Re: ManHub.com - Making money on your stolen content?
[QUOTE=BelAmiOnline;133101]As Dominic mentioned we are one of the studios that has an agreement with Manhub to show some of our DVD titles in their membership area with conditions that there is no promotion off site, or in their free area using our content. (I know of only one studio that has licensed all of their content to just about every file locker and tube site out there without restriction). It is not content that we have on our membership site, and is the same content that is available in the paid areas of less controversial sites like NakedSword and on various other VOD platforms as well.
I understand the frustrations of you guys trying to promote sites and facing a slew of free versions of the same material out there. We feel the same frustration, and as it is product that many of us put heart and soul into, our level of attachment and protectiveness is magnified many times over.
As someone who has been very actively involved in fighting online piracy now for many years, I see our biggest enemy as the (US and by default, world) legislation that provides a âget out of jail freeâ card for these companies who build sites based on stolen content. As long as they (I include google as the main facilitator here) maintain responses that conform with DMCA safe harbor provisions, there is little substantive action that we can take to change the current situation. It is because of this that we make deals with tube sites, file lockers etc
I want to add though that in the case of most of the tube/ file locker players mentioned here by Dominic or others who have made some deals, or efforts to ‘go clean’, that those decisions have only come about after substantial legal pressure and expense by the adult industry including Titan, ourselves, Corbin Fisher, Pink Visual, FSC, Porn Guardian, Flava Works et al (sorry for those of you I have not mentioned). None of these sites had a change of heart due to conscience.
This is not a fight that we are waging here, it is war for the survival of commercial adult production (sorry for the melodramatic metaphor), and if we need to make a few peace treaties along the way instead of trying to shed blood every time, so be it. Is it the optimal solution? No, but I think it is better for all of us here, producers, program owners and affiliates than the alternative.[/QUOTE]
Have you seen their free area? Its LOADED with Bel Ami content - not just in the premium area. Im happy to hear that PG has checked with Manhub as to the licensed content behind their pay wall. What most people are concerned with is whats available and FREE on their FREE site. Why aren’t they still getting DMCA notices for that content (that question was avoided)? Those vids aren’t licensed - at least not licensed from a majority of the studios that PG represents.
As to Peter/Dominic’s response - “the lady doth protest too much methink.” Assuming your answer to our question is accurate, it makes for incredibly strange bedfellows and gives off an air of impropriety. Why not just show your loyalty to the content producers and drop them. Don’t get me wrong I am very appreciative of your work helping to shut down Oron.com, but theres little, if any, difference between Manhub and Oron (besides plausible deniability - “oh the users did it, not us”). This is the sort of business that you need to pick a side in, you can’t have your hand in both cookie jars or it pisses a lot of people off.
Seriously, its not fair to either side in this. What if Titan gets pissed and sues them? You’re now helping to build a case, providing evidence, and possibly testifying against another client? Sucks for Manhub! On the flip side of that same coin if Titan/Corbin got pissed enough to sue, their evidence would be severely diminished because you’ve apparently stopped sending take-down notices (or at least not with the same frequency you were [I]before[I] Manhub was your client), not to mention the potential argument by Manhub that much of the evidence that studio has against them came from a Manhub service provider - which could raise many issues.