol.com
http://www.tsfoxxy.com
http://www.tsjesse.com
http://www.hotwendywilliams.com
http://www.interracialtgirlsex.com
http://www.privatetranssexual.com
http://www.jasminejewels.com
http://www.mandymitchell.com
http://www.natassiadreams.com
http://www.hazeltucker.com

Two:
http://web.newsguy.com/ReaLi5TiX/home.htm
http://www.tslist.com/list.html
Thanks and kisses,
Gabby :heart:

[seanchai]

Hi there.

One thing that HAS to be said is that everything that is posted on the internet becomes de facto public domain, so copyrights are a bit of a non issue, if you don't wany your pics to be shared, don't post them on the internet in the first place, free or not, because they will always be someone that will resent having to pay for something and not be "allowed" to do what they want with it, which is the real issue here.

The same is true for software, what is it we realy pay for? The disks, the manuals, the box? No we pay for the software, and since software is data, and easily copyable, why should i have to pay for 3 identicle copies of a piece of software for my 3 computers? I shouldn't, i paid for the software and i should have the "right" to do with it as i please, within reason of course, but again if you don't want others to have your software, don't publish it or accept the FACT that there will be some copy, even if you put all kinds of copy protections, someone ALWAYS finds a way to overide them.


JohnDowe.


Absolute rubbish. Go read the law before you bother posting.

[seanchai]

reading through the posts again, your request is a fair one. but wouldnt it have been more efficient to first open a dialogue with SSL and the moderators? they could then enforce you request as a rule for content from those sites listed.this way just looks like you are out to get us.

Been in dialogue with the owner for many months.

[seanchai]

:frown: I just noticed you (seanshai) deleted 3 photos of Meghan Chavalier from one of my posts. (Meghan Chavalier Post in freebies, #5)
Since I got these pics from a legitimate free site, (www.juicyshemales.com) and they are NOT stolen or from a members area, why did you delete them?
I thought you just said 15 pics from the same set were ok with you as long as they were free "marketing" pictures.
What gives? I'm playing by your rules! Is JSM not a legitimate marketing site? Are you saying they stole your content?
Grrrr.

Will investigate JuicyShemales but as I believe the images were from a new site, Shemale Pornstar, which doesn't have affiliates, no content should have been released.

Frankly, I'm not going to investigate deeply into each and every post, I'm pretty sure I know what content is what but if a few get caught up by mistake, then so be it.

[seanchai]

Are you a moderator or owner of this site? Is this forum connected in some way to commercial sites, or was it established for members to enjoy and share pics, etc?
Almost all forums or websites have a commercial interest. Sites make money from advertising. That's how they pay the server and related costs. You'd have to ask the owner, why it was set up. I'm not the owner but I do own other forms


Is there a legal precedent for forums like this to exist?

Don't understand question.


Also, an example of an earlier point: I visited a site earlier today,(juicyshemales.com) that is a freebie-link page, and there were two different sets of Carla Novais from shemaleclub that had 20 pics each. (thats 40 free pics from just two sets on a page with hundreds of free sets--and they change daily!) Multiply that by the hundreds of other freebie pages and your talking thousands of free pics daily. Does releasing so many free photos hurt yours (and others) business much? How do you differentiate between the free pics and the ones that are on the pay-site?

I don't own Shemale Club. You'd have to ask their own specifically. I don't think releasing that much free content is good business.
I differentiate between our free released pics and pay site pics in that the free ones should be a tease. Other companies may have a different ethos.


It also seems like the free pics are so good, you would have just as many people being satisfied with those as being tempted to join. (I would assume this is not the case or you wouldn't be doing it)
Agreed, this is why Grooby doesn't give the best content away.


Does any problem arise when free sites like this begin getting "too good"?
(The content is excellent, traffic goes up, the word gets out and perhaps people start wondering if we are cutting into their business....?)
No, good forums and traffic are what we like. The problem arises when new people on the internet come to sites like this and can get the majority of a set or a link to a stolen video for free. It can easily be found. Then they don't join paysites. We don't make money. We have no money for future shoots ... blah blah blah.


Are you generally ok with this site and others like it as long as they don't post whole sets or proprietary material?
I love sites like this and have been active on some for years. I hope to become more active on here other than just the complaints about the amount of material posted.


Thanks
seanchai

[violet lightning]

I think we (the reasonable ones) are more or less on board with your (also reasonable) requests, but I still wonder about the Meghan pics you deleted.
Shemalepornstars.com is one of the sites you listed in your first post here, and that is where those pics are from via juicyshemales.com, which (I checked) does have some sort of affiliation with grooby sites.

As I said, I downloaded them from one of YOUR promotional sites, (in good faith) and out of the 15 free pics, I only posted 6.
Are they stolen or used without your permission?? If they were legitimate free pics, I would appreciate them being put back up. They were posted on JSM on Sept. 26.

I completely understand your POV, but from mine its very disconcerting to have a post edited like that, especially (apparently) when all the facts are not in. (stolen content or not??)

Kinda sucks to have to go back and see whats been edited and why. If my posts (which are fairly well thought out) get edited like that, (half the pics removed) I'm not sure I even want to post anymore. Takes the fun out of things. My whole reason for being here is to enjoy sharing, taking part in discussions and just having fun.
I'm not pissed, just somewhat confused....

Post script: Regarding newbies finding this site and then not joining paysites.. As I said, I actively searched the internet for years for photos and only about 8 months ago did I stumble on this site. I assume the same to be true of people like Jenae, who joined fairly recently too, and has also been on the web for years. If its that random, do you really think newbies are coming here in droves? Do you have ANY data to back that assertion?

[seanchai]

I think we (the reasonable ones) are more or less on board with your (also reasonable) requests, but I still wonder about the Meghan pics you deleted.
Shemalepornstars.com is one of the sites you listed in your first post here, and that is where those pics are from via juicyshemales.com, which (I checked) does have some sort of affiliation with grooby sites.

As I said, I downloaded them from one of YOUR promotional sites, (in good faith) and out of the 15 free pics, I only posted 6.
Are they stolen or used without your permission?? If they were legitimate free pics, I would appreciate them being put back up. They were posted on JSM on Sept. 26.

I completely understand your POV, but from mine its very disconcerting to have a post edited like that, especially (apparently) when all the facts are not in. (stolen content or not??)

Kinda sucks to have to go back and see whats been edited and why. If my posts (which are fairly well thought out) get edited like that, (half the pics removed) I'm not sure I even want to post anymore. Takes the fun out of things. My whole reason for being here is to enjoy sharing, taking part in discussions and just having fun.
I'm not pissed, just somewhat confused....

Post script: Regarding newbies finding this site and then not joining paysites.. As I said, I actively searched the internet for years for photos and only about 8 months ago did I stumble on this site. I assume the same to be true of people like Jenae, who joined fairly recently too, and has also been on the web for years. If its that random, do you really think newbies are coming here in droves? Do you have ANY data to back that assertion?

Violet,
I really think I've posted enough on this and I'm not going to get into tiny details. I told you already I'll look at the site you mentioned.
I think the main points are:

1. Posting of content is not a right, it's a privilege. You don't have to post.

2. The content always remains the rights of a producer and just because it can be seen for free elsewhere, doesn't mean that anybody other than the producer or persons they have given permission, has the right to post it elsewhere.

3. If your posts get caught up in some deletions, then deal with it. I'm not investigating every post. As mentioned above, it's a privilege. Sometimes I don't want my shoots given away at all or certainly, some of the select photos. I reserve the right to have removed any content belonging to us, that I want, regardless of the other rules.

4. ... and once again. You don't have to post images.

[Jenae LaTorque]

I think that Sesame is right. It is time to let this go. He has already demonstrated to me that he is here primarily as a money grubber looking after his own self interest. He has also demonstrated that he isn't very bright and I will be surprised if he survives the increasingly competitive nature of his niche of pornography. He has demonstrated that he has no respect for the forum members, only for them as a possible source of income. His position as a moderator has been only in his own self interest - the numbers show this - his post count of less than 60, is less than 3% of ila's post count. All in all, I believe his statements here have been some very dismal public relations. While I do not subscribe to online pic sites, I do purchase quite a few videos. From now on, I will be on the lookout for Grooby productions and will absolutely never ever purchase one.

[seanchai]

I think that Sesame is right. It is time to let this go. He has already demonstrated to me that he is here primarily as a money grubber looking after his own self interest. He has also demonstrated that he isn't very bright and I will be surprised if he survives the increasingly competitive nature of his niche of pornography. He has demonstrated that he has no respect for the forum members, only for them as a possible source of income. His position as a moderator has been only in his own self interest - the numbers show this - his post count of less than 60, is less than 3% of ila's post count. All in all, I believe his statements here have been some very dismal public relations. While I do not subscribe to online pic sites, I do purchase quite a few videos. From now on, I will be on the lookout for Grooby productions and will absolutely never ever purchase one.

Sour grapes or your lack of intelligence to grasp the situation or legalities?
I really don't have to defend my intelligence or my business to you, so I won't bother.
One thing I will say though, is that I'm one of the few adult sites that does engage fans, members, models, producers, etc. and aims to produce quality porn with the models. Our reputation is un-surpassed and what we have done as a company to promote respect to transgenders working in the adult industry, is more than any other person or group.
Go and google a few interviews with me, if you want to understand a little more about me:
"Steven Gallon / seanchai / grooby "

I hope to bring some real things of interest to this forum soon, rather than just picture posting.

The DVD market is almost dead, so if you want to continue for good transgender porn to be produced, then it's going to be via the internet. Only Grooby is producing TS porn with proper themes and stories.
Download and watch LOADS OF FREE TRAILERS - direct from our server at:

http://grooby.com/groobycom_dvd.html

Thanks for your opinion anyway Janae. Since you made the first attacking post on here and displayed your lack of understanding, it was fairly obvious you'd never see our point of view, no matter what.

[ps this image was found on a free site. That doesn't mean I have the right to repost it. The copyright owner can mail me directly and I will remove it immediately.]

[Bionca]

Perhaps it's because interacting with the public via message boards and blogs is my job or maybe I'm just strange. Either way, I feel that Mr Gallon has made a good faith effort to make his position clear while at the same time, actually interacting with the member of this forum in an effort to reach an understanding.

What would Vivid do? Send a letter to SSL and demand that their property be removed with a very real threat of legal action (and precedent would be on their side regardless of the specifics of their product). Copyright law favors the producer/artist.

While I understand why people are feeling defensive and perhaps attacked(?) by this series of posts, I really don't think this site is being singled out or individual members are being accused of being thieves.

Mr Gallon, as far as doing things "to promote respect for transgenders" - umm.. well that may be true - but is more than either nothing or actively harming really a good talking point?

[seanchai]

Mr Gallon, as far as doing things "to promote respect for transgenders" - umm.. well that may be true - but is more than either nothing or actively harming really a good talking point?

Well this post isn't really about that, so I don't want to really derail it to something it's not. If you find any of my interviews or postings on other boards ... or the way we work with models, promote them, etc. you can find out more there.
Point taken in the way I worded it though.

[GroobyKrissy]

Hi there.

One thing that HAS to be said is that everything that is posted on the internet becomes de facto public domain, so copyrights are a bit of a non issue, if you don't wany your pics to be shared, don't post them on the internet in the first place, free or not, because they will always be someone that will resent having to pay for something and not be "allowed" to do what they want with it, which is the real issue here.

One thing that HAS to be said in reply to this post is that you do not know what you're talking about. Although this may be your little fantasy world of what YOU consider to be true, a simple precursory look into copyright law proves you wrong.

Seriously... do a little research before you make comments about something you obviously don't know anything about.

[GroobyKrissy]

This reminds me of this old thread that I started...

http://forum.transladyboy.com/showthread.php?t=6026 Take a look at the last post on that thread. Clearly, this kind of post is damaging to the industry and has no place on a 'legitimate' forum such as this [is]. This post should be removed and the person warned against making further posts of this nature and banned if he/she persists.

Hey, I get it... you guys want free porn. It's human nature to want things for free. That doesn't make it right OR legal. The fact of the matter is that in posting mass amounts of ripped content, you don't often realize how you're hurting the models and the sites that provide you the content to 'get your rocks off.'

As an independent producer and a VERY careful keeper of all kinds of statistics and records for my site, I KNOW for a fact, when I see a sharp decline in sales, invariably, I can trace it back to either a forum with rips from my site or pw sharing.

I think Seanchai has done a pretty good job here of defending his stance and hardly needs me to weigh in on the subject but, what really irritates me about some of the responses is the 'justifications' for posting ripped content. Instead of making up illogical (and sometimes just plain stupid) reasons to justify your actions, you should just say, 'I'm selfish and don't want to pay for porn.' OR, 'I want to look important and that's why I post ripped content.' This last one is personally the reason I feel most people post excessive ripped content. They like the replies of gratitude and it helps them think that what they're doing is OK. Just my two cents.

Because, really, why else would you care if you're asked to limit your postings to 3 pictures from one set?

[Bionca]

Well this post isn't really about that, so I don't want to really derail it to something it's not. If you find any of my interviews or postings on other boards ... or the way we work with models, promote them, etc. you can find out more there.
Point taken in the way I worded it though.

You are right, discussing that would be a massive derail. I took your advice awile ago actually and read some interviews with you. That's one of the reasons I'm supporting your stance here today. However, since you brought it up - I have posted a little bit from one of your interviews on my blog.

[GroobyKrissy]

I think that Sesame is right. It is time to let this go. He has already demonstrated to me that he is here primarily as a money grubber looking after his own self interest. He has also demonstrated that he isn't very bright and I will be surprised if he survives the increasingly competitive nature of his niche of pornography. He has demonstrated that he has no respect for the forum members, only for them as a possible source of income. His position as a moderator has been only in his own self interest - the numbers show this - his post count of less than 60, is less than 3% of ila's post count. All in all, I believe his statements here have been some very dismal public relations. While I do not subscribe to online pic sites, I do purchase quite a few videos. From now on, I will be on the lookout for Grooby productions and will absolutely never ever purchase one.

I cannot believe the sheer lack of facts behind these statements.

If you knew anything at all about the person you're speaking about, you'd know that:

A: Grooby Productions (with him at the helm) is probably THE company when it comes to caring for and furthering the careers of their models... even when they decide to strike out on their own. Although the company is obviously a business, I have personally seen the company make decisions not based on increasing the bottom line but making a decision based on maintaining integrity and honesty in an industry which, quite frankly, is often lacking.

B: While yes, more TS sites come on the market, Grooby Productions has remained on the forefront of producing content in this niche and still has some of the best sites around. Your implication that you know something about the business model or health of the industry as a whole just shows your complete narcissistic tendencies and proclivity to hear yourself speak.

C: Demeaning someone's intelligence and resorting to purposefully calling them names are oftentimes the act of desperation or lack of civility... both which you have shown here. Seriously... does Jenae's post remind anyone of a disgruntled 3rd grader?

D: Ummm... yeah... why should he not see forums like this as a potential source of income with potential customers? I would actually say it would be negligent not to. He does run a BUSINESS after all. So, why is it a bad thing to see Members here as potential customers? You state an IQ of over 150 yet fail to grasp this basic business principle?

E: Position as a Moderator? Completely irrelevant. Nice that you took the time to calculate out the statistics (again... tooting your own intellectual horn), but WTF? I smell sour grapes that he is and you're not.

F: I'm quite sure that the company is not losing any vast amounts of money by you not purchasing their DVD's (which by the way... we call them DVD's in this day and age) since you've "...never contributed a single penny to a paysite directly." I find it difficult to believe, given this mindset that you are the owner of a staggering library of legitimately paid for DVD's.

Anyway... this is a little more sarcastic and a bit on the rude side so for those of you readers not involved, I apologize. Typically, I don't get into personally addressing someone negatively but Jenae's statements are just plain uncalled for, illogical, and completely disrespectful for someone who is VERY WELL respected in the TS Industry. Pretty easy to do a little searching and come to the conclusion that Seanchai's a stand-up guy running one of the most honest, respected, and best business in TS porn.

[ila]

This reminds me of this old thread that I started...

http://forum.transladyboy.com/showthread.php?t=6026 Take a look at the last post on that thread. Clearly, this kind of post is damaging to the industry and has no place on a 'legitimate' forum such as this [is]. This post should be removed and the person warned against making further posts of this nature and banned if he/she persists.


Below is the message that you are referring to.

For what purchasing pay sites??? On the NET you can find many shemale tube site, many of them have very nace content. PM me if you interesting.....

Tell me how this this message is damaging to the porn industry. The member stated that there are many tube sites on the internet. He is quite correct in that statement. Poor grammar and spelling aside he asked members to PM him for, I assume, the names of tube sites. There is nothing illegal about that. You might also note that this member has not been back on the site for more two months.

If you feel so strongly that Mold's post should be removed then I suggest that you use the Report Post button in the message box. The instructions that follow will tell you what to do.

[Be_my_nude]

I have to say I am, like Jenae, somewhat puzzled as to what the qualifications are for a member to become a Moderator. It would seem no co-incidence that Seanchai got himself appointed Moderator for Freebies. As such I can hardly think he can claim to be impartial ( an absolute pre-requisite, I would have thought ), without vested interests.

One aspect which seems to me curious. It seems that Seanchai is against members of this Forum liberally posting pictures which have already been downladed by paid-up members of any of his listed sites. Surely it is up to him to identify and contact those paid-up members who have made available the sets for free. Clearly their paid for membership makes them feel entitled to do what they want with the pictures. Make no mistake about it, these pictures were not 'stolen ' form the sites in the first place, so how can members of this Forum be accused by Seanchai of handling ' stolen goods '?

I'm also pretty unhappy about the possibility that a Moderator may have abused his powers or position. Perhaps Seanchai might care to comment ?

:no: this does not present a pretty picture at all.

[GroobyKrissy]

I have to say I am, like Jenae, somewhat puzzled as to what the qualifications are for a member to become a Moderator. It would seem no co-incidence that Seanchai got himself appointed Moderator for Freebies. As such I can hardly think he can claim to be impartial ( an absolute pre-requisite, I would have thought ), without vested interests.

One aspect which seems to me curious. It seems that Seanchai is against members of this Forum liberally posting pictures which have already been downladed by paid-up members of any of his listed sites. Surely it is up to him to identify and contact those paid-up members who have made available the sets for free. Clearly their paid for membership makes them feel entitled to do what they want with the pictures. Make no mistake about it, these pictures were not 'stolen ' form the sites in the first place, so how can members of this Forum be accused by Seanchai of handling ' stolen goods '?

I'm also pretty unhappy about the possibility that a Moderator may have abused his powers or position. Perhaps Seanchai might care to comment ?

:no: this does not present a pretty picture at all.

Wow... I find it entirely puzzling that people are so mistaken about the law... I thought that CSI and the ilk was the most watched show in the country for a reason. Let's clarify...

If I, as your friend or even casual acquaintance steal a car and give it to you saying, 'I own this car and I'm giving it to you.' You have a decision to make. Either you accept the car, no questions asked or you start to delve a little deeper because this would be just too good of a thing to get for free.

Now, if you choose choice A and then resell the vehicle, and get caught selling it... guess what... you're trafficking in stolen goods. Doesn't matter if you knew the car was stolen or not. Now, depending on circumstances and the strength of your defense... you may get off easy claiming ignorance. But, should you get a jury who doesn't believe you... tough cookies. Due diligence.

I'm not saying that every single picture on here has to be accounted for BUT.. C'MON people... let's be honest here! Most, of the content here is posted WITHOUT the express permission of the companies in question. This, cut and dry, is copyright infringement by the PERSON who posts it, REGARDLESS of the source.

I still find it incredibly irrelevant about who is Moderator and abuse of power or whatever this nonsense is. Unless you're the owner of this forum, why in the world do you have any say or interest AT ALL in who is a Moderator and who is not? Where in the Forum Bible does it say that Moderators have to be impartial? Folks... let's not mistake MODERATION with CENSORSHIP... these are two completely different words with entirely different meanings. A responsible Moderator should first and foremost have the good of the Forum in mind. I think everyone would agree that letting word get out that this Forum has Members posting large amounts of content from various sites without their permission would probably be more of a bad thing than a helpful thing. Best solved by making a polite request (done) and culling out overly populated threads (done). That's good moderation. Now, if Seanchai suddenly goes and starts deleting people's opinions and posts and such... that's CENSORSHIP and i would agree... an abuse of his Moderator privilege. But, that's not the case here. I think people are just sorry to see some of their free porn go bye bye. Tough beans. If you really want to see more than three pictures... stop eating at Burger King every day and Starbucks every morning and save up 30 or 40 bucks to join the site for a month. Download all the content you want for yourself to enjoy... just don't post it for someone else to get without paying for it.

I, as the copyright holder of my pictures have the right to take them down (or make the request) whenever and wherever I see them posted without my permission. I suspect that Seanchai was made Moderator more out of convenience by the owner(s) of this Forum who probably doesn't have the time or energy to view every single thread to make sure the content there is legitimate or not. Actually, I think this is entirely MORE preferable than finding tons of ripped content on the forum and taking legal action, no?

[GroobyKrissy]

Below is the message that you are referring to.



Tell me how this this message is damaging to the porn industry.
If you feel so strongly that Mold's post should be removed then I suggest that you use the Report Post bar beside the message. The instructions that follow will tell you what to do.

Obviously, I didn't care that much since I didn't even know the post was there until I revisited the thread tonight. BUT... Here's your answer... (read my above post first please)

In effect, what this Member is doing would be akin to a person sitting on the front doorstep of a auto dealer and telling people as they walk in, 'Psst... why pay for a car when I know of a place where you can get all the cars you want for free... oh, by the way... there's probably one or two stolen cars mixed in there but who cares.'

I think any reasonable person would call this 'damaging.' Hey, if you want to do the homework to find all the little sites on the web that cater to the free porn people, then by all means, go ahead and do so. By leaving a post like this up in a public place, the Forum is basically 'looking the other way' at letting people post links to places to download stolen content. Stolen content IS bad for the industry. Period. I don't think (at least I hope) I need to go into the book of reasons why that's true...

[ila]

....Hey, if you want to do the homework to find all the little sites on the web that cater to the free porn people, then by all means, go ahead and do so. By leaving a post like this up in a public place, the Forum is basically 'looking the other way' at letting people post links to places to download stolen content. Stolen content IS bad for the industry. Period. I don't think (at least I hope) I need to go into the book of reasons why that's true...

First of all I have no desire to go out looking for tube sites or free sites. It is a very rare occasion if I even look at a free porn site (except for tlb).

Secondly not all tube sites have stolen content. Some do, but even then not all content is stolen.

Thirdly this site does not tolerate stolen content nor are links to tube sites allowed. It states this in the rules.

[GroobyKrissy]

First of all I have no desire to go out looking for tube sites or free sites. It is a very rare occasion if I even look at a free porn site (except for tlb).

Secondly not all tube sites have stolen content. Some do, but even then not all content is stolen.

Thirdly this site does not tolerate stolen content nor are links to tube sites allowed. It states this in the rules.

BUT... it's ok for someone to say, 'Hey, private me for the links for free content?' I'm pretty sure this is what is meant when one refers to a 'double standard.'

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that probably 99.9% of all tube and torrent sites have stolen content on them. They simply couldn't exist as a business model without it.

Even if SOME of the content is stolen (hey, I just robbed a bank but I left some of the money there so everything's ok) for a particular site, should this Forum be in the business of encouraging people to go there or making it easier for persons to find the site? I think not... that is, if you truly believe in the rules you've set up.

[GroobyKrissy]

Surely it is up to him to identify and contact those paid-up members who have made available the sets for free.

C'mon... really? Do I really need to explain why this is simply an unreasonable and impossible expectation? Are you really the bronzed beauty that is your avatar?

We site owners take it on good faith that you're going to use our sites in accordance to the TERMS and CONDITIONS just as people who join sites take it on good faith that they're going to get their monies worth. Most people do follow the rules.

[Bionca]

Folks -

I'm just not seeing the need for ruffled feathers here. Seanchai WANTS people to repost his stuff (within reason), to talk about his (and others) models, to discuss the quality content and nature of the business. "Within reason" being the operative words.

He understands that this is an insular, but growing, market. He knows that a few pics here and there is good for business. But he also knows that most people won't pay for something if they don't have to. It has to be a balancing act - come down to hard and you alienate your fans, allow unrestricted posting of content and you are ultimately running some sort of porn charity. If you read the first post, what is being asked is quite understandable and reasonable.

[ila]

... that is, if you truly believe in the rules you've set up.

I am not the owner of this site nor do I make the rules.

This thread is getting off topic. It was originally intended to ask members here to quit posting more than 3 pictures from any one set from a Grooby site. This is a reasonable request and is the thrust of the thread.

[WendyWilliams]

As a Producer myself I have to agree with Seanchai about posting "excessive" amounts of pictures from a set. I DO NOT have a problem with a fan posting some pictures to reply to a thread about something like "favorite shemale" "girls in glasses" ETC ETC HOWEVER I do NOT want someone posting excessive amounts from a set because I only usually release 15 pictures from a set for my affiliates..........Fans using pictures on boards is different to someone who is an affiliate and is providing traffic for that reason to my website. Those affiliates are usually providing a text link to my website and I am going to hopefully get traffic from that whereas a FAN posting pictures is usually more for "sharing" than for promotion, THOUGH sometimes it goes hand in hand.

So I LOVE LOVE to see and read threads about myself and the ladies I shoot but I hope people can realize how much money I spend to run a website and hold back with excessive posting of pictures from myself or my models sets.

Hugs
Wendy

NOW GET TO JACKING OFF LOL

[Jenae LaTorque]

Wendy,
Thank you, Classy Lady. It is nice to hear from you on this matter. Your input was very well put, and I couldn't agree with you more.

_____________________________:)___________________ ______________

seanchi, I would like to apologize for taking offense at your tone. I did do the google search you suggested. OOPS! I quickly saw part of our problem. It's that Scots-Irish heritage which we share. Not the most diplomatic people in the world are we? I am glad that this discussion did not get as hot as some board exchanges(wars?) I saw. I still have a problem seeing that the amount of traffic in pics here is a serious problem. I will say that there maybe was a problem with several threads though. Having an engineering background, I do notice numbers. And I had noticed the very high number of visits to the Harley thread. Since you have removed the majority of the pics, I was unable to assertain how many downloads there have been. Of the pics remaining, the high number was 353, with the majority falling under 100 views(downloads). The high count downloaded pic suggests that maybe it was just the tip of an iceberg and that many of the removed pics had a higher download number. It is still debatable how many of those "grabs" resulted in lost sales for you. There are some other threads that do have relatively high download counts, but in general, most pics here do not. A lot of this is due to the way download restrictions are. There are less than 180 members who have posts of over 100 and I suspect many of them, like me, don't download many pics here.
Then there are the numbers of who is here on the home page. At the present moment as I write this, there are 19 members and 59 guests here. Since guests are unable to download pics; their presence, while contributing to the count for thread visits, do not count any for downloaded pics. All they can do here is read the posts, save small pics, and follow links posted here. I can readily see where links to sites that do post massive amounts of "stolen material" is a matter of deep concern to producers, not only in your field, but in all areas. I don't envy you - your problems there.

Summation - I don't see pic posting here as a big problem for you. As has been stated, they are also a promotion for your sites, not as good as your promo galleries, but a promotion nevertheless. There may need to be a modification of the rules here regarding posting. As it is, sometimes you have one member posting pics from a set, and then another member posts more pics from the same set, and then another.... Not good! Perhaps we need a modification in the rules regarding this. Perhaps the mods and the big boss could come up with something there.

I wish you the best of luck in your fight and like I said before - I don't envy you your problems. And I certainly don't envy your position as moderator - you can ask SSL about that.

[Be_my_nude]

C'mon... really? Do I really need to explain why this is simply an unreasonable and impossible expectation? Are you really the bronzed beauty that is your avatar?

We site owners take it on good faith that you're going to use our sites in accordance to the TERMS and CONDITIONS just as people who join sites take it on good faith that they're going to get their monies worth. Most people do follow the rules.

Of course it is an unreasonable expectation - as unreasonable as expecting free sets on a Pay-site not to go wandering off into the WWW whole or in part to become available to eager porn-hunters. I think all I'm saying is that the responsibility for monitoring and preventing such abuse is two-sided, and that an appeal for principled rehandling of material is a bit like farting upwind.

Oh, my Avatar ? Well I couldn't find one of myself good-looking enough not to attract guffaws, so when I saw a one that was the near mirro-image of my daughter, I thought I'd use that ! A male friend of mine commented that I had a bit of a brass cheek to join a Transexual Forum, so I got someone to add the bronze ! Glad you like it. I think my daughter's lovely. :hug:

[GroobyKrissy]

Of course it is an unreasonable expectation - as unreasonable as expecting free sets on a Pay-site not to go wandering off into the WWW whole or in part to become available to eager porn-hunters.

The two are NOT equitable for the simple reason that one is proactive and the other is very active. We, as site owners, proactively state and ask people that when they join our sites, download all the content you want during the length of your subscription for PERSONAL use but DO NOT repost, exhibit, or transmit it anywhere else. It is a statement / request that is agreed to upon joining the site, regardless if you read the full terms and conditions or not (mortgage foreclosure anyone?).

The other is an ACTIVE premeditated CHOICE to post pictures that you know you don't have full permission to post in a public setting.

You cannot logically compare the two.

Our expectations as site owners are extremely reasonable. Exhibit some self control and don't post what doesn't belong to you, intellectually or artistically. Or, repost it within reason once you do have permission (i.e. - an affiliate). If you can't do that... then don't join the site.

[seanchai]

Ok, for all of those crying how people here don't cause a problem:
http://forum.transladyboy.com/showthread.php?p=111153#post111153

This poster, posted 30 images from a set we put up on our new site ShemalePornstar.com on Friday. We haven't promoted in anywhere other than the 5 images on the preview page, there are not images of the set been given out yet this poster, took 15 fantastic images and posted them, followed by another post of 15 images including some of the best shots.

If you don't think that's got the potential to hurt our business, then your wrong.

[seanchai]

I have to say I am, like Jenae, somewhat puzzled as to what the qualifications are for a member to become a Moderator. It would seem no co-incidence that Seanchai got himself appointed Moderator for Freebies. As such I can hardly think he can claim to be impartial ( an absolute pre-requisite, I would have thought ), without vested interests.

I've had mod. status here almost all of this year. You'd have to ask the owner why.
I will say, I've no interest in moderaring anything other than stolen content or links to stolen content.


One aspect which seems to me curious. It seems that Seanchai is against members of this Forum liberally posting pictures which have already been downladed by paid-up members of any of his listed sites. Surely it is up to him to identify and contact those paid-up members who have made available the sets for free. Clearly their paid for membership makes them feel entitled to do what they want with the pictures. Make no mistake about it, these pictures were not 'stolen ' form the sites in the first place, so how can members of this Forum be accused by Seanchai of handling ' stolen goods '?


Surely even a Yorkshireman can't be that clueless? This doesn't even deserve an answer. UPLOADED content is the responbility of the uploader and the site. Our sites have clear rules and Terms of Service.


I'm also pretty unhappy about the possibility that a Moderator may have abused his powers or position. Perhaps Seanchai might care to comment ?

Not really.

[seanchai]

Of course it is an unreasonable expectation - as unreasonable as expecting free sets on a Pay-site not to go wandering off into the WWW whole or in part to become available to eager porn-hunters. I think all I'm saying is that the responsibility for monitoring and preventing such abuse is two-sided, and that an appeal for principled rehandling of material is a bit like farting upwind.

If you are happy to see a business you love and content you feel very strongly for, be decimated and spread around for free, to see the potential of your livlihood and the many employees worldwide go down the drain and to have the threat of not producing the content that the models and producers want to do, because some ill-mannered, inconsidate, internet heroes wish to repost it - then bully for you. I'm not. If it upsets a few people, it's nothing new. It's certainly not farting upwind, which is why we're one of the few companies surviving when many have failed.

[seanchai]

Jenae
After only just returning home after many years living abroad and even more years on the internet, I know it's a thin line in text compared to a much broader one verbally.

Respectfully, you can quote numbers to me all night ... if this forum had 5 members posting multiple sets, we'd still have a problem. This is not the only TG forum we work with, practically every decent forum out there we've had an agreement with and it's nothing new with this forum. Only when I returned from being away from the trip, did I notice to the extent some threads had gotten out of hand (incl. one posted today - see above).

If I hadn't made a notification, 95% of people probably wouldn't have realised we were asking for content to be deleted. However, given the fact that I will be watching more actively what's going up, in an effort to save my time and to be transparant, I made the requests.


Wendy,
Thank you, Classy Lady. It is nice to hear from you on this matter. Your input was very well put, and I couldn't agree with you more.

_____________________________:)___________________ ______________

seanchi, I would like to apologize for taking offense at your tone. I did do the google search you suggested. OOPS! I quickly saw part of our problem. It's that Scots-Irish heritage which we share. Not the most diplomatic people in the world are we? I am glad that this discussion did not get as hot as some board exchanges(wars?) I saw. I still have a problem seeing that the amount of traffic in pics here is a serious problem. I will say that there maybe was a problem with several threads though. Having an engineering background, I do notice numbers. And I had noticed the very high number of visits to the Harley thread. Since you have removed the majority of the pics, I was unable to assertain how many downloads there have been. Of the pics remaining, the high number was 353, with the majority falling under 100 views(downloads). The high count downloaded pic suggests that maybe it was just the tip of an iceberg and that many of the removed pics had a higher download number. It is still debatable how many of those "grabs" resulted in lost sales for you. There are some other threads that do have relatively high download counts, but in general, most pics here do not. A lot of this is due to the way download restrictions are. There are less than 180 members who have posts of over 100 and I suspect many of them, like me, don't download many pics here.
Then there are the numbers of who is here on the home page. At the present moment as I write this, there are 19 members and 59 guests here. Since guests are unable to download pics; their presence, while contributing to the count for thread visits, do not count any for downloaded pics. All they can do here is read the posts, save small pics, and follow links posted here. I can readily see where links to sites that do post massive amounts of "stolen material" is a matter of deep concern to producers, not only in your field, but in all areas. I don't envy you - your problems there.

Summation - I don't see pic posting here as a big problem for you. As has been stated, they are also a promotion for your sites, not as good as your promo galleries, but a promotion nevertheless. There may need to be a modification of the rules here regarding posting. As it is, sometimes you have one member posting pics from a set, and then another member posts more pics from the same set, and then another.... Not good! Perhaps we need a modification in the rules regarding this. Perhaps the mods and the big boss could come up with something there.

I wish you the best of luck in your fight and like I said before - I don't envy you your problems. And I certainly don't envy your position as moderator - you can ask SSL about that.

[johndowe]

Absolute rubbish. Go read the law before you bother posting.

Hi there.

I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT THE LAW, I WAS TALKING ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON, AND HOW THINGS ARE.

GRAB A BRAIN, WILL YA!


JohnDowe.

[seanchai]

HAS to be said is that everything that is posted on the internet becomes de facto public domain, so copyrights are a bit of a non issue


So basically, you just made that up? It has no legal grounds or precedent?

I heard your brain was missing so maybe I'll grab that for a laugh or too.
Arse.

[johndowe]

So basically, you just made that up? It has no legal grounds or precedent?

I heard your brain was missing so maybe I'll grab that for a laugh or too.
Arse.

Hi there.

I see i have used BIG words you do not understand, "de facto" means; in effect, or by default, and i didn't make it up, it is a fact, when you place a file on the internet, that ostrich you posted for example, the person who took it posted it on the internet, then you found it, and you reposted it here, the guy who posted it no longer had ANY control over it is now public domain, if he wanted to delete every copy of it could he? No, because it is no longer his to control, the one in your cpu is now yours, not his anymore, wheather he put it up for pay or free, remember; ownership is 90% of the law.

That is the REALITY of the internet, and no law will change that, not even software, it may make it a bit more complicated but it will not change.


JohnDowe.

[seanchai]

Hi there.

I see i have used BIG words you do not understand, "de facto" means; in effect, or by default, and i didn't make it up, it is a fact, when you place a file on the internet, that ostrich you posted for example, the person who took it posted it on the internet, then you found it, and you reposted it here, the guy who posted it no longer had ANY control over it is now public domain, if he wanted to delete every copy of it could he? No, because it is no longer his to control, the one in your cpu is now yours, not his anymore, wheather he put it up for pay or free, remember; ownership is 90% of the law.

That is the REALITY of the internet, and no law will change that, not even software, it may make it a bit more complicated but it will not change.


JohnDowe.

I understand big words, "de facto" is two small words - and yes this, theory of yours holds no weight.
What a crock of shit, I even stated the ostrich was copyrighted to the original.
Your just an idiot - THAT is the reality.
Unbelievable.

Simple fact is, John. You can't post the content. Take it or leave it.

[SandraB]

I understand big words, "de facto" is two small words - and yes this, theory of yours holds no weight.
What a crock of shit, I even stated the ostrich was copyrighted to the original.
Your just an idiot - THAT is the reality.
Unbelievable.

Simple fact is, John. You can't post the content. Take it or leave it.

Hi all.

I see the old saying "There is none blinder than the one who doesn't want to see" is true.

And "his" theory is not a theory is is a FACT, you may ask to have the content removed, or even threaten to sue, but in the end it is still up to the owners and operators of the site to decide to keep or remove the posted content.

And if i had to choose the idiot between you Seanchai and JohnDowe i would pick you Seanchai.


Sandra.

[seanchai]

And "his" theory is not a theory is is a FACT, you may ask to have the content removed, or even threaten to sue, but in the end it is still up to the owners and operators of the site to decide to keep or remove the posted content.


Threaten to sue? Or sue? Or just go directly to the server company.
Whatever twist you want to put on it, it's illegal.

Regardless of any further idiotic arguments, I think I've made myself available for this topic to run it's course so rather than devolve it into a slanging match, we'll leave it here.

Our statements are clear enough on what we need to be done.

[johndowe]

Threaten to sue? Or sue? Or just go directly to the server company.
Whatever twist you want to put on it, it's illegal.

Regardless of any further idiotic arguments, I think I've made myself available for this topic to run it's course so rather than devolve it into a slanging match, we'll leave it here.

Our statements are clear enough on what we need to be done.

Hi there.

Go ahead, run away, since you see that you CAN'T win.

And the server company shouldn't even be part of this because they are only ofering the internet hosting, and they have NOTHING to do with this site otherwise.

It would be illegal for them to remove the material without the consent of their customer, namely the owners and operators of this site.

And to see someone who uses the internet as his work and doesn't underatand it, now that's unbelievable.


JohnDowe.

[seanchai]

Hi there.

Go ahead, run away, since you see that you CAN'T win.

And the server company shouldn't even be part of this because they are only ofering the internet hosting, and they have NOTHING to do with this site otherwise.

It would be illegal for them to remove the material without the consent of their customer, namely the owners and operators of this site.

And to see someone who uses the internet as his work and doesn't underatand it, now that's unbelievable.


JohnDowe.

I'm not going anywhere John.
It wouldn't be illegal, we have sites closed by servers all the time, when notifiying them of stolen content and official DMCa notifications, it's not illegal. Wake the fuck up. We know what we're doing - you obviously are basing your comments on your own opinion - and not what actually happens.
I've no need to make unsubstantiated comments, this is just daily business for me, nothing new.

[johndowe]

Hi there.

I was going to ansewer you, but i don't want to fan the flames, anyway you got what you wanted, only 3 pics from pay sites, what else do you want?

And the internet is public domain, it isn't just my opinion, look it up.


JohnDowe.

[seanchai]

Hi there.

I was going to ansewer you, but i don't want to fan the flames, anyway you got what you wanted, only 3 pics from pay sites, what else do you want?

And the internet is public domain, it isn't just my opinion, look it up.


JohnDowe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain

"The public domain is a range of abstract materials-commonly referred to as intellectual property-which are not owned or controlled by anyone. The term indicates that these materials are therefore "public property", and available for anyone to use for any purpose. The public domain can be defined in contrast to several forms of intellectual property; the public domain in contrast to copyrighted works is different from the public domain in contrast to trademarks or patented works. Furthermore, the laws of various countries define the scope of the public domain differently, making it necessary to specify which jurisdiction's public domain is being discussed.

The public domain is most often discussed in contrast to works whose use is restricted by copyright. Under modern law, most original works of art, literature, music, etc. are covered by copyright from the time of their creation for a limited period of time (which varies by country). When the copyright expires, the work enters the public domain. It is estimated that currently, of all the books found in the world's libraries, only about 15% are in the public domain, even though only 10% of all books are still in print; the remaining 75% are books which remain unavailable because they are still under copyright protection.[1]

The public domain can also be defined in contrast to trademarks. Names, logos, and other identifying marks used in commerce can be restricted as proprietary trademarks for a single business to use. Trademarks can be maintained indefinitely, but they can also lapse through disuse, negligence, or widespread misuse, and enter the public domain. It is possible, however, for a lapsed trademark to become proprietary again, leaving the public domain."

[citoyen]

ask: in the news-groups are galleries with more than 15. how it behaves there
with Seanchai's postulates, because there you no restrictions.
who offers a fair, you need not fear for his client. friendly greetings

[GroobyKrissy]

ask: in the news-groups are galleries with more than 15. how it behaves there
with Seanchai's postulates, because there you no restrictions.
who offers a fair, you need not fear for his client. friendly greetings

Not quite sure what you're asking here... but, if my assumptions are correct, it seems you are asking what about newsgroups?

Newsgroups are a whole other ballgame and cannot be compared to Forums with moderation. Obviously, they are pretty difficult to police and hey, if you want to download stuff from there with the risk of trojans and viruses... more power to you.

[GroobyKrissy]

Hi there.

I see i have used BIG words you do not understand, "de facto" means; in effect, or by default, and i didn't make it up...

Was busy over the weekend but nice to come back and see the silliness continues here...

Actually, you did make your definition of 'De Facto' up. It does NOT mean 'in effect' or 'by default' as you postulate. And, before you go shooting your mouth off, I have studied both Latin and law so, yes, I can speak on this matter.

De Facto is a legal term (thus, separating it from the context is, in itself, an improper usage of the term) meaning something that has no legal establishment but is generally accepted as true. The very fact that Copyright laws exist render your argument completely illogical from the start.

To state that any material posted on the Internet becomes De Facto Public Domain and have that statement be true, no other laws concerning the subject would have to exist and it would have to be generally accepted as true that Copyright Laws don't apply to the Internet. Both of these statements are FALSE.

Imagine standing before a judge and saying that you robbing banks is de facto OK because it has been done before. Or, try opening your own brand of Burger King and using their trademark / copyright and telling the judge, 'Well, it's on the Internet so it must be de facto public domain...' Let me know how that works out for you. He would laugh in your face and send you back to law 101. Before you start hurling insults at people and misusing terms you don't fully understand... How's about educating yourself a little more about what you're thinking of speaking about?

[citoyen]

Not quite sure what you're asking here... but, if my assumptions are correct, it seems you are asking what about newsgroups?

Newsgroups are a whole other ballgame and cannot be compared to Forums with moderation. Obviously, they are pretty difficult to police and hey, if you want to download stuff from there with the risk of trojans and viruses... more power to you.
I want to put it more clearly:
The news-group server thwarting the requirement of the industry to limitation. copyright as defined in the internet unclear.
Seanchai says what is clear. who wants to keep customers, it must treat them fairly. Otherwise they are looking for other opportunities. friendly greetings

[GroobyKrissy]

Summation - I don't see pic posting here as a big problem for you. As has been stated, they are also a promotion for your sites, not as good as your promo galleries, but a promotion nevertheless. There may need to be a modification of the rules here regarding posting. As it is, sometimes you have one member posting pics from a set, and then another member posts more pics from the same set, and then another.... Not good! Perhaps we need a modification in the rules regarding this. Perhaps the mods and the big boss could come up with something there.

Truly, I find your excuses completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. Let's see...

The request was made for people to exhibit some respect and self-control and limit posting pictures to 3 pictures from one set. This you answer by compiling data and statistics with the effort to show that there are few potential members here on this Forum and stating that it's all in the name of advertising?

Irrelevant to the original request. Who cares about your data and statistics which, to me, only show the narcissistic tendencies you seem to exhibit on a regular basis? The original point was, posting of content is getting out of hand and in a fair attempt at compromise and avoiding further action, 3 pictures was put forth as a limit. How does the potential member base here or the efficacy of advertising have any relevancy to the original topic?

You hurl unfounded insults to someone and then offer a backhanded apology (if you can call it that) and then further try to confuse the original issue?

Seriously, folks, I'm all for lively debate and will gladly take the time to explain my points of view. But let's not muddle the waters with insults and irrelevant points. I have yet to see someone respond logically to the points I have offered here without digressing into a 3rd grade, 'Well you're stupid' mentality (with the one possible exception of Be_my_nude).

[GroobyKrissy]

I want to put it more clearly:
The news-group server thwarting the requirement of the industry to limitation. copyright as defined in the internet unclear.
Seanchai says what is clear. who wants to keep customers, it must treat them fairly. Otherwise they are looking for other opportunities. friendly greetings

Again, I think things are being lost in translation. But, I think you're now saying that customers will go elsewhere if not treated fairly? I don't think anyone is stating differently.

Hey, I'm all for competition between businesses. I don't think you're quite being clear as to what you're saying 'treat them fairly' is all about. If you're stating that a particular company does not treat their members fairly, you should be able to back that statement up with facts though. If anyone is being treated unfairly, it is the sites who deliver the content to paying members and then have to deal with dishonest members who redistribute content illegally.

Copyright as defined in the Internet is NOT unclear. I don't know where this whole feeling comes from. Let's be clear... the Internet is just a big, fat, bloated library. Libraries are full of intellectual property that is (at least when I was a kid, it was... I haven't actually been to a physical library in some time) FREE. That doesn't mean that all the property contained in it is magically public domain. Just because something is ACCESSIBLE doesn't mean it's not owned by somebody. That's why most companies trademark their images...

Anyway... again... completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.

[seanchai]

ask: in the news-groups are galleries with more than 15. how it behaves there
with Seanchai's postulates, because there you no restrictions.
who offers a fair, you need not fear for his client. friendly greetings

Yoda ????? :turnon:

[citoyen]

Again, I think things are being lost in translation. But, I think you're now saying that customers will go elsewhere if not treated fairly? I don't think anyone is stating differently.

Hey, I'm all for competition between businesses. I don't think you're quite being clear as to what you're saying 'treat them fairly' is all about. If you're stating that a particular company does not treat their members fairly, you should be able to back that statement up with facts though. If anyone is being treated unfairly, it is the sites who deliver the content to paying members and then have to deal with dishonest members who redistribute content illegally.

Copyright as defined in the Internet is NOT unclear. I don't know where this whole feeling comes from. Let's be clear... the Internet is just a big, fat, bloated library. Libraries are full of intellectual property that is (at least when I was a kid, it was... I haven't actually been to a physical library in some time) FREE. That doesn't mean that all the property contained in it is magically public domain. Just because something is ACCESSIBLE doesn't mean it's not owned by somebody. That's why most companies trademark their images...

Anyway... again... completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.

I boldly assert that the problems that are discussed in this topic are partly attributable to participate in the previously written.
Another aspect is the defined rules of a group, if
I want to move here, I must act according to them. ! IF I must draw the consequences and go other routes. 3, 15 or more images is no longer the question, SSL has clearly defined the proposition.
Moreover, philosophical discussions have sometimes sexy
surprises: the first blog to your views and not the last times. friendly greetings

[Jenae LaTorque]

I see that we have new additions to the rules. Looks like some solid steps in the right direction. I would not mind if the rule was amended to require that only 15 pics from a set could be posted by all members cumulatively. Most have you noticed that many times we have one member posting 15 from a set, then another member posts some more from that set, and sometimes even another posting more. I think that 15 from a set are more than adequate, in fact: I think 6 pics (2 neat rows of 3) should be adequate to showplace the model. If others require more; than a link to the authorized "FHG" site could be followed and they could then download the rest there.

The only objectionable drawback I can see to this reccomendation is that it will place a larger load on our moderators. Perhaps this load may be lessened soon if warnings and penalties are levied on members violating the rules. Hopefully incidents would decrease as the awareness rises.

In summation, I do believe, that for most of us, restrictions in the number of pics of a set are no hardship. There are a lot of promotional pics out there on the net anyway and there is no need for this forum to act as a prime source of pics.

[citoyen]

Yoda ????? :turnon:

I am not master yoda from star wars, I must disappoint you, unfortunately. friendly greetings

[citoyen]

I see that we have new additions to the rules. Looks like some solid steps in the right direction. I would not mind if the rule was amended to require that only 15 pics from a set could be posted by all members cumulatively. Most have you noticed that many times we have one member posting 15 from a set, then another member posts some more from that set, and sometimes even another posting more. I think that 15 from a set are more than adequate, in fact: I think 6 pics (2 neat rows of 3) should be adequate to showplace the model. If others require more; than a link to the authorized "FHG" site could be followed and they could then download the rest there.

The only objectionable drawback I can see to this reccomendation is that it will place a larger load on our moderators. Perhaps this load may be lessened soon if warnings and penalties are levied on members violating the rules. Hopefully incidents would decrease as the awareness rises.

In summation, I do believe, that for most of us, restrictions in the number of pics of a set are no hardship. There are a lot of promotional pics out there on the net anyway and there is no need for this forum to act as a prime source of pics.


this is exactly the core. friendly greetings

[Jenae LaTorque]

Master Citoyen??

[GroobyKrissy]

I see that we have new additions to the rules. Looks like some solid steps in the right direction. I would not mind if the rule was amended to require that only 15 pics from a set could be posted by all members cumulatively. Most have you noticed that many times we have one member posting 15 from a set, then another member posts some more from that set, and sometimes even another posting more. I think that 15 from a set are more than adequate, in fact: I think 6 pics (2 neat rows of 3) should be adequate to showplace the model. If others require more; than a link to the authorized "FHG" site could be followed and they could then download the rest there.

So, this is how you represent yourself publicly... wise, reasonable, etc.

BUT... this is how you answer someone privately? (see below) You have no other recourse in the face of logic but to backtrack on your statements, and hurl insults? Seriously... get a life.

Sorry folks... I typically wouldn't post something publicly that someone has stated privately but this is just rubbish and the true face of Jenae isn't as pleasant as her posts represent. This sent to me by Jenae in response to a private email she sent me.

PS: It was my CHOICE to get into porn, not out of necessity. I actually left a very successful career in the tech industry as an OM. My site has (and continues) to survive the current economic turmoils, which in itself proves that I have some business acumen. Quite honestly, I could really care less about your opinions about my looks, since my worth as a person isn't dependent on that, but you won't find me wallowing in the mud of insulting other people because I cannot build a logical and cohesive debate. If you take the time to read my posts, I think I've more than proved that I am pretty intelligent and can put together a reasonable discussion without having to stoop to insults. As stated before, I have yet to see some logical and well thought out answers (NOT EXCUSES) to the points I've made.

Damn if you ain't rather stupid. Because you can't understand numbers and what they indicate or downright prove, then you think they are irrelevant. Not only are you ignorant, but you wallow in it. No wonder you went into the sex business, you don't have the capacity to make it otherwise. To be honest, I did find your musings on your site somewhat interesting; I see now that is all you've got. You certainly ain't much to look at.

[GroobyKrissy]

If you look at the posts again, you will see that I am not contending the rights of the pic owners. There were others that do, I don't.

Jenae:

Seriously? I'm PRETTY SURE that your first two posts in this thread are pretty much contending just that.

In my mind, I see those pictures as paid for since we have to endure the advertising, pop ups, and other miscellania that accompany them.


Because I watch the commercials on TV I therefore own the shows that I watch and can reproduce, rebroadcast, and resell them as I see fit?

Nowhere do I see a claim of copyright which forbids the further dissemination of the pics.

You clearly do NOT understand copyright laws.

For you to come on here and plead for a lower limit is ridiculous.

Basically saying that we, site owners, shouldn't have the right to request (I see no pleading going on here) a limit on what is posted on a Forum that bills itself as a 'legitimate' Forum?

Backtrack to follow please... I'm interested to see what you say to this...

[citoyen]

Master Citoyen??

citoyen is the condition of the masters still far away.
friendly greetings:turnoff:

[Jenae LaTorque]

And I might say that for you to publically air anything that is contained in a personal message will be considered by many as an unethical act and not very nice. I will not repute the words you quoted because they do represent my view of someone who makes self righteous claims about relevance and do not bother to back up their assertion. The plain fact of the matter is that the numbers represented by the available data indicate that for the most part, there is not all that much downloading of member exclusive pics going on here.

Then you pull quotes out of context - another questionable action. Those quotes were pulled from my ealier posts where we were questioning the apparent declaration that all posts should be limited to 3 pics per set. At that time seanchi had not made the addition to his initial post as it now stands. Those quotes are in referance to the matter of "promo" pics that are freely available on the net. Many see those as in the public domain and I can appreciate their position. Part of the price we do pay in accessing them is that we are subjected to advertising, annoying pop ups, and in worst case scenarios; the attempts of sites to put adware, malware, and other goodies on OUR COMPUTERS. So I can see where users do feel a certain ownership in these pics. I DO believe they have no right to repost them on their own site in an effort to make money off of them. I do believe they do have some right to post them here on this forum. And as mentioned by other members the site owners do gain a certain amount of promotion this way just as they gain from FHG site promotion.

I have to be somewhere now so I will sign off for now.

[GroobyKrissy]

And I might say that for you to publically air anything that is contained in a personal message will be considered by many as an unethical act and not very nice. I will not repute the words you quoted because they do represent my view of someone who makes self righteous claims about relevance and do not bother to back up their assertion. The plain fact of the matter is that the numbers represented by the available data indicate that for the most part, there is not all that much downloading of member exclusive pics going on here.

Then you pull quotes out of context - another questionable action. Those quotes were pulled from my ealier posts where we were questioning the apparent declaration that all posts should be limited to 3 pics per set. At that time seanchi had not made the addition to his initial post as it now stands. Those quotes are in referance to the matter of "promo" pics that are freely available on the net. Many see those as in the public domain and I can appreciate their position. Part of the price we do pay in accessing them is that we are subjected to advertising, annoying pop ups, and in worst case scenarios; the attempts of sites to put adware, malware, and other goodies on OUR COMPUTERS. So I can see where users do feel a certain ownership in these pics. I DO believe they have no right to repost them on their own site in an effort to make money off of them. I do believe they do have some right to post them here on this forum. And as mentioned by other members the site owners do gain a certain amount of promotion this way just as they gain from FHG site promotion.

I have to be somewhere now so I will sign off for now.

OOHHH... Blue and Red text! Well, that MUST mean, you're right...

So, hey, guilty as charged. And, don't go spouting 'Ethics' and 'not very nice' at me... take a look at the mirror on those two accounts. At least I have the decency to admit, it may have not been in the best of judgments to post your excerpt publicly... I got caught up in a rare moment of anger because, quite honestly, I didn't do anything to deserve this attack. And, I would call it COWARDLY at the very least to hide those sentiments behind a PM. BUT... hey, wait a minute, since you sent it to me over the Internet, I have the right to post it anywhere I want, right? I mean, I basically own it now, according to your own logic.

Nice backpedal but even for those who read the entirety of your two posts, I don't believe the context will help solidify the validity of your arguments or your own need to backtrack. It's pretty obvious where you were going with those posts. Bottom line, you got caught and now have to backpedal. I pulled the quotes out more for spacial reasons than anything. I invite anyone to read the two posts and decide for yourselves if you'd honestly think that she's only speaking of 'promo pictures' there. I submit, grudgingly, that Jenae is smart enough, with her [self proclaimed] 150+ IQ, to have put those exact words in there if that was the original intent. Unless she was doing due diligence on all the 'FREE' sites she visited (which I highly doubt), certainly there was no way in knowing whether or not her pictures were from a legitimate Affiliate Program or ripped and therefore, 'ETHICALLY' should not have been downloaded or redistributed.

Funny how you still haven't publicly answered or refuted ANY of the points I've brought up concerning your irrelevant posts, confusing the original issue, and etc. ?? Again, I have NOT resorted to name calling and insults other than to say that your logic is at times, faulty and you seem to have a very egotistical view of yourself... a point which it seems others share reading through your 'Ask Janae Anything' thread.

I do believe they do have some right to post them here on this forum.

FALSE. And, this shows your incorrect beliefs on this subject. If you don't actually OWN the copyright to an image NOT in public domain, you don't have 'THE RIGHT' to post it ANYWHERE without permission. Just like, if you eat at McDonald's EVERY SINGLE DAY FOR FIFTY YEARS, it doesn't make you able to suddenly open up your very own McDonald's and use all their trademarked images and copyrighted materials. Usage doesn't equal ownership. You're wrong. I know it's asking a lot, but humble yourself and just admit it.

Many see those as in the public domain and I can appreciate their position. Part of the price we do pay in accessing them is that we are subjected to advertising, annoying pop ups, and in worst case scenarios; the attempts of sites to put adware, malware, and other goodies on OUR COMPUTERS

So, in the name of good 'ETHICS' and 'BEING NICE' can you please provide a list of the sites that DO NOT put adware, malware, or other goodies on your computer because you're sure making it sound like they all do... which is NOT TRUE. Obviously, there are some bad sites out there. The sites in question (listed) are all well run sites with honest webmasters / owners at the helm. Do you only go out and hold up only the 'bad banks' or go rape only the 'deserving women?' Strong words I know but think about what this course of logic is saying. Basically, because there are sites that do try to put crap on your computer that gives you THE RIGHT to violate the Terms and Conditions of ALL the sites? C'mon!!! If we were FORCING you to click on a link then MAYBE you'd have a small point (and even then weak) to make regarding 'paying' for something. As it stands, you're making yet another excuse for your wanting to view and enjoy something for free and redistribute it to feed your own ego.

[GroobyKrissy]

I will not repute the words you quoted because they do represent my view of someone who makes self righteous claims about relevance and do not bother to back up their assertion.

And... BTW (this in response to a dig Jenae made in a PM to my typing 'valid' when I mean to say, 'invalid' insinuating once again that I have a low intelligence.

I think you mean... 'Repudiate' here?

Nice excuse... Publicly, I say, you won't because you can't. I've backed up my assertions (Which assertion are you referring to here... quote it back to me please and I'll back it up.) plenty and nowhere have I said anything 'self-righteous.' In order to do so, there first has to be something that I see myself as being superior over morally... please tell me where I've stated this?

Again... feeding your own ego by making posts using words which sound fancy but are entirely inappropriate for the context. Nice. And you call out Bionca for playing the victim...?? Again... classy move.

[ila]

This thread has long ago derailed over petty bickering.

Seanchai,

I am closing this thread because it has gone so far off topic and rapidly sliding into irrelevance. If you need to add more to it then open it, make your post, and close it again.

[seanchai]

This thread has long ago derailed over petty bickering.

Seanchai,

I am closing this thread because it has gone so far off topic and rapidly sliding into irrelevance. If you need to add more to it then open it, make your post, and close it again.

THANKS - GOOD JOB.