DMCA & public shows.

Psythe

Psythe

New member
I did a lil more digging into camgirl gallery since its still dark. Here's what I found:

Emails [email protected]
Emails [email protected]
Name John Holmes (most likely fake)
Name Servers ns1.suspended-domain.com (taken offline via rerouted dns?)
Name Servers ns2.suspended-domain.com (taken offline via rerouted dns?)
Org n/a
Address ID#19779 PO Box 16
City Nobby Beach
Country AU
Creation Date Mon, 23 Jun 2014 15:10:23 GMT
Dnssec unsigned
Domain Name camgirl.gallery
Expiration Date Sat, 23 Jun 2018 15:10:23 GMT
Registrar PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com
State Queensland
Status clientTransferProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited (the interesting bit)
Status clientUpdateProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientUpdateProhibited (looks like ICANN locked down the domain)
Status clientDeleteProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientDeleteProhibited (most likely reason they would do this is that they found the registrar info to be invalid)
Status clientHold https://icann.org/epp#clientHold
Updated Date Tue, 14 Mar 2017 04:33:12 GMT (The day it went dark)

So it looks like someone tipped off ICANN to the faked registrar info. They checked it out and locked the site until he can prove who and where he is. Its a fairly common practice for ICANN to police domains in this manner. However, since identifying himself could open him up for legal issues, the site being restored seems unlikely.
 
K

Klept0

New member
It seems that they are uploading stuff from the backlog as they are on about March 25th. The thumbnails won't work unless you actually view the image and then edit the url. It's probably still on shaky legs, but I have a feeling that it is going to stay up or just re-establish itself in a different way.
 
Psythe

Psythe

New member
Klept0 said:
It seems that they are uploading stuff from the backlog as they are on about March 25th. The thumbnails won't work unless you actually view the image and then edit the url. It's probably still on shaky legs, but I have a feeling that it is going to stay up or just re-establish itself in a different way.
Click to expand...
Yup looks like you're right, its back online. Looks like he updated his email and they restored him lol.
 
K

Klept0

New member
Casey84 said:
anyone know any alternatives for cb which uses upstore links? other then camgirlvideos and the like
Click to expand...
I haven't found anything yet that is upstore related that isn't tied to this group of uploaders. So technically when one is down they are all down or not updating. Based on something I read on one of the sites this group of uploaders, upload shows for transmodels and that site is still updating so whatever is messing up the girls will ultimately fix itself I believe.

There is a site that uses megalinks that covers several cam sites, but since I only use mega as a free user I haven't tried to download more than two particular favorites.
 
K

Klept0

New member
fux0rz said:
camshowdownload.com is upstore, and not related to that group
Click to expand...
I know that but the original question said alternatives for CB that use upstore. I considered CB to mean chaturbate and I know the camshowdownload place only posts mfc links.
 
E

Equalizer

New member
csd is a much better organized site it appears but I don't think they have the variety of the other guys. I can get cams of the top 200 models here on the Kat at any time, but getting #201 through #2201 is a little harder.
 
fwfungi

fwfungi

New member
I added it as an extension to Chrome - but now the Mega DL link works for me. It is a higher resolution :)
 
V

vsthonglover

New member
fwfungi said:
I added it as an extension to Chrome - but now the Mega DL link works for me. It is a higher resolution :)
Click to expand...
Do you just click on the "Download from MEGA" link? It hasn't been working for me for the last week or so.

I have the MEGA extension in Chrome and it used to work without issue.
 
Dwight_K_Schrute

Dwight_K_Schrute

Member
fux0rz said:
I know models have always been sending DMCA takedown notices, and recently a lot of sites have appeared charging cam girls hundreds per month to send DMCA notices, and they are sending thousands of DMCA notices per day to popular cam download sites.

There's been some discussion about this here and there, but do they really have a right to send DMCA notices?

They don't even have the original content (the live show that was recorded). Can they claim copyright on public shows just because they appear in them?

This sounds like a huge grey area, and the girls and dmca services will continue to send thousands of takedown claims daily, unless one of the download sites takes them to court and wins (which will never happen I guess).
Click to expand...
It states right in the model contract that the girls agree to when joining MFC that the site and not the models themselves own all copyright claims to any broadcasts they perform on the site. So technically any DMCA notice they or someone else files on their behalf would not be legal. Any notices filed by a third party that has not been endorsed by MFC would also not be legal.

Some models know the above fact, but they do it anyway figuring no one would question it. They could be held as liable as the capper.


Panz said:
it's a big scam on the by these site's claiming to remove "their" content.
First because "tube" sites often aren't based in the U.S.A and don't fall under it's copyright laws, some countries may have similar laws and there is a basic international copyright laws i think, but not a legal person. So prosecution from someone in U.S. to say, Russia, not fucking high.
Second like above, you based in Romania, don't give a fuck about it, they not taking you to court
Only places these sites offering this service have some success are with upload sites, Mega, and the like. Mileage varies there, some people get fucking nuked almost immediate and accounts banned (personal experience), other people rarely have content taken down.
If models had more brains or not fucking lazy, all they'd need was a template that could be found pretty easy, or pay a lawyer 1 time fee to draw one up for them for use to send to upload sites, sending to most tube sites is a waste of time, they just ignore.
As to if they own the content, i've read arguments here they don't, simply because it's broadcast. That is not the case everywhere, in some countries, it's technically illegal to tape a TV show, because you don't have the rights to do so under reproduction. Most people only worry about distribution tho, which is where you may have legal trouble.
Different country different specific laws
Click to expand...
Part of my respond to this is above - as far as legality when it comes to who owns the copyright claim.

Offshore hosting is one way to get around it, but honestly I don't feel there is a host that would 100% ignore DMCA claims especially if they become inundated with them. Upstore for the longest time rarely removed MFC related content. After a year or two it was the just a small handful models who managed to get their content down (mainly just NikiSkyler and ZoeMadison/DevKingSley), but over time that list grew exponentially. I figure Upstore could no longer manually deal with checking the validity of the notices and opted to just remove the files in compliance rather than deal with the headache.

Honestly I've love to see someone stick it to a model on a false DMCA claim. I don't ever see that happening though, heh.

fux0rz said:
The admin of those sites is pretty clueless, I'm guessing he has a problem that he's unable to fix. If you want mfc caps camshowdownload.com is better anyway, they only upload videos with some win, so you don't have to fist through 500 videos of the model just sitting there to find a good one.
Click to expand...
Biggest caveats for CSD is it is not for the completionist type of collector, they encode the files with a very low bitrate and they don't get as wide a range of models. However CGV (at least when it started) was fun by someone else and merely just associated with all the other sites in that network as he got some help with setting things up. It is possible that management was incorporated though. Either way they used to claim that I inflated the size of my videos which in 95% of the cases was untrue. They had a roughly 250kbps bitrate in their early days and then they increased that to around 500kbps and now all of their files are inflated above the original FLV stream when they encode them to MP4. It's funny how they tried to tarnish my reputation with that nonsense and now they are doing it on 100% of their files when 1 in 20 of my files might be slightly bigger?

Others I've spoken with said the one guy knows server stuff, but that his website coding skills (or lack thereof) are beginner at best.

Panz said:
That's simplistic at best, "it's advertising, they should give away all their shows", like the question "you here because you enjoy it or for the tokens", and if she says enjoy, someone says, well fuck your ass for my enjoyment now then.

I to would never have found out about cam sites with out forums like this, but more viewers doesn't mean more income. Just like more people coming here doesn't mean more content being shared. There is a reason most stuff is from "free" shows in public, because very few people want to reach into their pockets.

I don't know much about how cam sites operate, but MFC seems to put zero-all into making the site better then it has to. Chaturbate seems a little more willing but i spend less time there, other's no idea. As to the sites doing something about it, MFC does have an option to report in the wiki or something somewhere, they just shit about it and would need to employ many more staff to process requests if they "advertised" that option there. Back to more interested in printing money and paying shit rappers for shows.
Click to expand...
Models are the ones claiming they are losing money when recorded public shows are posted online - but that is hypothetical and has no proven merit. They already received the money they requested to do the show, and they have no way of knowing what, if any, a recording of them has when it comes to future income. The only time a loss of income is true is the posting of one of the premium videos they film and offer for sale.

So few models comprehend this logic it really is a waste of time to try and convince them otherwise. It's like trying to convince devout Catholics that the Big Bang or Evolution are real.

Don_Lorenzo said:
MFC could destroy bulk capping very easy with a single server upgrade but they don't care and haven't cared since it started years ago. I remember even in 2011, I was recording 30-40 models at a time and now there are many doing a few hundred at a time.
Click to expand...
They could, but then people would find a new way around it. That has happened multiple times. Chaturbate tends to do this more, but that is mostly because they had some many security holes and that is why they had to constantly change things. MFC have done changes that impacted recording for a period of time until it was fixed by the developers of different apps.

Really the only thing they did was fixing a private feed loophole. If people can hack into government agencies that are infinitely more secure a camsite would be easy.

Psythe said:
I did a lil more digging into camgirl gallery since its still dark. Here's what I found:

Emails [email protected]
Emails [email protected]
Name John Holmes (most likely fake)
Name Servers ns1.suspended-domain.com (taken offline via rerouted dns?)
Name Servers ns2.suspended-domain.com (taken offline via rerouted dns?)
Org n/a
Address ID#19779 PO Box 16
City Nobby Beach
Country AU
Creation Date Mon, 23 Jun 2014 15:10:23 GMT
Dnssec unsigned
Domain Name camgirl.gallery
Expiration Date Sat, 23 Jun 2018 15:10:23 GMT
Registrar PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com
State Queensland
Status clientTransferProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited (the interesting bit)
Status clientUpdateProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientUpdateProhibited (looks like ICANN locked down the domain)
Status clientDeleteProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientDeleteProhibited (most likely reason they would do this is that they found the registrar info to be invalid)
Status clientHold https://icann.org/epp#clientHold
Updated Date Tue, 14 Mar 2017 04:33:12 GMT (The day it went dark)

So it looks like someone tipped off ICANN to the faked registrar info. They checked it out and locked the site until he can prove who and where he is. Its a fairly common practice for ICANN to police domains in this manner. However, since identifying himself could open him up for legal issues, the site being restored seems unlikely.
Click to expand...
Yes their WHOIS was full of fake info. Only one of the domains they registered had actually real information on them. Either intentionally or by accident.

fux0rz said:
camshowdownload.com is upstore, and not related to that group
Click to expand...
Correct - not affiliated in the slightest. Their sites are either forum based or the mundane looking Wordpress style sites.
 
BOZZOO

BOZZOO

New member
Dwight_K_Schrute said:
Honestly I've love to see someone stick it to a model on a false DMCA claim. I don't ever see that happening though, heh.
Click to expand...
hi Dwight. long time no see.

remembering back on my false copyright claim(s) thread a few years ago, i remember the camgirl would have to take the capper to court and if she couldnt prove she was the copyright owner, THEN she would get fined $2500, but i think they can try to have the pic hosts take them down w/ a DMCA claim. maybe if the pic host made a legal thing of it, then she might be in for a serious leak in her token stash.

good to see ur still around. tc.
 
F

fux0rz

New member
Dwight_K_Schrute said:
It states right in the model contract that the girls agree to when joining MFC that the site and not the models themselves own all copyright claims to any broadcasts they perform on the site.
Click to expand...
mfc have changed their tune about that, see: http://wiki.myfreecams.com/wiki/DMCA_Information_for_Models

still though, If models aren't recording their own shows, they don't actually have the original content, so it probably still wouldn't hold up in court, because there is no "content" it's just a live stream that is not stored anywhere, the content only exists once it's recorded

but i don't think any capping sites are willing to go to court over it
 
M

merlinshar

New member
fux0rz said:
still though, If models aren't recording their own shows, they don't actually have the original content, so it probably still wouldn't hold up in court, because there is no "content" it's just a live stream that is not stored anywhere, the content only exists once it's recorded
Click to expand...
I think you would find that is not really true. Live performance is protected - for example circus acts, concerts (aside from the ticket contract likely prohibiting recording the concert in the first place). The performer/author of the work is automatically granted copyright. The question is to they do anything about it? Bands used to get really upset when concert videos showed up on youtube. These days most of them view them as good promotion. One of the weird things about copyright - if you record an MFC model, you actually own the copyright to the recording. So if you posted the file and someone re-posted it you can issue a takedown request on the file. Of course the other question is do you have permission from the model to record in the first place. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top