Well, the problem is that you do not always know for sure if its legal or not. So how do you know what is required to remove??
Thats "why" they designed 2257 - to ensure it (even if it a good tool to harm adult biz too - but thats policy..). Officially, its designed for what the adult industry "failed" to do.

Sure, you won't go 5 years to jail for someone else submitting without proper IDs. But thats not "safe harbor", if you can still go 10 years to jail for ignoring it.

i think if we do send some gorillas to some people with big legal tube sites it will bring some heat on whole industry and label will resurface we are run by mob and the regulations will start to come on strong and the whole industry will get ruined

best way to fight big legal tubes is legally

my point exactly :2 cents:

well it is a topic of great debate but i will say if video is uploaded and is suspected that they are minor and there is no 2257 statement in video then you are legal to take it down no questions asked






users submitting videos are who we should go after

they are in fact supposed to put 2257 notice on every video they upload

you can also get court order the records of tube sites to find out who is uploading your content with out permission and sue them




you have to go after users of tubes not owners if you want to get any ground

if people start getting sued by the thousands for uploading porn it will be in the media and people will get the picture

Yes, you are correct. But my point is that no one is safe, because there are many laws. Not just 2257. The 2257 is basically designed for you, not to break other laws, which can get you to jail for even longer time :)

I'm not a laywer, but I'm pretty sure the top laywers on YouTube or other user submitted hosts have discussed these issues, regarding sexually related uploads. Even if there are no nudity, it could still violate the other US laws about childporn.

So as a hoster, you have to ensure it won't happen. All the smut not allowed on YouTube, is now a business model for porntubes, and they are not exceptions from the same issues. If some hoster ignore the laws, no matter which law, then there is a reason for "going after" him too.
These issues has nothing to do if its a tube or not, but how its operated regarding spreading some specific content. Torrent sites.. even wikipedia is no exception :)

The political lobby is set in motion already by warner's/disney's/paramounts/ etc.
In France your SDL connection will be terminated, in Germany you will be sued to your last cent, etc. In other countries your ISP is governed to keep all data of all your surfing/downloading/etc. as a pre-action to later, yet to be set, legal consequences.

How did this thread go so far off topic?

I thought it was all about angry monkeys.

Here, this should get us back on course...

https://youtube.com/watch?v=ux8SGKrC1SA

Your Mom is an illegal tube site.

the.drunk is mindwaste's fake nick

this is an issue that could still be a problem, because it is not unprecedented for the U.S. to go after people anywhere in the world for violating U.S. laws...... gambling sites that do business with U.S. customers would be one example, so any porn site that has visitors from the U.S. could conceivably get the same kind of attention? generally the U.S. has waited until a foreign national sets foot in the U.S., but there are many examples of foreign citizens being charged while still in a foreign country when it comes to exporting illegal items to the u.s. (one recent case was a canadian selling seeds to the u.s. and being charged and given up by his own government to the u.s. justice system)

having your sites on u.s. based servers pretty much cements the issue further I would guess, and possibly brings different taxation issues into the business plan as well if the IRS wanted to get sticky?? :upsidedow

That's true.

I'll believe that when he free style raps that here :2 cents:

who is mindwaste?

I'm not a US citizen, and I haven't violated any US laws. I run my business according to Canadian laws. Our privacy laws all but make 2257 inspection nearly impossible anyway. The US goverment has no right to do any 2257 inspections on my place of business in Canada. It's not like I'm actively breaking US law and there's no way Canada would extradite a citizen for complying with local laws and ignoring 2257, a non applicable US law.

As for the IRS getting "sticky", when does using a US service open you up to US tax laws? If I were to for instance run an ad in a US newspaper, you think the IRS can come tax my Canadian business? Sorry, not doing business in the USA, not paying taxes there.

I agree with you, but I'd be interested to hear directly from the IRS what they think.... if you were to tell them that you run a website that makes $200k a year and that website's server is located in the U.S.A. and a majority of your customers are located in the U.S.A. as well..... I really am curious as to what the IRS would rule on that if it ever came into their attention crosshairs?

nice post sir

All tubes are Illegal but Mine :)

All countries have trade and tax agreements, and they won't tax you twice in several countries for the same business.
But if the U.S. IRS are the ones to claim taxes on me if I rent a server in U.S., I wouldn't mind... because I pay nearly 60% in my country :1orglaugh

A monkey walks into a drugstore and orders a fifty-cent sundae. He puts down a ten-dollar bill to pay for it.

The clerk thinks, "What can a monkey know about money?" So he hands back a single dollar in change and says, "You know, we don't get many monkeys in here."

"No wonder," answers the monkey, "At these prices you won't get many more."

why are you guys debating with clueless jon clark is beyond me

Thanks for the heads up.

I felt the same way about the definition of legal and illegal tubes, but I did not manage to point it out as you did.
Good thread. Thanks for the info. :thumbsup

I have a question regarding legality of certain types of tube sites.

Let's say the tube site is operated in such a fashion that the site is operated by a script which pulls embed code from several larger tube sites which provide the embed codes for promotional purposes. So none of the videos are actually hosted on your server but the website acts more as a portal to view videos from a variety of sources?

Thanks :)

cant wait for BradM to get in here...

Did you have to bump a 4 month old thread?

Should I have started an entirely new thread on a topic that was already covered in a thread that just so happened to be 4 months old?

Looking for a serious response to the question, thanks! :)

I agree. You have to think small and go after the users. Hell you gotta start somewhere!
http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=918590

the illegal tubes are lawyered up and the legal tubes are protected by dmca. or do i have it backwards? anyways you need go after joe shmo surfer for uploading and sharing copyrighted content. once the news hears about it the surfer will be afraid to share videos.

sure it wont solve the problem, but in future lawsuits the lawyer can refer to this case and create a valid argument.

There's nothing wrong with bumping a old thread with relevant information...

At a webmaster point of view, yes it's just as harmful as putting up a fully hosted tube with the same videos, you're giving full length porn away for free, you may not be hosting it, but the viewers just have another place to get it, and it's another source to take traffic from honest working webmasters.

this has got to be teencat

Looking on the bright side of things, with all these tube sites, at least there is no shortage of jerk off material. It's great for masturbators.