I Have A Business Idea But What Do You Think About It...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alex_Manifest_M

Yes, giants like sony may be 'giddy' at the prospect, but until I can sell very expensive ads for Coca-Cola and Trojans placed in my jo clips, this does nothing but negative things for me.

I can barely negotiate product placement as it is.

---

Why would you want to sell ads to other companies on your content? :eek:

You'd be putting ads to your own site on the content, not someone elses.

Regards,

Lee

The content we sell already has our ads in it, but unless you are advertsing tangible goods, you are just alerting folks to a new file to steal and share. If I see an advert on a video I lifted off a site, it would not run to the producer to buy it, rather I would just search until I found it for free too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alex_Manifest_M

The content we sell already has our ads in it, but unless you are advertsing tangible goods, you are just alerting folks to a new file to steal and share. If I see an advert on a video I lifted off a site, it would not run to the producer to buy it, rather I would just search until I found it for free too.

---

Thats what *you* would do though, there are plenty of companies on GWW using p2p as part of their marketing plan and seeing great results...

http://forums.gaywidewebmasters.com/...ad.php?t=22994

Its also interesting to see how the posters in that thread and this thread reacted, even though we're talking about pretty much the same thing.. Profiting from p2p and filesharing LOL

Regards,

Lee

That does not take into account the difference in a site like XTube and Bittorrent. One give a grainy little version that may indeed encourage someone to join a site or buy a video or dvd. The other is a place to grab the whole enchilada looking and sounding as good as the site it was stolen from. That is the difference. Giving somebody a taste as part of a marketing plan makes sense. Tossing the entire buffet out there removes any reason for them to come a site at all. They seem to be very different things to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alex_Manifest_M

They seem to be very different things to me.

---

But they are both done on BOTH bit torrent, filesharing networks and sites like YouTube.

There is no difference whatsoever, all types of sites, bot torrent, filesharing networks, p2p, the 'tubes' etc all have the ability to post 'stolen' content so why is it only P2P and bittorrent that it is 'wrong' to profit from, and not the tube sites?

They both have stolen content on them.. What makes bittorrent 'wrong' to use for profit and not the tube type sites when there is absolutely NO difference between them.

Regards,

Lee

when somebody takes a 16:9 vid and puts it on one of the 'tubes, it looks like crap, it has to be chopped up in small pieces and then it is of little value. You also can monitor that somewhat and our members alert us when they find our content. When somebody can take full quality material and give it away, THAT is for me the kicker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lee

Thats what *you* would do though, there are plenty of companies on GWW using p2p as part of their marketing plan and seeing great results...

http://forums.gaywidewebmasters.com/...ad.php?t=22994

Its also interesting to see how the posters in that thread and this thread reacted, even though we're talking about pretty much the same thing.. Profiting from p2p and filesharing LOL

Regards,

Lee

---

XTube is not p2p file sharing because only people who chreated, or someone authorized to distribute the videos may do so. XTube will always pull down stuff and ask questions later. The content is on their servers, they know they are responsible, and honor all DMCA requests. File sharing networks do not because they are simply a "gateway".

What you are talking about is putting your greed ahead of any possible ethical standard of respect for other site owners/producers and their content. Its about as slimy and dispicable as it gets. Why not include a message board for members to trade passwords to pay sites, you can even get down in the slime and toss in some logins to your sites, you've considered that before.

I seriously doubt that CCBill or more importantly, VISA would allow it. If they did, and the first Titan title that a member of your site downloaded would be grounds for immediate account termination--you enabled it and profited from it.

It simply wouldn't work, but thanks for letting us know about your sick, twisted greed, and steps you would consider taking to satisfy it. Are you that desperate for money? We can take up a collection or have a fund raiser.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MWCren

XTube is not p2p file sharing because only people who chreated, or someone authorized to distribute the videos may do so.

---

What do you think bittorrent started out as? LOL

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent

Even Amazon.com has a bittorrent service.

Quote:

---

XTube will always pull down stuff and ask questions later. The content is on their servers, they know they are responsible, and honor all DMCA requests. File sharing networks do not because they are simply a "gateway".

---

Actually, some will, the responsible ones, the ones that arent there solely to distribute stolen content.

Quote:

---

What you are talking about is putting your greed ahead of any possible ethical standard of respect for other site owners/producers and their content. Its about as slimy and dispicable as it gets.

---

No, what i am talking about is a way for all of us to profit from these types of service, not just the individual companies that can afford to flood them with their own branded content, to get traffic... Traffic that could be provided by such a service i described in my first post.

Quote:

---

Why not include a message board for members to trade passwords to pay sites, you can even get down in the slime and toss in some logins to your sites, you've considered that before.

---

Why not, lots of companies give away 'free' passwords on those types of service, and profit from them directly and indirectly.

Quote:

---

I seriously doubt that CCBill or more importantly, VISA would allow it. If they did, and the first Titan title that a member of your site downloaded would be grounds for immediate account termination--you enabled it and profited from it.

---

Again you dont seem to grasp the point being made, the first Titan title downloaded from Google, means that Google is responsible correct, even if all Google did was send that surfer to a site where they could find the title? Im not talking about doing anything other than what Google currently does... im just talking about displaying a specific topic of information, whereas Google displays millions of topics...

http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...en+porn+movies

http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...site+passwords

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&r...images&spell=1

So how does the service *I* have been describing differ to Google? It doesnt.

Quote:

---

It simply wouldn't work

---

Why wouldnt it work? I posted a thread above where it was proven it DOES work, the person sharing their files saw a 25% increase in site memberships... Where do YOU think that traffic came from that viewed their shared clips?

Regards,

Lee

OMG, you know, you're right, its a terrific idea. You should do it!!!!!!!!!:loser:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MWCren

OMG, you know, you're right, its a terrific idea. You should do it!!!!!!!!!:loser:

---

So basically what you are saying is, you cant think of any reason why the service i am suggesting, and Google ARE different.

Regards,

Lee

I think you're absolutely brilliant. You have all the answers and everything covered. You need to get busy and get this ball rolling! Now, I need to go get my prescription refilled, and I won't be able to reply anymore. Good Luck on this exciting project Lee.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MWCren

You have all the answers and everything covered.

---

To the reasons why its 'wrong' that have been posted so far, yes i do. I havent read a single thing that anyone has posted up to this point why my idea wouldnt be a viable solution to cut back on some of the money companies lose every day to filesharing.

So far, my suggestion has been the only one made in the thread to, everyone seems to be saying they would rather stick their head in the sands about the fact that filesharing is growing and there is currently nothing out there to assist content producers, adult affiliates and program owners to profit from it.

If anyone has a better suggestion than mine, please post it.

I have demonstrated how filesharing, P2P networks and tube type sites continue to dominate the web in terms of traffic figures, and how we are ALL going to start losing more and more money as the growth continues so how do we combat this?

Its obvious you folks dont think my idea is a good one, so what is?

Regards,

Lee

The most promising idea I've been advocating (which, to be fair, isn't an out of-the-box solution as of yet) is for all site owners to start implementing Digimarc's invisible watermarking technology that allows a serialized watermark to be put on each video supplied to each member. In this way, the content can be tracked back to who stole it. If a few "thieves" are hit up with statutory $25,000 per incident copyright infringement enforcements, a LOT of people will stop sharing copyrighted content.

Any method of monetizing theft is inherently bound to increase theft and/or demand for theft, and therefore not helpful in the long run. While I think the RIAA is full of shit in the way they are taking action, I do think that some means of tracking the content back to who first shared it is probably where the best way of addressing this issue lies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaybucks_chip

The most promising idea I've been advocating (which, to be fair, isn't an out of-the-box solution as of yet) is for all site owners to start implementing Digimarc's invisible watermarking technology that allows a serialized watermark to be put on each video supplied to each member. In this way, the content can be tracked back to who stole it. If a few "thieves" are hit up with statutory $25,000 per incident copyright infringement enforcements, a LOT of people will stop sharing copyrighted content.

Any method of monetizing theft is inherently bound to increase theft and/or demand for theft, and therefore not helpful in the long run. While I think the RIAA is full of shit in the way they are taking action, I do think that some means of tracking the content back to who first shared it is probably where the best way of addressing this issue lies.

---

Chip,

Prevention and subsequent tracking, is definitely something that a lot of companies can look at however, as Michael mentioned a few pages back, a lot of companies simply dont have the budget to 1) use digimarcs services and 2) take legal action even if they did.

Which then makes the whole process moot to some extent as, like now, its only serving those companies who can afford to not only use those types of services but also prosecute those types of crimes.

In that, the digimarking of content is still not going to prevent filesharing from happening, i mean look at the Titan stuff, everyone and their son knows that Titan are aggresively pursuing individuals and companies that use their content illegally... But it still gets used illegally on websites and on filesharing and p2p networks.

So we're bascially back at square one again, illegal filesharing is still going to happen, how do we monetize it and legal filesharing as an industry?

Regards,

Lee

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lee

I have demonstrated how filesharing, P2P networks and tube type sites continue to dominate the web in terms of traffic figures, and how we are ALL going to start losing more and more money as the growth continues so how do we combat this?

Its obvious you folks dont think my idea is a good one, so what is?

---

I have stayed out this one-sided Lee-dominated discussion. Time for me jump in.

I understand the idea that Lee is trying to advance... instead of fighting new technology - now would be the time to create an official links to "everything free" site. Since Lee has continued to argue and mentioned he discussed it with CCBILL, I am sure the site is already under construction.

With content provided by sponsors, Lee's site would become a next generation affiliate link site, pointing to approved files.

The negative aspect is that once LEE's site gave instruction on how to use utube and bit-torrents, Lee's paid members would see a vast resource of free content that most wish to keep a secret.