Is It Telling About The Individuals In The Industry?

When people launch new sites and have to pre-face their press releases with 'legal'?

Does it really need to be said time and time again or are there really that many content theives working the adult industry right now?

Over the past month or so ive seen a bunch of posts across a wide range of industry message boards where individuals have launched tube sites, movie gallery posts, tgps and even new paysites all with the disclaimer that these sites were 'legal' in terms of the content being used.

Do you think that says a lot about those in the industry right now where we have to start explaining that we arent using stolen or pirated content on the sites we launch these days?

Regards,

Lee

It does say a lot, and it didn't used to be like this, but there are a lot of Gay porn webmasters out there that don't do their homework, and this is the result.

When someone new comes to our industry via the boards so many people are willing to work with them and give them valuable advise before even knowing the persons name, or much about what they are doing and their past. The result is that many of those with ulterior motives are empowered via our knowledge and traffic thrown at them, without question, that now we're faced with rampant and obvious fraud via content theft and traffic manipulation.

You never see this in mainstream business, the whole "I want to know everything you know and work with you anonymously." is the thing that helps drive this industry into the ground. There are no checks and balances. Our Gay adult online culture has now degraded to the point of it being an insult to ask a newbie what their intentions are, their name, where they live and what they've done in the past. If you point out facts about an individual or business without provocation it's seen as an attack. This is what we've become and the consequence is rampant fraud. It will be interesting to see where things go. $0.02

i think the problem is tube sites - there are 2 kinds. one is illegal, one isn't. owners of illegal tube sites (ie sites with illegal content) often post their sites on our boards. so the only way to differentiate at the gate is to say "legal tubesite".

Patti,

Its not just tube sites im seeing this with though and to say one type of tube site is legal and another is illegal doesnt really make sense.

One type of tgp owner runs a 'legal' tgp using licensed content, another uses illegal content.

One type of paysite owner runs a 'legal' paysite using licensed content, another uses illegal content.

One type of review site owner runs a 'legal' review site using reviews they have had written, another steals them from other review sites.

I really dont think this is just a tube site issue, i really do think we have hit the point in the industry now where those of us who are working 'legally' are having to make ourselves stand out by saying stuff like we run a 'legal' site vs. the vast majority of webmasters who dont.

Regards,

Lee

i've seen at least 6 review sites that stole reviews i wrote for other people - and 2 reviewers who sent me "samples" of their work that i myself had written.

but so far i've never seen anyone write about a "legal" review site. i also haven't seen anyone write about a "legal" tgp - just tube sites. so far...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lee

Patti,

Its not just tube sites im seeing this with though and to say one type of tube site is legal and another is illegal doesnt really make sense.

One type of tgp owner runs a 'legal' tgp using licensed content, another uses illegal content.

One type of paysite owner runs a 'legal' paysite using licensed content, another uses illegal content.

One type of review site owner runs a 'legal' review site using reviews they have had written, another steals them from other review sites.

I really dont think this is just a tube site issue, i really do think we have hit the point in the industry now where those of us who are working 'legally' are having to make ourselves stand out by saying stuff like we run a 'legal' site vs. the vast majority of webmasters who dont.

Regards,

Lee

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by basschick

i think the problem is tube sites - there are 2 kinds. one is illegal, one isn't. owners of illegal tube sites (ie sites with illegal content) often post their sites on our boards. so the only way to differentiate at the gate is to say "legal tubesite".

---

The problem isn't just tube sites. It's also torrents, which the owner of another board openly lets torrent sites promote his sites as an affiliate.

It's also illegal paysites, where the owner was banned from here for stealing my content, fratment content, and others and putting it in his members area, but he's openly allowed to post on other boards and is a very active member.

It's also illegal blogs where the owner of another board openly lets people who steal content and post it to their blogs promote his sites as affiliates. (none of my examples are regarding Gaydemon)

When content theives are allowed to openly promote any program as log as it's not the one they're stealing from, and it's projected as acceptable on boards, then there's a fundamental flaw in our industry that few care to openly address, and those that do are considered trouble makers or are accused of trying to start drama.

Things have changed and it's time to adapt or go out of business. I've adapted.

i'm not saying those problems don't exist - and btw, have always existed. i'm saying you never see a webmaster post about his "legal torrents site" or his "legal blog site". i've only seen the word legal used by webmasters as a description in posts and announcements about tube sites.

Thats interesting, im always seeing posts about sites that use 'legal' content on the str8 webmaster forums, whether they are paysite owners, tgp posters/owners or even blog owners.

Its almost as if these people need to say they are looking for legal content because otherwise they may be though of as a content theif, thats more what i dont understand, if webmasters are doing nothing wrong, WHY does there need to be a distinction, shouldnt it just be assumed that unless someone has a 'history' (especially people who have been in the industry for years) that they will be using 'legal' content?

I know there are only a handfull of people in the business who's integrity i would doubt and some of them have their own affiliate programs that seem to be growing.

An example, the Tube Tender sites when they launch, i have no intention of billing them as 'legal' sites because i shouldnt have to, it should be obvious to everyone, after working in the industry for over 10 years, that the content being used on the tours and inside the members areas isnt stolen.

Not one person who has viewed this thread has even questioned whether the content being used is legal, because they shouldnt have to, yet others post about 'legal' tube sites, paysites, blogs, etc, etc.

Regards,

Lee

actually i know of plenty of sites with illegal content - always have. i email the content owners when there's a watermark or when i recognize the content. when the site is one i'm being asked to review, i also email the review site owners to let them know.

over the years, i've seen a lot of stolen content that was resold. once i even licensed a stolen set from a thief that created his own content site. and i know of 2 producers who found their cotent listed on PPV sites under other producers' studios.

It is a sad state of affairs when more and more companies have to promote their stuff as legal. The good ol days are long gone where the worst programs had to say about themselves was "no shaving."