CamModelProtection sending tons of fraudulent DMCA's

[jscott]

Hey anyone got a contact for CamModelProtection? I just went through sending counter DMCA's these guys are sending a TON of them on behalf of Valentina Nappi, with fake information that legitimate content from Brazzers/Bangbros originates from Onlyfans.

Shady shit.

Anyone know what's the best way to combat these? Doing counternotifications of course but would like to go a step further to try to get these stopped.

[AleXRated]

I usually remove content, send counter DMCA and then I put it back

They do it automatically - parsing all the web for the names and images cause they charge per request. And I'm sure they even hit Brazzers with DMCA in the past :-D

Try block all cloud providers and cheap hosting companies from accesing any of your websites as a part of anti-dmca therapy.

[NoWhErE]

I’s say the first step is to contact them.

If that fails, get a lawyer.

Problem solved

[Roald]

We had the same and reached out. They whitelisted our domains but couldn't promise none would go through anymore.

[fuzebox]

Are these the same guys sending false DMCAs to NASA because a model chose the same name as their new space program?

[NoWhErE]

Originally Posted by fuzebox

Are these the same guys sending false DMCAs to NASA because a model chose the same name as their new space program?

Nah thats DMCA Privacy Protection. I think that company is owned by the same guy that owns/owned manyvids.

[RyuLion]

[email protected]

[JesseQuinn]

Originally Posted by fuzebox

Are these the same guys sending false DMCAs to NASA because a model chose the same name as their new space program?

nope, just another prominent one

Originally Posted by NoWhErE

Nah thats DMCA Privacy Protection. I think that company is owned by the same guy that owns/owned manyvids.

yeps, DMCA Protection owns Branditscan as well


all three companies are notorious for sending out false DMCAs on behalf of unwitting* clients claiming their clients own content they do not. hell, sometimes the recipients of the DMCA's are the actual companies that shot the material and have legit primary ownership, or share co-ownership with the performers in the content

@J, hit up Grooby for more info, Steven is pretty hard core into fighting this fuckery

*I say unwitting because lots of performers don't really understand how affs use legit content, why would they if they're not affs themselves? even some performers who do understand it trust these companies to be legit

there's a financial incentive for these cos to over-DMCA, it gives them an excuse to push higher-priced packages on their clients (wow, look how much stuff we found!!!) and makes it look like they're cleansing the net of content the performer legit owns. also cuts costs by not having to use a precise and well thought-out approach to the DMCA's they send

I'm sorry, I consider this fucking theft. from performers, legit affs and in some cases the sites that shot that shot the content themselves. these 3 co's don't care cuz they get paid. no matter that their payments come at the expense of everyone else

madness

think I'm most pissed that they steal from talent while pretending to be on their side, but this hurts/causes hassle for everyone and serves to make performers look bad

a huge fan of the DMCA process, but this...I'll stop before I continue swearing

[$5 submissions]

Is there a way to sue these bastards?

Do they have enough assets to be worth suing?

[jscott]

Thanks guys & Jesse, going to email them and I guess see about the whitelisting.

But c'mon, they are redacting all descriptions & all their content origins for everything is Onlyfans, there's no way they wouldn't know that these are being sent fraudulently.

Shouldn't it be on Google to penalize them!?!

[ZTT]

Originally Posted by Roald

We had the same and reached out. They whitelisted our domains but couldn't promise none would go through anymore.

"Sorry for committing felonies. We'll do our best to not commit felonies again, but, you know, we might lol."

That about sums up how seriously anyone takes DMCA claims made without proper authorization, which bottom feeding affiliates/competitors use against each other all the time. Good luck getting the Feds interested after more than a quarter of a century.

Civil action is possible if you have lawyers sitting around doing nothing, but I think at best you'd get some money for time and expense wasted, while the offender just carries on with the scam under other names.

[cqloss07]

Looks like you haven't met RULTA yet. Unfortunately, these kinds of DMCA issuers act solely based on matching. Google or hosting companies implement their decisions without querying. They don't take you seriously.

[jscott]

Originally Posted by cqloss07

Looks like you haven't met RULTA yet. Unfortunately, these kinds of DMCA issuers act solely based on matching. Google or hosting companies implement their decisions without querying. They don't take you seriously.

Ya I've had similar issues with RULTA too, these seem like perjury/fraud companies, no idea how they're being allowed to operate

[natkejs]

Getting regular DMCA's from RULTA as well, quite annoying.

Seems they getting business done though, lots of different names using the service. And as mentioned before, it's all affiliate content (last one was BangBros) that is claimed to be exclusively shot for various OnlyFans models.

Shady fuckers and greedy models unite

[pornlaw]

You would have to sue the actual performer/creator, not the DMCA company.

The DMCA service is acting on their behalf.

https://www.polygon.com/23180433/bun...suit-lord-nazo

https://storage.courtlistener.com/re...08508.19.0.pdf


Google is getting into the action now though...

https://searchengineland.com/google-...equests-434748

[bill_musk]

Originally Posted by AleXRated

I usually remove content, send counter DMCA and then I put it back

They do it automatically - parsing all the web for the names and images cause they charge per request. And I'm sure they even hit Brazzers with DMCA in the past :-D

Try block all cloud providers and cheap hosting companies from accesing any of your websites as a part of anti-dmca therapy.

As a test I cloaked pages. They do not access them. So no way to block them, they just gather the result on "XXXX" query and mass dmca it to google. not much to do.

[AleXRated]

Well guys, here is something new you'll be seeing a lot more:

In 2013, she was invited by Sergey Goncharov for a photoshoot in Kyiv. The model, along with another victim, was confined in a house by Goncharov and two other men. Their passports were seized, and they were coerced into producing pictures and videos. The model was above 18 at the time, but was under duress.

Photos of my client, taken when she was a minor under distressing conditions, are being circulated. Each time these images are shared, it not only revives the trauma of those moments but also violates the privacy of an underage girl. This situation could lead to legal consequences for those distributing this content. I kindly ask, with an appeal to your understanding and empathy, to please cease sharing these photos

My client's name, pictures and videos were used without permission and consent of my client. So it's a copyright violation under DMCA act. This is also an illegal activity to distribute someone content with her permission and authorization. Please remove this content immediately.

Thank you!

Like she was 18, but was underage. What the fuck, dude :-D

[jscott]

They said they whitelisted my domains. If anyone else has a problem with them, as Roald said already, contact them (thx for email Ryulion) and have yours whitelisted.

[pornlaw]

Originally Posted by AleXRated

Well guys, here is something new you'll be seeing a lot more:



Like she was 18, but was underage. What the fuck, dude :-D

Its not new. I am IAFD.com's attorney and we get that quite a bit.

Ask for a copy of a police report indicating that she had reported this crime to the police. Or if the claim is that she was a minor, a copy of her ID/passport.

More and more you will get the GDPR Article 17 claims if the performer wants to take the content down when it comes to European performers.

[drexl]

Originally Posted by pornlaw

More and more you will get the GDPR Article 17 claims if the performer wants to take the content down when it comes to European performers.

True.

I don't understand why licenses granted to affiliates don't cover this. Also, what personal data is being published through a live stream iframe or a perfomer pseudonyme? (cam affiliation).

[pornlaw]

Originally Posted by drexl

True.

I don't understand why licenses granted to affiliates don't cover this. Also, what personal data is being published through a live stream iframe or a perfomer pseudonyme? (cam affiliation).

The models face. And stage name which can be connected to their real names. However, there are exceptions to Article 17.

The data is being used to exercise the right of freedom of expression and information.
The data is being used to comply with a legal ruling or obligation.
The data is being used to perform a task that is being carried out in the public interest or when exercising an organization’s official authority.
The data being processed is necessary for public health purposes and serves in the public interest.
The data being processed is necessary to perform preventative or occupational medicine. This only applies when the data is being processed by a health professional who is subject to a legal obligation of professional secrecy.
The data represents important information that serves the public interest, scientific research, historical research, or statistical purposes and where erasure of the data would likely to impair or halt progress towards the achievement that was the goal of the processing.
The data is being used for the establishment of a legal defense or in the exercise of other legal claims.

I have a network of attorneys in Europe that can handle GDPR issues like this if it should come up.

[drexl]

Originally Posted by pornlaw

I have a network of attorneys in Europe that can handle GDPR issues like this if it should come up.

That's good to know.

Originally Posted by pornlaw

The models face. And stage name which can be connected to their real names.

Makes sense.

So what about model agreements? Models have an agreement with cam sites companies to use their image and share it with affiliates. Then cam sites companies have a separate agreement with affiliates to grant them non-exclusive license to a selection of promo tools (username sent via API and live feed via iframe).

[SpicyM]

Originally Posted by drexl

That's good to know.


Makes sense.

So what about model agreements? Models have an agreement with cam sites companies to use their image and share it with affiliates. Then cam sites companies have a separate agreement with affiliates to grant them non-exclusive license to a selection of promo tools (username sent via API and live feed via iframe).

If data processing is done for the performance of a contract, consent for data processing is not required.

Processing shall be lawful only if and to the extent that at least one of the following applies:

b) processing is necessary for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is party or in order to take steps at the request of the data subject prior to entering into a contract;

A model can't request deletion of her personal data if she has a valid contract which provides legal basis for such data processing.

[drexl]

Originally Posted by SpicyM

If data processing is done for the performance of a contract, consent for data processing is not required.



A model can't request deletion of her personal data if she has a valid contract which provides legal basis for such data processing.

That is useful, thank you.

[adtrafic]

There are some new idiots Bruqi OU. They are sending reports on pornhub, xhamster, xvideos and everything they can find by the Keyword.

[hony]

Not from that company but other DMCA providers are causing me a problem by submitting DMCA complaints that are complete garbage.

After talking to one of the models about her end of the process it seems she gave some "search strings" to them, which includes her branding which is a highly generic term concatenated (keyword1keyword2keyword3) and the DMCA company have clearly just googled that and taken the top 1,000 results to submit.

When I contact them it is "oh sorry, we'll withdraw that" - but it doesn't do anything, months later Google still won't index my original content that simply happens to have keyword1, keyword2, keyword3 in the body text.

DMCA seems a great concept, but the implementation sucks. There are no sanity checks happening.

[jscott]

Originally Posted by adtrafic

There are some new idiots Bruqi OU. They are sending reports on pornhub, xhamster, xvideos and everything they can find by the Keyword.

Sounds like the same company as Rulta OU

If anyone has info/details of these shady companies please post all their details.

[jscott]

"Cleaner Web" is another one sending out massive amounts of DMCA's

https://lumendatabase.org/faceted_se...me=Cleaner+Web