Titan wants Veoh's ass on a plate

[Matt 26z]

The primary purpose of the FSC lawsuit against 2257 is over the secondary producer requirements. How can you support the FSC and at the same time target a company in part for allegedly violating the very requirements you are in support of getting rid of?

Furthermore, most lawyers will tell you that user controlled service providers such as AdultFriendFinder, Yahoo, AOL, gay.com, etc... are exempt from 2257. If you believe otherwise and fight for your beliefs, are you not taking a stance against the industry?


I'd also be curious to know how they are guilty of "willful infringement" under the DMCA. Merely operating a user controlled service meant for good intentions that can be abused by some is no argument. This isn't exactly RIAA vs. Napster.

[Titanmen]

Matt,

I do not have the time nor the desire to give you a lesson on copyright infringment and the DMCA. We have fought dozens of these cases before, and we have not lost a single case. We do not file suit unless we know we will win. We have a full-time attorney in-house that does nothing but copyright infringment cases. When was the last time you litigated a case like this?

Check our case files in http://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/ or here for some recent cases of ours. http://www.titanmedia.com/legal/recent.htm

We will do whatever is needed to win the case, plain and simple. Hell, we are taking on fucking Michael Eisner and Time Warner, do you think we would be that bold unless we have a great case?

There is much, much more here then meets the eye. It's not a simple as you might think. The truth will be told as the case moves along in the courts. Until then, you'll just have to wait and watch.

[Matt 26z]

I don't mean to be attacking you guys personally in my posts here. It's moreso the copyright holder vs. user controlled site aspect.

I run a few mainstream sites where users submit the site's content, so I have very strong feelings on this issue.

I otherwise support enforcement on regular sites where the owners made a decision to personally put up stuff that wasn't theirs.

[Kewlaidkiddd]

Thanks for this post... has been very informative and I have learned a lot from what has been posted. I am still a little torn/confused on the issue though. Maybe some clarity is at hand.

I am curious as to what exactly Veoh is. I have gathered that it is a sharing company... much like what Kazaa was... or is it completely different. Did they allow users to upload full length movies, or just clips of your content?

This question is why this has me a little torn. Though the clips are "stolen".. if they are nothing more than clips... then hell.. milk the free promotion. Cos its still going to cause nothing more than people wanting to go to your site and getting the full length movie.

But on the other hand if they are full length movies... then take em down for all they are worth.

Either way, you have many of our full support.

Chris

[Squirt]

But on the other hand if they are full length movies... then take em down for all they are worth.

Either way, you have many of our full support.

Chris

They were full length movies

When I first found out about them I was astounded at all the free full movie content they had. At first I thought they might be clips for promotion but after downloading a few I found they were full movies of most every producers content.

Being a small producer of adult content I'm so happy to see Titan kick some ass and if I was to grow to their size I'd have my attorneys do the same with vigor :pimp: way to go guys!

[Kewlaidkiddd]

Damn.. I am surprised they have gotten away with it as long as they have then. Still unsure where the site is but I am sure a lot of the producers we work with would have content there... if so I am sure they would be pissed as well. Hopefully Titan will come through with flying colors and maybe finally sites like this will go away. They really are a hindrance to the industry.

[rick]

Some interesting judgments there, I'd love to know why some images garnered $1,250 and others up to $8,250.

Did David Forest ever satisfy the judgment in full? If I remember, he was asked to remove them and that would have been the end of it, but then put the images back?

If you're going after heavyweights, I'd like to see you take down GUBA/Skin Video.

[jIgG]

Whoa Titan is taking on KevsCave!
About fucking time someone handed this thief his ass, I can't even think of anyone more egregiously stealing content than him

[DonMike]

We've had our own run in with these Veoh guys. You know, I'm a huge fan of YouTube. But it's one thing to post commercials, old videos, clips from TV shows or specials. Basically anything that is not available commercially. Hell, even if the user posts clips or trailers to current adult videos, it could really end up being promotion for all of us. But to take someone's videos right from the paid member areas of thier sites and just hand them out for free to anyone who wants them is low. It's like going to a store, opening the back door and just handing things to the people passing by.

[Xstr8guy]

Whoa Titan is taking on KevsCave!
About fucking time someone handed this thief his ass, I can't even think of anyone more egregiously stealing content than him

I think they should go after GlobalMalePass as well for allowing Kev's Cave to put the stuff up on their AVS. Hasn't he been booted by every other AVS already?

[Squirt]

Fortunately we use the same spidering/reporting service used by the MPAA and RIAA, so it is all automated and done by a huge database.

What service is that? Is it the watermarking service provide by Digimarc? How do you get around services like mancheck, etc. that have members areas that aren't indexed? That would be my concern, someone actually making money on my content somewhere, as well as distributing it free online without my permission of course.

[cheapdick]

I just wish Titan would fix my affiliate log in problems. It's been two weeks, Nick.
:cry:

[Titanmen]

Here goes:

1. Image value is based on minimum statutory value of $750 per image, plus an additional $750 "rights of publicity" violation per model in the image. In the case of David Forest his action were "wilfull" and we got treble damages for each image. Mr. Forest is currently making monthly payments via the collection agency we turned his account over too.

2. We are currently in the process of attempting to seize assets as they relate to the Kevscave.com judgement we have already won. They are trying to hide, but we'll get them.

3. The service we use to spider the net is not Digimarc. Unfortunately, I cannot discuss it publcily as we are their only adult customer. Just like the digimarc process it cannot get behind password protected areas. It can only search publicly accessable areas like P2P networks and websites. It is VERY expensive and VERY effective. For membership sites we have to join the site and then send in a legal assistant to find and document all our content.
4. Cheapdick- I'll check with Nick and have him get back to you directly.

[cheapdick]

Thanks I appreciate it. :pie:

Here goes:


4. Cheapdick- I'll check with Nick and have him get back to you directly.

[rick]

David posts on another board I visit (or he spams, I should say) and several people have brought up his judgment but I hadn't seen it mentioned in a while.