Content Sellers Harassing About USE
 

Recently I've experienced second hand.. thru a contractor... a particular content producer who sold his content to a reseller.


The reseller gave the girl who works for me ONE contract.. that didn't mention banners or topsites or any limitations on promotion...

Well now the actual producer is emailing topsites and promotion sites that she has her banner on... and sending them cease and desist letters...

The woman doesn't even have a CONTRACT with the producer... her contract is with the reseller...

is this harassment? or is this a content producer just pissed off that he sold to someone who is saturating his content?

It sounds like you need to contact me about some content.. There is information about me in the following thread, I can get you whatever you need.

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=837679

Regards!
David

please name the content provider so i can avoid them...

sure the fuck wasn't me... I only shoot custom exclusive content. hit me up if you need some. no fucking problems with me :) -bmb

If you paid for content from an actor with no contract and an agency tries to claim they own all property of the actor then its the actors responsibility, from what I understand to cover any damages from the company he or she has a legal contract with for content... now if the actor had no contract at the time of your content being made then the company as you have indicated is causing damage to you financially and you should take them to court for damages...

The original content was sold by photorama... which I've NEVER had an issue with. EVER. They're the reseller.

The original producer who is not honoring the photorama agreement is: asianxxxcontent.com ....

Asian XXX is expecting her to honor HIS agreement... when her purchasing agreement is thru Photorama....

Again, he's contacting every phone sex topsite he finds her banner on.. and sending them cease and desist letters..

I could understand if she was breaking her original photorama agreement.. and it was photorama harassing her..

but asianxxxcontent.com doesn't even have any signed documents or money trail to her. Her business was with photorama...

She's just gonna change out the model to someone who looks similar... and chalk it up to a lesson learned..

But I just thought it'd be nice to get it out there how assy asianxxxcontent.com is being.

asianxxxcontent.com also just disabled her domain name thru dreamhost.

I just don't understand how he thinks he can do that.. when her agreement is with photorama.. not him.

well thats good to know, especially since i own a bunch of his content and i dont think i ever got a signed agreement since i bought it through a reseller/agent (or whatever the relationship was)...

however, i will say that i am pretty sure that asianxxxcontents agreement supercedes photorama's agreement with your friend..

maybe you should find out or ask to see photoramas agreement with asianxxxcontent and see if they match in terms of acceptable use...

how can he disable her domain? sounds like she needs a lawyer..

now there are damages...

If AsianXXX's supercedes photorama.. then what's the point of photorama even having one? And why isn't it mentioned when you buy from photorama that the photographer MAY get a bug up his ass one day?

photorama just offers a free set.. and says I'm sorry.

He sent dreamhost a DMCA

Sounds an awful lot like someone never followed up with paperwork and really should have. Everyone really needs to have proof that they are allowed to use a copyrighted item no matter how they aquired it.

A DMCA just does not kill a domain.

because of photorama has an agreement that allows for banners, etc, but their agreement with asianxxx doesnt allow for that then they (photorama) are liable for damages bec ause they are granting rights that they dont have permission to grant...

i would get to the bottom of this if i were you...

But the proof she does have is her photorama sales contract... plus 2257 stuff...

and AsianXXX is now saying that the photorama sales contract isn't the one that matters...

So I dunno.

Problem is.. these are solo phone girls in most instances... Not some million dollar corporation.. so I think sometimes they think they can bully the "little housewife at home" around.... :( It's sad.

I told her to send her photorama sales contract to dreamhost.... see what happens.

no, it doesnt sound like that at all.. it sounds like a reseller gave permission to do something that the copyright holder did not allow..

or the customer didnt follow the agreement with the reseller..

again, i would ask to see a copy of the terms of photoramas contract with asianxxx...
if asianxx has a contract with photorama that allows what your friend is doing with content, then thats what matters...

Thank you guys for talking it over :)

You would think dreamhost would follow dmca and allow her to of responded first anyways so that is either a little fishy or they really do suck hard.

A sales contract is not the same as a license agreement though and I hope that is what she is referring to. Just because you can show you bought something from some third party or even the provider directly, that does not supercede the license agreement and rules. Hell most do not seem to grasp this whole copyright issue ordeal and how for instance a designer you paid to design your site could change his fucking mind after you paid them and have you pull it down without you having proof you have rights to it.

Oh and just because it was bought from a 3rd party does not at all limit the copyright holders abilities and rights.

So much miss information.

If photorama, and whomever, has a contract or license with limitations that supersedes any third party 'agreements'.

If I sell to ASM, and say no tubes, no this no that, and they in turn as a reseller give those rights to someone else. That someone else is not protected under their license or agreement. It doesn't work that way.

Same as someone steals a car, sells it to some crack head for $50.00 and then the cops recover the car. Crackhead does not keep the car, or get their money back. Unless they sue whomever sold it to them.

From the limited details in this post, it sounds like there may be some of this going on, and the DMCA, and copyright enforcement would be within the original content producers rights, and license.

:2 cents:

agreed, thats why the agreement between photo and asian vs photo and end user is important..

Well, they do not have to follow DCMA when they have a TOS. They can opt to enforce that, and the DMCA was just the catalyst.

For example, on copyright infringement... for some web hosts they can/could/did kill your account immediately upon notice. No DMCA needed. DMCA is just a CYA for them.

Allowed Digital Still Image Usage:
Licensee may use up to 5% of the content (rounded to the nearest whole number) for banners, logos, and HTML design. In sets of less than 20 images, one image can be used for those purposes. Banners with licensed content on them must be linked to a site owned by licensee, and content used in HTML design elements must be located on a website owned by the licensee. Up to thirty (30) images may be used at one time in a thumbnail post URL, so long as the material remains hosted at the licensee's website. If the material is to be hosted at the Thumbnail post's URL, then up to fifteen (15) images may be used, providing that all images are clearly identified as being from the Licensee owned site, and a link to that site is provided.

thats from his site, so it seems like he asian xxx is fucked...

nevermind... it says logos on licensee owned site.. so unless photo has something different in writting, your friend is SOL

Ya and no arguement there, also would list them into the sucks ass category for me. I am happy to know my host would at very least allow me to provide some evidence before fucking with me.

Interesting since he never gave out a license with his content. Came like this. Content zip, 2257 zip. Inside 2257 was model ids, and model release,and occasionally pics of the model holding id but rarely, and sometimes a translated id sheet. Maybe he started now, but he never used to. So no contract came with the content.

Take that how you will. :2 cents:

I had zero doubt that it was not that same boiler plate content license agreement from a decade ago that is long past its useful age. Hell providers are still using that damn license today. Not sure who the original author was, yet they have possibly been pirated more than any other item in this industry. :winkwink:

That would translate into you being an idiot for not demanding one or demanding your money back unless he gave you a signed one. If someone went ahead and used such content without a license well I guess they will learn their lesson one day or perhaps should treat it more like a business.

i know right... :1orglaugh i still ocassionally run into someones T&C's and find links to another sites that they missed when doing a find and replace.. :1orglaugh

Dat's because you are da king, Northern California, hoss. :thumbsup

:2 cents:

Spot on.

When will people learn this is a BUSINESS and need to treat it as one? Including LLC and business bank accounts. Also, preferably ST/Fed tax ID.

I have this discussion all the time on DP, and some other WM sites. If you are going to be in the online game, you need to run everything like a business.

No handshakes. No back alley or ICQ crap. You have it in writing and signed. I know when I have sold/licensed content. It is very clear on how material can be used, including tube sites, and even transfer of ownership should their business go under.

Friends is friends. This is business.

Yea she's gonna just switch it out.. to a more phone sex friendly/promotion friendly content place...

and be really weary of the 3rd party places...


Most content providers realize that phone sex is a really small niche.. we don't do FHG's.. we don't do TGP's.. we don't do tubes... we stay in our little niche.. so most content providers are usually alot nicer/less structured with us..

but apparently this guy had a hardon for her..

Yea but alot of times.. your phone sex operators buying content are independent contractor women... who are SMALL FISH getting into this game... but definitely lessons like this get learned quickly...

ty guys for being so professional about all this.

That's understandable toots based on your niche. However, business dealings, and especially licenses need to be detailed in both current, and future uses. Especially in the regard to resale.

As mentioned previously, there could be more to this story, and since no one has seen the agreements, or what is all going on here, there simply could be misunderstandings. But, on the face value based on what I have read.

The original copyright holder is well within his enforcement. Hard on or not.

More than welcome chief.

I think overall, you had some good input based on what info was available. Also, you are right in saying that, 'this is a lesson learned'.

Yep... and I think she gets that now.. but there was definitely some communication problems between them all... between photorama and asianxxx ... photorama and her...

Yea... I think legal action should occur. :helpme

It definitely sounds like it on all accounts.

Which can happen on content deals. I know that having it in writing has help, especially us, in clearing up that confusion. So they know what they can and can't do with it, and what they are licensed for and not.

As previously mentioned, we even spell out how much is allowed on a tube site in length, and clip(s). We protect our content, not just on copyright, but saturation. However, not everyone is forward thinking.

good luck,, hope you get this worked out

Very interesting!