YOU'VE BEEN BUSTED!!!
<sigh> I guess I saw it coming but it's still a mystery how some accounts can post obvious DCMA material - with the studio names, URL's and watermarks -- yet I make sure none of that showed up.
Anyone who's had an account in any of the GLBTQ social sites where user-input is allowed knows the mods can be fickle. One site I used to belong to (LifeOUT) was so capricious about bouncing users for no apparent reason that it seemed obvious the bitchy queen mods who were on a power trip must have been rejected by the back alley bum with the big dick in that Midwest bastion of flagrant debauchery - Dayton Ohio (snort!!)
Ohio is sort of the vacuous orifice that serves as the killing zone of anything esoteric in Americana. High society means buying SlimJims in bulk instead of scr****g together sticky floor change from the F150. Dating barnyard a****ls is strictly forbidden unless there's been a chaperone on the first date. Kind of fertile territory to mine for Trump supporters.
After a 'you've-been-a-naughty-boy' reprimand for pretty much similar purported offenses, I yanked everything and left a vacant account, complete with an avatar of blank nothingness. One of the most popular pages, gone with a blow-it-out-your-ass-bitch. It's still an active account.
Elitist Northeast snob alert.
I suppose there's enough porn and smut on my page to give a good few rises here and there. And AFAIK, this account is only clipped for uploading videos and photos... for now. But of course, that could change as well so my days here could be limited. Time will tell.
'Terminated'. It sounds like a death sentence. Mortal punishment for grievous transgressions bordering on acts of war crimes. Intellectual property rights can get magically powerful when enough cash to buy some prime lawyers gets tossed in their laps.
If you find a $20 bill wedged under your tire at the supermarket parking lot, what do you do? It's obviously not yours, so taking what's not yours without anyone's permission is pretty much the definition of theft or stealing.
So ethically (and legally?) are you obligated to grab the bill and turn it in to the Lost & Found folks at the store's service counter? What do you imagine their reaction might be?
If you simply pocketed the cash, could you be arrested by its original owner if they saw you retrieve the bill and drive off before they could stop you?
If you find something on the internet and there's nothing to stop you from copying it and re-posting it, provided you didn't profit financially in any way, is that stealing? Suppose a video clip had its identifiable information edited out and you re-posted it; are you guilty of stealing from the original producers?
At some point, weren't the producers of the studio porn clips paid for their product? If I buy a DVD of Johnny Rapid getting gangbanged or a clip of Aymeric Deville getting pounded into oblivion by Rogan Richards, at some point that DVD or online clip was purchased and THEN re-posted.
The assumption that anyone who views the material is a paying customer or even a *potential* paying customer... well, dream on Mary. Consumers have this strange notion that once they forked over the required cash for a product that's provided to them outright, they're free to do with it whatever they want *provided* they're not benefitting financially off of it.
If a bonafide purchaser chooses to take it to Holy Bob's House of Sin Soldiers and Bait Shop and set the prurient and sinful work of the devil on fire on the stainless steel smoker in the backyard, that 's their right, isn't it?
But if 'Ol Bob first makes a few dozen copies of Kris Evans fucking the living hell out of Jack Harrer's perfect snatch before the original is burned and sells them under the counter to Elmer the Perv... who gets nailed on p*******e charges... and the County D.A. discovers 'Ol Bob might not be as Holy as the River Jordan after all, does Bob get charged with a DCMA offence?
People with one shitload of a lot more money than you or I have seem to think so. Sobbing in their greed... uhm... *grief* at the loss of yet another sale or twenty, it's true some studios have gone under when their online holdups aren't pulling in the sort of biz that keeps the warehouse rent paid.
Deliciously Harry Reems died a rather ignominious 'termination' and considering the amount of cash *his* hairy cock and ass made for someone else, even with his name recognition over the past few decades alone, it's obvious few male porn actors ever make a mountain of cash. Even the grossest, fattest, ugliest slob in porndom - Ron Jeremy - was forced to turn to cheesy schlock playing Tammy Bakker's sordid opposite on some MTV crap. If that's not desperation, I'm not sure what is.
If it's agreed that anything - *anything* - that appears on your computer/tablet/smartphone's viewing screen is possible to be copied and reposted - including the 30-minute show you put on showing yourself furiously beating off for the cam site you frequent - then the legal waters start to get pretty damned muddy quickly.
Check out males-cam.com for an example of how 'terrified' some cam capturers are about DCMA laws. They make bucks off of your balls bouncing online.. without your knowledge or permission. There are countless numbers of these sites and all it takes is a free screen capture app that anyone can use.
If the video images of you flogging the glory meat are found online on one of the x-video sites (like this one?) and someone either downloads it or does a screen capture of it, then re-posts it, who's the criminal here? The one who initially captured the image of you -- or the one who found it online?
If you decide to copy this blog entry, who's 'intellectual right' claims ownership? Me or XRMXX? If this makes it into a book 'Porn Addicts Say the Darndest Things' and someone wracks up some healthy sales, whose work are they profiting of from... mine or XRMXX's? Does anything and everything anyone posts on this site become the 'property' of XRMXX and if so, wouldn't *they* be profiting off someone else's work? Would *that* constitute theft of 'intellectual property'?
The cardinal rule of the internet: Never upload *anything* unless (a) you're willing to have it stored somewhere permanently and (b) you have no problem if your grandmother, mother, girlfriend, wife, daughter or son sees it.
The first part is where the porn studios think they're exempt. They're not.
The second part is what some web sexers forget to remember. They're reminded, sometimes with the worst possible consequences.
XRMXX thinks showing a face with an identifying webname Is a swell idea - so do the divorce attorneys, cops and prospective -- and often, current -- employers. That can have consequences as well. That's why I show the best feature of myself. The rest ain't so hot and there are some damn compelling reasons why my face isn't shown. Don't ask. Only with the rarest of exceptions will it be revealed... and if that happens, I consider those people a kindred spirit worthy of respect and love.
I'm not really angry with the mods ripping my uploading abilities away. If they boot me altogether, I might get a bit pissed off but I'm young and will get over it rather quickly.
So dear friends, let's hope at least some of my better uploads make the cut. And it's been a blast serving you a sample of what I find sweet 'n dirty.
-----Original Message-----
From: XRMXX [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2019 10:42 AM
To: Alode
Subject: Upload termination notice
Dear User,
Your uploader account on the website has been terminated on the basis that you have been deemed a repeat infringer of copyrights pursuant to our repeat infringer policy, which you can find as part of the Terms of Use for the website. Your ability to upload content onto the website is hereby terminated and you are not permitted to create a new account. If you believe that your upload account was terminated as a result of an error, you may consider filing a counter notification to any copyright notices we received for content that you have uploaded.
已删除
已删除
Anyone who's had an account in any of the GLBTQ social sites where user-input is allowed knows the mods can be fickle. One site I used to belong to (LifeOUT) was so capricious about bouncing users for no apparent reason that it seemed obvious the bitchy queen mods who were on a power trip must have been rejected by the back alley bum with the big dick in that Midwest bastion of flagrant debauchery - Dayton Ohio (snort!!)
Ohio is sort of the vacuous orifice that serves as the killing zone of anything esoteric in Americana. High society means buying SlimJims in bulk instead of scr****g together sticky floor change from the F150. Dating barnyard a****ls is strictly forbidden unless there's been a chaperone on the first date. Kind of fertile territory to mine for Trump supporters.
After a 'you've-been-a-naughty-boy' reprimand for pretty much similar purported offenses, I yanked everything and left a vacant account, complete with an avatar of blank nothingness. One of the most popular pages, gone with a blow-it-out-your-ass-bitch. It's still an active account.
Elitist Northeast snob alert.
I suppose there's enough porn and smut on my page to give a good few rises here and there. And AFAIK, this account is only clipped for uploading videos and photos... for now. But of course, that could change as well so my days here could be limited. Time will tell.
'Terminated'. It sounds like a death sentence. Mortal punishment for grievous transgressions bordering on acts of war crimes. Intellectual property rights can get magically powerful when enough cash to buy some prime lawyers gets tossed in their laps.
If you find a $20 bill wedged under your tire at the supermarket parking lot, what do you do? It's obviously not yours, so taking what's not yours without anyone's permission is pretty much the definition of theft or stealing.
So ethically (and legally?) are you obligated to grab the bill and turn it in to the Lost & Found folks at the store's service counter? What do you imagine their reaction might be?
If you simply pocketed the cash, could you be arrested by its original owner if they saw you retrieve the bill and drive off before they could stop you?
If you find something on the internet and there's nothing to stop you from copying it and re-posting it, provided you didn't profit financially in any way, is that stealing? Suppose a video clip had its identifiable information edited out and you re-posted it; are you guilty of stealing from the original producers?
At some point, weren't the producers of the studio porn clips paid for their product? If I buy a DVD of Johnny Rapid getting gangbanged or a clip of Aymeric Deville getting pounded into oblivion by Rogan Richards, at some point that DVD or online clip was purchased and THEN re-posted.
The assumption that anyone who views the material is a paying customer or even a *potential* paying customer... well, dream on Mary. Consumers have this strange notion that once they forked over the required cash for a product that's provided to them outright, they're free to do with it whatever they want *provided* they're not benefitting financially off of it.
If a bonafide purchaser chooses to take it to Holy Bob's House of Sin Soldiers and Bait Shop and set the prurient and sinful work of the devil on fire on the stainless steel smoker in the backyard, that 's their right, isn't it?
But if 'Ol Bob first makes a few dozen copies of Kris Evans fucking the living hell out of Jack Harrer's perfect snatch before the original is burned and sells them under the counter to Elmer the Perv... who gets nailed on p*******e charges... and the County D.A. discovers 'Ol Bob might not be as Holy as the River Jordan after all, does Bob get charged with a DCMA offence?
People with one shitload of a lot more money than you or I have seem to think so. Sobbing in their greed... uhm... *grief* at the loss of yet another sale or twenty, it's true some studios have gone under when their online holdups aren't pulling in the sort of biz that keeps the warehouse rent paid.
Deliciously Harry Reems died a rather ignominious 'termination' and considering the amount of cash *his* hairy cock and ass made for someone else, even with his name recognition over the past few decades alone, it's obvious few male porn actors ever make a mountain of cash. Even the grossest, fattest, ugliest slob in porndom - Ron Jeremy - was forced to turn to cheesy schlock playing Tammy Bakker's sordid opposite on some MTV crap. If that's not desperation, I'm not sure what is.
If it's agreed that anything - *anything* - that appears on your computer/tablet/smartphone's viewing screen is possible to be copied and reposted - including the 30-minute show you put on showing yourself furiously beating off for the cam site you frequent - then the legal waters start to get pretty damned muddy quickly.
Check out males-cam.com for an example of how 'terrified' some cam capturers are about DCMA laws. They make bucks off of your balls bouncing online.. without your knowledge or permission. There are countless numbers of these sites and all it takes is a free screen capture app that anyone can use.
If the video images of you flogging the glory meat are found online on one of the x-video sites (like this one?) and someone either downloads it or does a screen capture of it, then re-posts it, who's the criminal here? The one who initially captured the image of you -- or the one who found it online?
If you decide to copy this blog entry, who's 'intellectual right' claims ownership? Me or XRMXX? If this makes it into a book 'Porn Addicts Say the Darndest Things' and someone wracks up some healthy sales, whose work are they profiting of from... mine or XRMXX's? Does anything and everything anyone posts on this site become the 'property' of XRMXX and if so, wouldn't *they* be profiting off someone else's work? Would *that* constitute theft of 'intellectual property'?
The cardinal rule of the internet: Never upload *anything* unless (a) you're willing to have it stored somewhere permanently and (b) you have no problem if your grandmother, mother, girlfriend, wife, daughter or son sees it.
The first part is where the porn studios think they're exempt. They're not.
The second part is what some web sexers forget to remember. They're reminded, sometimes with the worst possible consequences.
XRMXX thinks showing a face with an identifying webname Is a swell idea - so do the divorce attorneys, cops and prospective -- and often, current -- employers. That can have consequences as well. That's why I show the best feature of myself. The rest ain't so hot and there are some damn compelling reasons why my face isn't shown. Don't ask. Only with the rarest of exceptions will it be revealed... and if that happens, I consider those people a kindred spirit worthy of respect and love.
I'm not really angry with the mods ripping my uploading abilities away. If they boot me altogether, I might get a bit pissed off but I'm young and will get over it rather quickly.
So dear friends, let's hope at least some of my better uploads make the cut. And it's been a blast serving you a sample of what I find sweet 'n dirty.
-----Original Message-----
From: XRMXX [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2019 10:42 AM
To: Alode
Subject: Upload termination notice
Dear User,
Your uploader account on the website has been terminated on the basis that you have been deemed a repeat infringer of copyrights pursuant to our repeat infringer policy, which you can find as part of the Terms of Use for the website. Your ability to upload content onto the website is hereby terminated and you are not permitted to create a new account. If you believe that your upload account was terminated as a result of an error, you may consider filing a counter notification to any copyright notices we received for content that you have uploaded.
已删除
已删除
5 年 前