Question about content...

[derekt]

I sold a webmaster 12 videos for membership site purposes. The webmaster developed a membership site based around the model. Using this as an example, he bought 12 videos with Jay Kyle in it. He bought the domain JayKyle.com. He displayed the 12 videos (previews) in his tour.

The model name "Jay Kyle" is not copyrighted. We do not copyright model names.

I also looked at his domain name list.... He bought a bunch of content from a content broker. Did the same thing with that content. And several other videos he purchased.

Does this violate any content license agreements? We've bought content from Maxpixels, Ounique, and several others. And in there it doesn't specify that you can't do this.

I've been curious about doing the same on some membersites we've been looking at launching. For example, we have a lot of content we've bought with the model Erec Estrada that we've bought from Maxpixels, Ounique, and another I can't think of off hand.

Would this violate any license terms?

[HunkyLuke]

unless your license agreement specifically states they cannot do this, then I see no issues with it (other than you did not get to do it first)....but I am not a lawyer!!!

[derekt]

That's what I had thought.
The webmaster that had did this with our content, we were not upset about this. We even offered the webmaster a return link back to us from his members area, we even created a directory in the store for him to promote his DVDs, and in the events we get the model back and we film him we would offer him the content 90 days after the videos were live.
Truthfully, I don't see how it would hurt anything by doing just this and only this. In all honesty, I see it helping out the producer if the producer is a production studio.

:fool:

[Rich]

i dont think that is bad because it will be promoting the model and help get his name out more i think

[PornTeam]

sorry was going to leave a comment, changed my mind.

[nickbaer]

The stage name should stay with the model, or the model's home base company where he does the majority of his work.

I think a company registering a domain name, the same as a model's stage name, is akin to domain squatting, which courts have been favorable to the party with the prior most history of use of the identification.

You don't copyright something that already has been published by someone else, and you don't take other people's names.

[gaybucks_chip]

The whole issue of anyone other than the model having control of the model's stage name is, to me, ridiculous. When Bryan Kocis was trying to file a trademark for the name "Brent Corrigan", I was just appalled.

Porn model stage names are inextricably linked with the likeness of the performer who uses that name. It's not like James Bond where people will accept that every few films some new guy will be called Brent Corrigan or Jake Cruise or whatever. As Nick says, the domain name should be in the hands of either the model or whatever studio has the majority of the model's work.

Now... if an affiliate is genuinely marketing a model's content from multiple sources (say somebody like Dillon Samuels who has worked for a dozen studios) then I don't think there's any squatting going on... but if an affiliate has registered the name, or something close, simply to get traffic away from its legitimate source, or to capture traffic and send it, for a commission, to the place it belongs, then that isn't ok.