Piracy Summit Speakers

[gonzo]

CANOGA PARK, Calif. — The Free Speech Coalition’s (http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/) summit on piracy is taking shape with the announcement of the event’s speakers from both the adult and mainstream industries. “How to Survive and Thrive in the Digital Environment” will be held Nov. 18 at the Sheraton Universal in Universal City, Calif.


Headlining the event are Vivid Entertainment co-chairman Steven Hirsch and AEBN president and founder Scott Coffman. Joining them are executives from NBC-Universal, Warner Bros., Sony, the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and more.

Hirsch and Coffman will speak on a panel discussion about the future of the adult entertainment industry, and specifically about online content distribution. Each session will bring leaders in their respective fields to speak on important areas of interest for all content producers.

On the agenda are sessions discussing copyright infringement, prosecuting pirates, tube sites, new media platforms and distribution issues in the digital age.

Mainstream speakers include:
Steve Kang, senior counsel for anti-piracy legal affairs at NBC-Universal
Dean Garfield, executive Vice President and Chief Strategy Officer of the Motion Picture Association of America
Alasdair McMullen, Senior Vice President of Business Affairs, EMI Music North America
Gill Sperlein, In-House Legal Counsel for adult producer Titan Media
David Kaplan, Vice President of the anti-piracy division at Warner Bros. Studios
Keynote luncheon speaker James Griffin, Warner Music Group
Jennifer Pariser, Senior Counsel in Global Litigation for Sony Music Entertainment

[RawAlex]

We all know the great successes that the movie and music business have had fighting piracy. There was Napster, and, umm, that women they sued for 250,000... and umm, Napster.

[Hell Puppy]

We all know the great successes that the movie and music business have had fighting piracy. There was Napster, and, umm, that women they sued for 250,000... and umm, Napster.

And alienated their customer base while doing it. I haven't bought a CD since they shut down napster.

I do now buy stuff from Itunes and other sources that let me have that instant gratification and choose the cuts I like.

[tony404]

Someone else said didnt they miss that boat a few years too late.

[tony404]

And alienated their customer base while doing it. I haven't bought a CD since they shut down napster.

I do now buy stuff from Itunes and other sources that let me have that instant gratification and choose the cuts I like.

you produce content and had a problem shutting down a company that gave someone elses work away for free?

[Hell Puppy]

you produce content and had a problem shutting down a company that gave someone elses work away for free?

I also find lesbians sexy but two gay guys butt humping to be disgusting.

[Paul Markham]

Without more controls and less the freedom the fight against piracy will always be uphill.

Make it illegal to advertise on a site that clearly promotes the theft of any content and the piracy issue will diminish. Those who promote sharing (STEALING) probably will not be very keen to put up sites they can't profit from. I bet they won't let you advertise if you don't pay or would be furious if you stole their traffic.

Also make it ISPs responsible for who is uploading content. It would be simple to do, if you're not approved you can't upload. A law that was written to protect hosts has been used by pirates to protect them. How does anyone know if the content was uploaded by someone independent of the site or someone employed by the site?

HP do you think theft of porn is cool then?

[buggerlugs]

Also make it ISPs responsible for who is uploading content. It would be simple to do, if you're not approved you can't upload.


How would that be simple?
Half of the software on my computer needs upload to call home, My OS needs upload to update its self, send bug reports etc. How would I send email? How would I update my websites?

ISPs will not be able to monitor every individual on a network EVER and even if they do "approve" me, how do they know what I'm doing if i were to use an encrypted torrent system? (which will be the next stage in piracy).
If I upload a zip file called 'myupdates.zip' to my website, how do they know whats actually inside that zip?

While I agree that they should take some responsibility, its easy to point the finger at ISPs.

[gonzo]

How would that be simple?
Half of the software on my computer needs upload to call home, My OS needs upload to update its self, send bug reports etc. How would I send email? How would I update my websites?

ISPs will not be able to monitor every individual on a network EVER and even if they do "approve" me, how do they know what I'm doing if i were to use an encrypted torrent system? (which will be the next stage in piracy).
If I upload a zip file called 'myupdates.zip' to my website, how do they know whats actually inside that zip?

While I agree that they should take some responsibility, its easy to point the finger at ISPs.

I pay as much attention to what Paul says as I do about him keeping his word.

[Paul Markham]

How would that be simple?
Half of the software on my computer needs upload to call home, My OS needs upload to update its self, send bug reports etc. How would I send email? How would I update my websites?

ISPs will not be able to monitor every individual on a network EVER and even if they do "approve" me, how do they know what I'm doing if i were to use an encrypted torrent system? (which will be the next stage in piracy).
If I upload a zip file called 'myupdates.zip' to my website, how do they know whats actually inside that zip?

While I agree that they should take some responsibility, its easy to point the finger at ISPs.

Ifyou can't get approved as an uploader to your own ISP then you need to find out why. It would need changes in the way we work, but it can be done. It would need the law to be worded so it's not a slam dunk disqualification if one rogue person uploaded something wrongly. But the law needs to be changed some way so ISPs don't just turn around and claim they are not responsible.

Or we all lose out.

Got any better ideas.

Gonzo prove it or fuck off.

[gonzo]

Ifyou can't get approved as an uploader to your own ISP then you need to find out why. It would need changes in the way we work, but it can be done. It would need the law to be worded so it's not a slam dunk disqualification if one rogue person uploaded something wrongly. But the law needs to be changed some way so ISPs don't just turn around and claim they are not responsible.

Or we all lose out.

Got any better ideas.

Gonzo prove it or fuck off.
You can fuck off Paul.

Everyone here knows you talk out both sides of your neck. Bashing the tubes publically and then begging them for the promotion on the other hand.

Add to you showing up here about once a month to stir some shit in an effort to sell your content or shill for some free promo and disappear shortly after to repeat the cycle.

May work for the GFY crowd but all of us here know better.

[Paul Markham]

You need to come up with proof that I did not keep my word or you're just talking.

Yes I only respond to threads that interest me.

I have never begged Tubes for promotion, another lie.

Prove it please. Or is giving them clips begging in your book?

[gonzo]

You need to come up with proof that I did not keep my word or you're just talking.

Yes I only respond to threads that interest me.

I have never begged Tubes for promotion, another lie.

Prove it please. Or is giving them clips begging in your book?

You only respond for shameless self promotion.
Nobody cares Paul.

Hows that Redtube trade working out?

[buggerlugs]

Ifyou can't get approved as an uploader to your own ISP then you need to find out why. It would need changes in the way we work, but it can be done.

so i get approved to upload - as do 10 million other people on my network how do you think my isp can sit and monitor us all 365/24/7? no isp could possibly have those kind of resources.

[RawAlex]

so i get approved to upload - as do 10 million other people on my network how do you think my isp can sit and monitor us all 365/24/7? no isp could possibly have those kind of resources.

At some point, the ISPs will end up being forced to take action to avoid legal liablity. Many ISPs already block standard outgoing email ports to avoid simple minded spammers, so in some ways they are already controlling and checking what their clients do. Examining at least in passing all non-port80 traffic would likely be a good way to spot people serving files, and then you can check to see what files they are offering. You don't have to check every data packet of every user, just run a big sample, find out who is doing what, and then look at them more closely.

The traffic shaping software has been pretty effective (read so effective people noticed) so it wouldn't be hard to use that same sort of data to target network users and check to see if they have potentially illegal content.

P2P isn't that easy to hide, no matter how much they try.

[Paul Markham]

so i get approved to upload - as do 10 million other people on my network how do you think my isp can sit and monitor us all 365/24/7? no isp could possibly have those kind of resources.

Sorry I'm not with you, why should an ISP have 10 million people uploading to them. Not saying it does not happen but can you explain please.

Of course I'm talking about an ISP that is publishing content from it's uploaders, from hosting companies to Tube sites. Maybe it would not work, but I doubt if the Piracy Summit will come up with anything. This industry does not have the balls to take on Pirates as an industry.

I came up with something that did not work. So shoot me. After 8 years of everyone listening to the experts about how the business should be run we are where we are today. Tube sites with crap content, crap quality and crap speeds taking all the traffic. Thank God everyone listened to the experts. </sarcasm>

More lies from Gonzo. Prove I have a trade deal with Redtube. Or is giving them a few samples a trade deal in your book. You say I backed out on an agreement and then lie and lie instead of proving yourself right. I'm challenging you to tell me here what the agreement was and where, when and how we made it. If you're right I will stick to it.

If you're wrong I will tell you how you're wrong. I doubt if you will tell me.

[Paul Markham]

At some point, the ISPs will end up being forced to take action to avoid legal liablity. Many ISPs already block standard outgoing email ports to avoid simple minded spammers, so in some ways they are already controlling and checking what their clients do. Examining at least in passing all non-port80 traffic would likely be a good way to spot people serving files, and then you can check to see what files they are offering. You don't have to check every data packet of every user, just run a big sample, find out who is doing what, and then look at them more closely.

The traffic shaping software has been pretty effective (read so effective people noticed) so it wouldn't be hard to use that same sort of data to target network users and check to see if they have potentially illegal content.

P2P isn't that easy to hide, no matter how much they try.

I agree with you. The Internet was set up as a free area and it's been abused ever since. The days of it remaining free are numbered or the money that could be made will be lost.

So what if it's tough to upload or send emails. That means less people stealing content and less people sending spam.

AND MORE PEOPLE MAKING MONEY.

I'm not technical but I do know the Internet could be a wonderful tool to generate vast amounts of income for the West. Only if it's regulated. Unregulated it's a money pit.

[miz_wright]

Without more controls and less the freedom the fight against piracy will always be uphill.

Make it illegal to advertise on a site that clearly promotes the theft of any content and the piracy issue will diminish... [snip]

Since when is it a good idea to get the government involved in approving ad space on a non-harmful product?

As far as I am aware, the only legal restrictions on advertising media is for smokine - in all other cases, it is self regulated by the ad world itself. Case in point: the trouble finding ad space for Zack and Miri. No governmental agency or sidearm is making it difficult - that is strictly at the choice of the agencies that have space inventories.

No, Paul, while I certainly have problems with the tacit approval of theft by those who choose to advertise on the sites in question, I think the solution is to make the option to do so untenable rather than illegal.

[gonzo]

Sorry I'm not with you, why should an ISP have 10 million people uploading to them. Not saying it does not happen but can you explain please.

Of course I'm talking about an ISP that is publishing content from it's uploaders, from hosting companies to Tube sites. Maybe it would not work, but I doubt if the Piracy Summit will come up with anything. This industry does not have the balls to take on Pirates as an industry.

I came up with something that did not work. So shoot me. After 8 years of everyone listening to the experts about how the business should be run we are where we are today. Tube sites with crap content, crap quality and crap speeds taking all the traffic. Thank God everyone listened to the experts. </sarcasm>

More lies from Gonzo. Prove I have a trade deal with Redtube. Or is giving them a few samples a trade deal in your book. You say I backed out on an agreement and then lie and lie instead of proving yourself right. I'm challenging you to tell me here what the agreement was and where, when and how we made it. If you're right I will stick to it.

If you're wrong I will tell you how you're wrong. I doubt if you will tell me.

Continue to talk out both sides of your neck Paul.

Eveyone here knows that its not my practice to lie just to call bullshit on someone.

And then most everyone here can read between the lines on why I know your credibility to be lacking as well.

Is it about time for your lecture on how traffic doesnt matter in this business either?

[buggerlugs]

Sorry I'm not with you, why should an ISP have 10 million people uploading to them. Not saying it does not happen but can you explain please.

I explained earlier. Even everyday non-noticable stuff requires uploading.
OS updates, software calling home, e-mail sending, online gaming etc etc.

Try this:
Turn your computer on in a morning and do nothing, go back a few hours later and see how much data you have actually uploaded while you were not even there.

Thats how an isp gets 10 million people uploading

[buggerlugs]

At some point, the ISPs will end up being forced to take action to avoid legal liablity. Many ISPs already block standard outgoing email ports to avoid simple minded spammers, so in some ways they are already controlling and checking what their clients do. Examining at least in passing all non-port80 traffic would likely be a good way to spot people serving files, and then you can check to see what files they are offering. You don't have to check every data packet of every user, just run a big sample, find out who is doing what, and then look at them more closely.

The traffic shaping software has been pretty effective (read so effective people noticed) so it wouldn't be hard to use that same sort of data to target network users and check to see if they have potentially illegal content.

P2P isn't that easy to hide, no matter how much they try.

I agree in some respects but controlling an email port is a little different to monitoring what people are sending and recieving and stopping a few packets here and there isnt very scientific - more like shooting a gun at a target with the lights turned off.
Also controlling ports isnt that useful because i can tell a newsreading prog to download stuff from newsgroups via port 80 - which an ISP can never block because its a standard web port.
Ultimately file sharers will find alternative routes.

The real issue that needs looking at is WHY people do it. I personally dont think poverty is the only reason, I'm sure a lot do it just because they can - many are totally ignorant of what copyright even is.

I think DRM is a major problem too - people hate it.

Go over to amazon and look at the reviews for electronic arts "spore" game - masses of negitive reviews all concerning DRM.
If you buy that game you can only install it 3 times and then no more - ever. Get the hacked copy that was released hours after it went on sale and you can install it all you like.
Whos being punished there? It didnt stop hackers or people downloading it.

the same with itunes. I refuse to buy anything from there because we've seen several online music stores close this year and people who paid for stuff are told "tough luck, sorry".
Amazon USA and play in the UK both sell mp3's with no DRM, which really is the way forward. If its accessible and inexpnsive people are more likely to pay.

Once you find out 'why' then people can start asking 'how' to fix it.

[Paul Markham]

Since when is it a good idea to get the government involved in approving ad space on a non-harmful product?

As far as I am aware, the only legal restrictions on advertising media is for smokine - in all other cases, it is self regulated by the ad world itself. Case in point: the trouble finding ad space for Zack and Miri. No governmental agency or sidearm is making it difficult - that is strictly at the choice of the agencies that have space inventories.

No, Paul, while I certainly have problems with the tacit approval of theft by those who choose to advertise on the sites in question, I think the solution is to make the option to do so untenable rather than illegal.

Non harmful????

It's harming the profitability of the Internet. I have no problem with you buying content or using content you own to advertsie webcams or dating sites or even your own site. I do have a problem with you having content that is obviously stolen on your site so you can earn a profit.

You don't care because you're laughing all the way to the bank.

buggerlugs as I said it would be content intended for publication, are you talking about computers communicating with each other?

Gonzo I knew you had no case and would come up with more lies. I have never said traffic does not matter in this business. I have said it matters less than many people think. Less is not does not matter. Keep twisting my words.

All my solutions to Tubes are pipe dreams. The Goverments of the world are unlikely to get together to ban the theft of propert on the Internet, the industry will do little about it and some will fight tooth and nail to keep the ability to profit from theft. As for the industry looking at winning the surfer back by giving him something he wants to buy, that's even more of a pipe dream.

Threads and seminars like these usually end up as a waste of time. I don't have the time to waste.

[Paul Markham]

Once you find out 'why' then people can start asking 'how' to fix it.

They do it because they can get away with it. It's that simple.

Now try and fix it.

[buggerlugs]

They do it because they can get away with it. It's that simple.

Now try and fix it.

Thats incredibly over simplistic and pure opinion. I'm not going to get drawn into some forum trol/flame war so ill stop talking now and put you on my ignore list.
No offence but I see too much negitivity and hostility from you.

[Hell Puppy]

They do it because they can get away with it. It's that simple.

Now try and fix it.

They do it because they can make money at it....

[gonzo]

They do it because they can make money at it....
Unlike crybaby Paul who wants to have his arrogant attitude an cry because none of us want to buy his content.

[miz_wright]

Non harmful????

It's harming the profitability of the Internet. I have no problem with you buying content or using content you own to advertsie webcams or dating sites or even your own site. I do have a problem with you having content that is obviously stolen on your site so you can earn a profit.

You don't care because you're laughing all the way to the bank...[snip]


Wait, what?

You're creating an argument that porn is harmful? And analogous to smoking, so therefore either it - or the wide and varied world of the internet should be limited to the type of speech you find appropriate, in the format you approve? Is that what you're saying? Because that's what it looks like.

I'm not entirely sure where you're coming up with the idea that a) I have stolen content or b) that I am "laughing all the way to the bank" - or really what the second has to do with anything regardless, as I'm not entirely sure my take-home pay is germane to the conversation at hand.

I find it profoundly distubring that you feel regulation at a federal - or possible international level, since the internet defies political boundaries, which is part of what makes it great - level appropriate or necessary, considering your niche of choice is one of the very ones that bring us, as an industry, under scrutiny.

Which is where that whole "free speech" thing comes into play.