Originally Posted by RazorSharpe

If after 15 years you don't understand that difference between a DMCA and a contractual issue, then I'm not sure anyone can really help you.

I do understand it very well, I also understand the term " work for hire" which is a subject to most contractual agreements. NOBODY hired the particular girl and therefore she just conveyed a temp. license to the cam company. No different then somebody renting or leasing a car, a boat or any other asset. And yes a porn content is deemed an asset. She is always owner of it and the copyright is automatically assigned to her by way of her creating the content. I am dealing with licenses, copyrights, contractual undertakings in a film business mainstream and adult for 30 years.

1. NOBODY pays her? As I have mentioned above, she is not a subject of work for hire rules since NOBODY paid her to preform and nobody even gave her any MG ( minimum guarantee) which upon a full payment could be considered a work for hire, but ONLY if so stated in the agreement.

2. I thought NOBODY pays her. But now she's getting a cut. Getting a percentage ( or commission) from sales does NOT constitute giving up an ownership. It certainly cannot be considered as a compensation for her work. It is a royalty for the use of her content.

3. There's a reason why one needs to be an adult to make adult decisions. It's 2020 and everyone knows that once stuff is on the internet, it's hard to get it off the internet. Having said that, if they asked legitimate affiliates to take down their content, I'm sure they would be accommodated. I can't speak for people who use content outside of the affiliate agreement/contract.Yes, it is 2020, but stolen or illegal content remains stolen and illegal regardless what any affiliate may claim. The affiliate has rights ONLY as so far as the cam company has granted to him. Under NO circumstances can a cam company grant a copyright to anyone, because they do not own the content and have no right to grant such rights. Anyone who claims otherwise is either stupid or a thief.

4. Again, you are speaking about people using content outside of the sponsor/affiliate agreement as if they are one and the same as legitimate affiliates. And "smear this girl all over the internet"? You do realise that he/she chose to be a cam model. No one pointed a gun at her head and forced her to do it. Re-read 3 NO need to re read anything. Slavery was outlawed a long time ago. To state that because the girl ONCE participated in creating an adult content which was NOT a subject of work for hire, that forever she should be a subject to further exploitation ? That analogy is say the least ridiculous. From my own experience we had over the years 2 models asking if we can remove thier content from our site. They BOTH were subject of work for hire and therefore they did NOT own the results of their labor. We do. There the case ended.

Just because a site receives a DMCA does not mean they are using content illegally. On the contrary, lodging false DMCA ckaims seems to be the new cottage industry. As I have said above and now I am quoting myself :" Likely a bunch of former thieves who found a better gig. That being chasing other thieves,..." Here I tend to agree with you. On the other hand MOST tubes and tube like set ups and their affiliates basically live off recycling old and stolen content, so getting their knuckles wrapped once a while is not to bad for us content owners.